Humanatic Reviews

Pros

Very Good Company, Payment are quick

Cons

Only Paypal accepted for payment method

Pros

Humanatic is a easy way to earn cash just by reviewing calls and balanceing accuracy

Cons

I didn't heard off any cons

Pros

I have great experience this

Cons

I love to work this company

Pros

Work anytime you want . No set hours or days.

Cons

Extremely low pay. This s just a few extra bucks..

Pros

Work at your own pace

Cons

- Their system is bugged with so many errors and irregularities which affect accuracy in review, earnings and many more. -They have highly unqualified editors who make a lot of errors editing reviews and thus cause reviewers to spend time correcting their mistakes rather than working on other jobs -Method of penalizing a wrong review is illegal. They take double the amount you are expected to get from a job if you do it wrong. That's utter exploitation. It would be better if you do not pay for a penalized job rather than taxing double. - very low rate of response to complains made to support the team. They can take probably a week to respond to a query or most of the time not respond at all.

Pros

There are no pros associated with this site as a job opportunity.

Cons

Sorry, but the Humanatic system is lunatic. Work flow levels are insanely indefinite and the system is unreliable. Someone working at Level One has no idea how many reviews are required to reach the "higher paying levels", or at what point the "higher paying levels" do in fact "unlock". Pay levels above .50 cents to $1.00 dollar per hour appear to be the carrot held out to users. The carrot is always dangling, but it is not ever attained in the vaguely defined and seemingly glitch-ridden work space. There is no answer to the question of whether the higher paying levels are activated at Level Ten, Level Twenty, or Level One Hundred for that matter. It could be one hundred levels before unlocking a category that pays more than a thousandth of a penny every five minutes. It might require thousands of individual reviews over an unidentified number of levels before that happens-- if it happens at all. Besides the hyperbolic carrot stick promises of "no hassles, no conflicts, and easy pay for accurate work", and vague indicators of progress, there are accuracy-destroying, badly constructed call review questions such as "Did a live conversation with a qualified employee take place?" What seems like a simple yes or no question is not as simple as Humanatic advertises the task to be. The task is not merely to distinguish between voicemail and answering machines as opposed to live answering services. The task is to select a time marker from a response set containing five categories of time ranges corresponding to when the call was answered, not by just anyone, but by a qualified employee. However, what the phrase "qualified employee" means, no one knows. Accuracy ratings take huge deductions while the user tries to figure it out in a guessing game of trial and error. Penalties are not revealed or summarized at sign-up of course. If the user is inclined to suffer a trial and error period entailing hours of wasted time, what Humanatic actually means by "live conversation with a qualified employee" emerges. It is "At what audio time marker did the party specifically requested by the caller begin speaking live to the caller?" In some cases the requested party is a department. In other cases it is an individual requested by name. It is never merely a live conversation with a random employee unless a random employee answers the inquiry of the inbound callers in lieu of connecting them to whomever they asked for. If the party requested never answers live, the call is not connected, even if the caller speaks to other live employees who take information or attempt to connect them to their party. The instructions for making the distinctions between random, qualified, or unqualified employees are buried in a learning resource library page that appears nowhere in the drop down menu within the workflow, or in initial training screens on the top sign up pages. Clarifications are hidden in tiny onscreen icons. When clicked, the icons offer definitions of connected or not connected, but do not list the definition of "qualified employee". Inbound calls are related only to whether the call was answered by a requested employee. In one instance, the call audio features a caller who is trying to reach her spouse who is visiting an automotive dealership. Her spouse is not an employee of the dealership but a guest. She asks for her spouse who is just visiting the showroom, not employed there. When classified as "connected to a live employee within one minute" since a live employee informed the caller her that her husband was not there, the call review was rejected for wrong classification with a re-classification as "not connected because she was not connected to her spouse". No, she did not reach the person she specifically requested, namely her non-employee spouse. But yes, the caller spoke to a live and qualified employee who answered her question.The answer to the question was, "No, your husband is not here in the showroom." The person she requested was not an employee, so even if she had reached her party directly and immediately by transfer from reception, that connection would not have been a conversation with a qualified employee. The person who answered was an employee and did answer her question. Badly constructed review questions and hidden rules such as these mean no progress to higher pay and possible account termination in this variation on an unhappy Rumpelstiltskin tale of spinning calls into gold. If the user happens to move beyond the first futility exercise on the way to no pay, there are more to come at higher costs to the user. Level One shows 30 reviews required. Level Two shows 100. Level Three shows 170. But call reviewer beware, the green-lighted slider bar keeps sliding across the dashboard long after the required number of reviews is completed. Now it reads 50/30 reviews completed, now 200/170, and the Level Indicator does not advance. In many cases the system never credits the correctly categorized review. I have screenshots of more than five instances in a single session where it never credits the correct categorization in the slide counter or in the pay metric. There is certainly no indication that the user should be confident a payment will follow for work completed accurately. With all of the other uncertain indicators, there is no way to anticipate time on task or allocate work hours in advance even where work is credited. While the work flow is in progress, there are myriad technical glitches and slow downs. There are failed metric displays, failed audio loading, audio loading delays on each file, and time gobbling offline references to be deciphered without benefit of summary presentation. The accuracy metric glitch results in failure of the accuracy metric to show reliably on the dashboard, so there is no way to track accuracy while work is in progress. There is only the unpredictable green slider bar that is presumably part of the carrot technique along with a learning resource document disclosure that the slider is there to encourage the user to keep going-- apparently to keep going indefinitely without promised payment. What is the right track exactly? 80%? 90%? 95%? 99%? The system makes it hard to find out. There is not a visible statistic that consistently and accurately measures progress in call categorization, or that shows a summary of deductions and penalties in real time. That's all hidden. If the user wants an accounting, there is only a downloadable spreadsheet provided by the system. The spreadsheet shows credits. It also shows penalties that do not appear on the dashboard except as diminishing earnings but it does not compute, label, or display the number of reviews in any category as a sum and there is no line numbering. There is no clue, other than hand counting all of the lines in the spreadsheet or exporting the data to a line-numbered program, as to how many reviews were audited, whether correctly or incorrectly. If the user completes hundreds of reviews before asking for a work history, there is no way to quickly cross verify the online dashboard green-line indicator with a spreadsheet tally. Other glitches that prevent payouts occur when the system counts a categorization as wrong, and asks for a user response to the audits. In every case it fails to load the audio, so the work history spreadsheet is not of much use since no user correction of a bad audit, or agreement with a good one, is possible. Taking time to review these offline indicators is another tremendous slow down and renders earnings in the range of net zero, expressed as $0.00. Perhaps not coincidentally, the only part of the system that never experiences a glitch or slow down is the sign-up page where quick audio loads and easy bonuses encourage the user to go on to frustration and futility in working for what amounts to a non-payment opportunity. Email, profile information, and sensitive financial data for Pay Pal logins are all taken by the system with record speed and efficiency. There is never a break down or slow down there. At sign up, practice reviews load almost instantaneously. Bonus pay is added immediately to a highly visible cash account advertised as payable to PayPal accounts. After sign up, login, and subsequent completion of the first three or four levels, it takes 30 seconds or more for each audio segment to load. Instantaneous is gone. The system is so bogged down there is no way to process more than a few cents worth of work flow per hour. Only after sign-up is the payout minimum revealed at $10. You have to do untold scut work for that without guarantee of pay. That is, unless you "win" a pay-early power up, and no one knows how that "win" happens. It reads like a rigged gaming site, not work an honest day for an honest day's pay. After sign up, the flashing cash account cannot be accessed on payment requests "easily and without conflict or hassle". To the contrary, payment requests occur far from instantaneously or easily. They in fact occur only once a week, solely on Mondays. But wait, payment to Pay Pal is instant payment according to the misleading Humanatic home page ads, right? Wrong, after signing up and working without any disclosures of restrictions by Humanatic, it is revealed that payments are made only if the request is submitted before 12:00 noon on Mondays, not just anytime on Monday, and otherwise postponed until next week. But then again, payment for hundreds or thousands of call reviews may not be compensated at all if the glitchy system loses your PayPal address, or you can't log in. Get the picture? All the wishy-washy disclosures are made after the fact of the user working doggedly for 16 hours to reach a $10 payout level. Nowhere does it state on the top page ads that maybe payments will be once a week on Monday, or possibly by 7:00 PM on Tuesdays, and only after earning $10, and it's not just payment to your easily opened basic Pay Pal account, but they will absolutely not pay you unless you opt to open a verified Pay Pal account linked to your bank, and give them access to all of your personal, private, protected information. The process of verifying a Pay Pal account involves opening a bank account. Then it involves deposits to your bank account by Pay Pal which may take days or weeks to complete. It takes two to three days just for Pay Pal to send the deposits. If you did not wish to verify a Pay Pal account, that's too bad according to Humanatic. All is lost and you simply can't have your hard earned money. If you do choose to verify a Pay Pal account, the Humanatic system can now access your legal name, address, phone number, bank name, and even your Pay Pal login password when they scrape your credentials on the verification page through Pay Pal. Promised easy payouts are now great big hassles for days and weeks and compromise privacy and safety to unknown parties who don't exactly appear to be the epitome of honesty. In sum, Humanatic does not keep any of their glossy ad, top screen promises of no hassles or conflicts and easy payments for completed work. I'm not sure if this is intentional in a rat-lab sort of way with bar pressing behavioral experimentation ongoing, and that alone, or if they have in addition to a cheating bent, a crummy bandwidth and cannot handle peak loads. It is abysmal in any case. If it is intentional rat-lab programming, the system is not only lunatic, it is deserving of the more accurate label Humana-Cheat. I would hope it is not the case, but if they are taking the variable ratio, bar pressing, rat lab approach like rigged casinos, consider yourself donating your time, which equates to your earning power, for entertainment purposes. You might get a laugh at some of the calls, but you won't earn above poverty wages, and you won't win anything. If you need to earn a decent living, don't lose hope or faith, but do look for a real job. Humanatic is not a legitimate job opportunity. No one should think for a moment there is any possibility of earning a living wage, or even a minimum wage. Unless you are living in a place with zero cost of living it is a colossal waste of time. It is rigged to prevent anything above poverty earnings and you could not hope to put bread on the table or a roof over anyone's head working for Humanatic. They offer nothing remotely resembling fair wage, or fair labor as we know it in the USA. It's basically stealing work from people and mining personal data. I am completely surprised they are not blocked from Internet Service Providers in the US for unfair wage and labor practice. What they are doing constitutes an employment contract no matter how they spin it. Work in return for wages is employ, and it comes under the Minimum Wage and Living Wage Acts. Minimum wage, and living wage is the cost of doing business in the USA. If you can't pay it, you don't use people here. You go where you are not impoverishing anyone and causing them grief. Exploitation is not welcome here or anywhere. Couching it as a game is one thing-- albeit a losing game. Couching it as a job is outrageous. With all of the false advertising and failure to fulfill the payment requests, it would not surprise me if their large ad featuring a big pay out tally of 8 billion was solely to themselves with the same five dollar bill. If it were a classroom exercise it might be funny, but with sincere people signing on as workers and being misled by phony ads to believe they should have expectations for earning a living, it is tragic. Word to the wise: Place your confidence in something better. These people are not long on honesty.

Pros

There is absolutely nothing positive about this company. p.s. sorry, they made me use at least five words for this category

Cons

By far the worst company, and job, I've ever had. They penalize you for calls you get wrong by taking away the money that you earned. They only pay you a penny per call if you get it right, but if you get a call wrong you can get subtracted four cents. I can see not getting paid for a call you get wrong, but taking away the money people earned is criminal.

Pros

*Free sign-up you only need a verified Paypal to register. *Flexible hours of work, you can work when you feel like it. *Simple and easy to understand overviews and work.

Cons

*Already a scam if I say so myself. Explanation?! Here it is: One, right minus wrong scam: When you made a mistake even if you don't they will mark it wrong so that they will get the wage you worked hard on for themselves times two, literally times two of the hard work you made. Two, magic deactivation: The company lets you make money and when they see that you're make buck loads of money, they will magically deactivate your account with money still saved there. They say that because you are cheating but I'll say otherwise. So if you example had 200$ saved in your account and your about to withdraw, suddenly you can't log-in and says your account has been deactivated (I'm not lying this really happened). I want to add more for the fact that the scams they are but I'll keep it on two so it won't get long too much. *Hard to sign-up. *Low wage payment. (Like 50 cents US dollar an hour for average new freelance worker.) *Website problems, they will always have a problem in their website. *Unresponsive customer service/management. *Amateur mediators/admins, I feel like the freelancers have more things to offer basing on correct tagging than them because mediators/admins felt like they just make the tagging more confusing than it looks like. FYI they are very unfriendly too. *"Cheaters" like they say. But really though? Or are you just making that up to swindle your freelancer's hard earned money? *Not a newbie friendly work. Because the work is dominated by the veterans. They have so much more accounts than you. Seriously though. Deactivation of accounts happens more than you think that is why people have more than one accounts than you should have. That's why there are not that much work really. *Toxic environment, not user-friendly, and stuck doing the job over and over and over and over repetitively with a boss that glares at you madly as if your a piece of meat. (metaphorically) But imagine what I mean though that is just Humanatic really is. I have so much more two say after working for them for at least 4-5 years. But i'll stop at that. So really though, the cons out weight the pros. My recommendation, don't even think of applying their are so much more online jobs out their that really cares and respects their freelancers more and pays you the amount that you deserve not Humanatic and its crap. You've been warned fellow freelancers.

Pros

own hours, decent work, enjoyablr

Cons

pays soo low, that is a big negative, not much room for advancement

Pros

Other than it being easy work there are is nothing positive to say about this company or "job".

Cons

With Humanatic you will provide a service, and they will provide you one or two cents every 15 minutes.....seriously If you can make $1 per hour you would be doing great. This so-called job will get you no where real fast and is not worth the time signing up a wasting your time in training.