My comment on this update is the same as the response I sent to CEO Tony after he replied to my message about earnings dropping 60-90%: numbers don't lie and follow the data instead of replying with distractions and obfuscation instead of addressing my data points:

"As an angel investor in a dozen tech startups I've dealt with many tech CEOs. What counts are honesty, transparency, clarity and numbers. I hope your explanation for a 90% drop in earnings on the same articles before and after the transition will provide these.

By ceasing to pay by hours read Medium penalizes long form writers with fewer readers with long attention spans.

I have several articles with reader engagement that straddles the before and after the changeover date. The numbers do not lie. I made screenshots documenting the 80-90% (or more) drop in my earnings. Though the amounts are chump change, it's about fair play and contempt vs respect for my efforts.

Some of the numbers:

https://medium.com/me/stats/post/9635f3c02b7a

https://medium.com/me/stats/post/97224daa545a

From 4.68 for 2h35m and 3.64 for 2h6m to .07 for 43m and .40 for 2h6m.

These numbers are like a double blind clinical trial, the same articles before and after.

Please explain why I should accept a 90% drop in earnings from THE SAME ARTICLE with views and reader time before and after the transition. I just published my first article in August. 76/15 views/reads in a day. I expect that in a week it should reach the 361/115 views/reads of my last July article, but with earnings 80-90% less than the 31.50 of my last July article. Please explain why I should continue to write on Medium when this happens.

At Twitter we've seen how hubris destroyed one tech platform. I sincerely hope you don't follow that example."

My diagnosis: Medium's owner told Tony to get to break even and the only way to cut costs was to slash writers' earnings. This is like feeding the house's furniture into the fire to stay warm. It won't end well.