Hi, I was just wondering how to write a review on TurkerView? There is no access to writing a review on the homepage and only provides it through the script. However, the script only allows reviews for live or current hits. I am trying to review a requester from a hit i did a couple of days ago, but the script does not provide that option when I visit my history on Mturk. I feel like the script is really limiting especially when it says it's for the benefit of the user.
that's not currently a feature. imo, it's still really helpful. but you have to remember this is still in its infancy. Still lots that CT is working on.
To be clear: reviews are for the benefit of the users. We might not be seeing eye to eye on design philosophy here because "stale" data is much less helpful than data that gives a real-time indication of what's going on on the platform, IMO. So the question is why are you trying to leave a review for a HIT days after the fact? At some point memory starts to be pretty stale and I feel like its difficult to give an accurate & helpful representation of the work, though I admit my memory isn't as good as it once was haha.
Just some quick input here, but I did have a legitimate case recently where I couldn't submit a review for a HIT that I completed recently. It had a 24 hour timer and I had to screen record myself turking for 30 minutes. I didn't have a block of time to record before the MTurk day change. After submitting, I couldn't review it because it showed up on the previous day. Of course, this is a fringe case that doesn't happen often at all. HITs with timers that are >24 hours are pretty rare, but they do come about sometimes. I realize this may change when HIT Tracker API access is a thing, but just wanted to throw this out there.
I love the idea that TV does not allow you to put a review for a HIT in which you have not done recently. I am screened out without any pay/I missed an AC so they forced me out of the survey/I did not like the guy' LET'S BOMB TO with 1/5 's Noooo, not in TV. Do the HIT, and leave a nice review (by saying nice, I mean if you think you got ripped off, mention it. DO NOT tell others you were gonna ripped off without doing the HIT).
I understand that you are trying to have relevant data that is not stale. However, I am trying to leave a review because of an unfair rejection in which I think would benefit the users and warn them against the requesters. This was a survey that has been completed and approved within 2 days. The reviews may say, "oh this a great hit, fast, easy, etc!" but they can all get rejected and no one would know. How do you rectify this problem? There have been multiple requesters putting out the same surveys over the course of the week. Therefore, the data is still highly relevant and beneficial to the users because if I do not leave a review at the same time that I am doing the hit, which is an inconvenience, then other users would not get to see a review. That decreases the overall reviews over time because less people would be likely to leave a review. Moreover, no one would know the fate of that hit. If the reviews are few months out of date, there's nothing stopping you to delete those reviews. Nevertheless, limiting users on when they get to review, and how they review is not a good approach in my opinion for this new site. You take away the convenience of simply adding a review by forcing users to go through a process that is new and over complicates things.
That isn't really what TV is built for. That seems more in line w/ TO's usage. Users update the review to mark the HIT as rejected. TVJS is, by far, more convenient than anything TO provides. You don't have to do the review the same minute you submit the HIT, you can wait until you have downtime in your workflow. But only reviewing HITs that reject is super useless and I don't want to encourage that kind of behavior on our platform. We have doubled the data coming into both TO1 & TO2 combined for weeks now. So, stats say this isn't true. TO1 has years of existence & marketing as well as ten times the userbase and yet is complete and utter junk as far as data quality goes and we crush them for # of reviews coming in week in and week out for quite some time now. Many folks update their reviews to give an indication of when the HIT approves. I do admit this is still a weak point of the platform, but its not terrible. I take away the convenience of only reporting negative experiences because that isn't the data we want. 75% of our reviews are regarding work that is above minimum wage & approves. Its all about finding good work. Rejections on surveys honestly don't even matter. Yeah, it sucks, but in the grand scheme of things the only rejections that actually matter on mTurk are mass rejected batches, which are few & far between.
Right. I am gaining more understanding of the differences in approach between the reviewing websites. Now that it's not the weekend,and I am turking, I see how the TurkerView script is implemented and used. I guess your right that reviewing rejected hits is useless since it does not fit with the vision of TurkerView. Thanks for elucidating this information, and your site is still the best, I just had that one issue with it.
Here it is months later and they haven't added a much-needed functionality. So, let me understand this. If TurkerView isn't for letting me submit a review of a requester, what is it for? How is it "helpful"?
This is crap. I'm uninstalling this script and deleting my profile. Your justification for leaving out the ability to post a review of a requester who hasn't bothered to review my HIT after a month is junk. So, you just want people's review of the HIT, not the requester. Is that correct? Who cares as long as it pays well and doesn't take too long. And all this self-congratulations is tasteless. A big hand for you, your script is pointless.
I'm not sure what the big issue here is - you can review the HIT & update as needed. What would you honestly even write about a HIT that is 27 days old? I can't remember what I ate for breakfast nevermind much about a HIT I did a month ago haha I understand its an extra step to install the script, but frankly the benefit is pretty high on both ends --- you don't have to load new tabs / funk around with filling out info yourself, we don't have to deal with data like this: There are honestly fairly well thought out reasons TV is set up how it is, but I'm all ears if you've got better ideas
You can edit a review after you have posted it. Also this. It takes seconds to post a review if you don't care about anything other than the time.
Are you saying the fact that a requester hasn't reviewed, approved, or paid out on a HIT after a month is of the utmost relevance? I don't know about you but that's the type of information that I want to know before spending time working on a HIT.
Nah, I actually agree with you pretty strongly that a general gist of approval times is super nice to have/know (you can get by without it, but its still nice). I think we probably just don't see eye to eye on the best way to collect that info :/
is likely? a requester that the VAST majority of people who provide TV data probably already don't/won't/wouldn't work for...
Really? Your saying I can't provide this kind of information because everyone should already know? I'm done here.
Fair enough. A6 said that everyone would already know that that specific requester is a bum. That's why I shouldn't be able to post a review after the fact. At least you were able to see that never getting a HIT approved might be useful information to pass along. A6 is telling me that everyone already knew. I'm the last to find out. Boy, do I feel silly ...
