03/16 - Fork it Over Friday!

Title: Answer a quick survey about saying "thank you for your service" [ $ | $ ] PANDA
Requester: Nicholas Mercurio [A1VGP5W6BSW0TW]
TurkerView: [ $ / hour Unrated | Unrated | Unrated ]
Description: Give us your opinion about saying thanks to veterans and military members
Duration: 01:00:00
Available: 1
Reward: $0.40
Qualifications:

[326T9PSZY2KON3FTVU06BNX044GJPX]​

 

I think it was supposed to post around 10 am but don't remember if she specified a time zone. Haven't heard it come across OW yet.

 

Title: Taxi Cabs Bets | AcceptA Requester: Michael Silverstein [A2385BRCFA1EGX] Contact TV: No Reviews TO: [Pay: 5.00] [Fast: 0.00] [Comm: 0.00] [Fair: 0.00] [Reviews: 1] [ToS: 0] TO2: [Hrly: $16.62] [Pen: ---] [Res: ---] [Rec: 100% of 1] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Brk: 0] Reward: $1.80 Duration: 1 hour Available: 1 Description: In this study, you will be asked to place bets on the perpetrators of a hit and run accident based off of limited information. Requirements: Location EqualTo US

 

Stanford Psych Experiments [A2PQJ75833YDO3] Participate in a 5-minute academic study(~ 5 minutes) - $0.50 | PANDA

[3QKP95RWQZJE8IO6J47IG8NP3SA5XM]​

Low

Unrated

Unrated

$6.72 / hour
00:04:28 / completion time

​

Pros:

Cons:

To read Stanford Psych Experiments's full profile check out TurkerView!​

 

I had licking lollipop...there was a fetching lady licking a lolli.

 

Michael Silverstein [A2385BRCFA1EGX] Taxi Cabs Bets - $1.80 | PANDA

[3AJNAQR5VMGETHG1UZZ2WJQ5KG5ZHH]​

Generous

Unrated

Unrated

$21.53 / hour
00:05:01 / completion time

​

Pros:
Potential bonus.
Cons:

To read Michael Silverstein's full profile check out TurkerView!​

 

Speechfeedback [A2DPU6JE37X0YV] Rate the quality of computer-generated speech - English@United States native only [#3e60] - $1.20 | PANDA

[355YH9BKNIP1N8SLZTBKKVX3DXYFVB]​

Good

Unrated

Unrated

$10.85 / hour
00:06:38 / completion time

​

Pros:

Cons:

To read Speechfeedback's full profile check out TurkerView!​

 

I hear you (and @turks24) - I really do.. But.. You (and others) just openly 1-bombed that guy off your personal assumption of his behavior - I'm sorry but that's unchill. I don't want people to have the ability to hide work from me (or anyone else) based on their personal assumptions. That's uncool for everyone involved. You've permanently tarnished his reputation over a perceived slight based on what the platform looked like 2 years ago? What some completely different person said to you before? How you reconcile that as being fair or helpful doesn't jive with me so you'll have to explain how you think that's serving the purpose of improving the platform for those around you if you want features like that built into TV. I'm not even trying to attack you here, but its behavior that is so ingrained into TO that I just cannot see any value in the generated content except for when an account is so new & fragile that not heeding it could cause more harm than can be withstood to an account (so basically.. up until ~3-5k approved HITs)

Daily threads do exist now and offer a perfectly valid way of voicing those kinds of concerns without all the permanently adverse affects of 1-bombing a publicly facing profile. With that said its totally true that in cases where a community consensus can be reached on unacceptable behavior (getting Pirc'd, Breligs, all the things we hold synonymous with garbage Reqester practices) TV is indeed sorely lacking in acknowledgement, but TO gives one individual far too much leeway & power in condemning something.

I'm undoubtedly one of the most pro-goodness folks around, on both sides of the ball. Pretty darn proud of it too even if I make sarcastic jokes about Workers & Requesters & their mamas all too frequently. Everyone on both sides of the platform is more or less dealt a crap hand to start out with. My one and only focus is on building things that make it better, not worse. In that regard TV is a resounding success IMO. Improvements are & will come, I know nothing outwardly facing has changed in the last few weeks but the mods (and @gurlondrums 'cause Badger abandoned me) can confirm I am still working very hard towards that ultimate goal of improving the platform for folks. Heck one of my most stalwart positions on certain functionality was changed by a guy I mostly dislike (CCB) & will probably make an appearance because of it, so I'm not just trying to be stubborn/closed minded about stuff but I'm totally unconvinced of the value here.

I will say that I think in the past I've definitely been way too dismissive of the impact TO has had on the platform re: putting people on the up & up. I've come to recognize that after talking w/ folks like @awdrf & Fester & misc people who've chatted w/ me - so I get where you're coming from & I recognize that TV needs to safeguard those "culture" improvements if it wants to exist as an all-encompassing platform, but I don't subscribe to the idea of needing to do so with the brute force negativity that TO has cultivated it being done with (hell its not even really TO's fault per-se, more the community atmosphere that has ingrained itself there). I think that kind of mindset is cancer and it limits the earnings potential of people who subscribe to it and a thousand times worse it lowers the earnings potential of people who are using data from those folks.

I will never purposefully give someone the tools to lower another person's earnings potential. Not gonna happen. So some things will be missing from TV until I can find ways to allow X content (rejection reporting, batch reviews, etc) without empowering nasty people who have turned TO into what it currently is: a cesspool. You go open 3 browser windows, TV, TO1, & TO2.

TV has 9/10 of the last HIT reviews being >min wage, in fact hell 8 of them are above $15/hr.

TO2 is.. 5 / 25 being >minwage but like.. can you even really trust that data? TV's got some shaky data point foundations, especially at lower pay tiers so how can TO2 hope to be better with 1/10th the data coming in.

TO1 is... well its TO1. Just copy/pasting Requesters one bomb'd there into TV gets you $9hr for Marta (1-bomb'd for screener TWICE), $7/hr from Jimenez 1-bomb'd, Anaa Gabrielyan ALL FOUR SCORES ONE-BOMB'd while sitting at $21/hr on TV, Central College Psych 1 bomb'd but $8/hr on TV.

Honest to God, unless you have sub-5k total approvals or are nuthugging 98% approval rate I have no idea what you'd look at TO for nowadays.

TV collects enough data to keep you working on safe & well paying work for quite some time, and if the Mods & community green-light my next project that is only going to get better. Finding garbage on mTurk is absurdly easy, so data points indicating trash just aren't very valuable is my basic perception / focal point on design

 

Nicholas Mercurio [A1VGP5W6BSW0TW] Answer a quick survey about saying "thank you for your service" - $0.40 | PANDA

[326T9PSZY2KON3FTVU06BNX044GJPX]​

Generous

Unrated

Unrated

$30.00 / hour
00:00:48 / completion time

​

Pros:
2 pages, super quick
Cons:

To read Nicholas Mercurio's full profile check out TurkerView!​

 

Title: Fast and easy content viewing (few minutes for possible $0.60) - EB9ENdi8zzNVwWXkvwHJ9 [ $ | $ ] PANDA
Requester: Sticky [A1I5WZRIXY5GS9]
TurkerView: [ $13.65 / hour Good | <24 hours | Unrated ]
Description: Look at some content for a few minutes to help us improve our measurements.
Duration: 00:20:00
Available: 1
Reward: $0.40
Qualifications:

• Age LessThanOrEqualTo 70, [ Take Test ]
• Location EqualTo US,
• Age GreaterThanOrEqualTo 18, [ Take Test ]

[3WC6MIR2HS8WYT4RPNZHA9W5PD3YJV]​

 

Is this their way of saying happy birthday really late?

Spoiler

https://gyazo.com/fa3db1dea9ad59b9936a20bc4e671e18

Can't wait to see all the hits now

 

All I take away from that great read.... no wonder why I didn't go on to college

 

TO still serves an important purpose. It is about the only way you can punish bad requesters. I know that's not your intent, but at the same rate, I really think without TO you'd see a lot more reject and run requesters. I may be biased because I was a mod with it for quite a while, but I do think there needs to be some platform to keep requesters honest. Amazon will never have our back, so we need to have each others. I do agree that most (probably 80-90%) are well meaning academics, or honest businesses. But since we don't know how much impact being blocked has, we don't know what causes accounts to be shut down, we do have to be wary of people who use blocks to stop repeat takes, or in spite.

TO's trust the reviewer was definitely abused. There are a fair amount of sock puppets, there were people who would 1-bomb good requesters to keep people away from them. There are people who would absolutely deserve the rejection they got that would 1-bomb, and when the requester would post proof, I still wouldn't be able to remove their harmful and dishonest review. But, above all else, it's a necessary thing for the moment, and truly the only way to fight back we have, that isn't an IRB.

 

Title: Write 50 messages (WARNING: This HIT may contain adult content. Worker discretion is advised.) | Accept Requester: Anna Gabrielyan [A14CCC9KUG7P6Y] Contact TV: [Hrly: $22.57] [Pay: 4.71] [Fast: 5.00] [Comm: null] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Blk: 0] TO: [Pay: 3.73] [Fast: 3.55] [Comm: 1.82] [Fair: 2.76] [Reviews: 20] [ToS: 0] TO2: [Hrly: ---] [Pen: ---] [Res: ---] [Rec: ---] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Brk: 0] Reward: $6.50 Duration: 1 hour 10 minutes Available: 1 Description: Write 50 messages in total: 25 should include offensive phrases/profanities and 25 should be neutral. Requirements: HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThan 80; Total approved HITs GreaterThan 50; Location EqualTo US; Adult Content Qualification EqualTo 1

HIT exported from Mturk Suite v2.1.17​

 

Title: This survey will be about your opinions regarding a major online retailers website | Accept Requester: Jonathan Hildebrand [A37IVWTBD21B20] Contact TV: [Hrly: $19.00] [Pay: 5.00] [Fast: 4.00] [Comm: null] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Blk: 0] TO: [Pay: 2.00] [Fast: 2.90] [Comm: 2.14] [Fair: 2.43] [Reviews: 29] [ToS: 2] TO2: [Hrly: ---] [Pen: ---] [Res: ---] [Rec: 0% of 1] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Brk: 0] Reward: $3.25 Duration: 2 hours Available: 1 Description: You will review several pages on a website and then be asked to provide feedback. Requirements: Location EqualTo US

HIT exported from Mturk Suite v2.1.17​

 

There are 6 up, not going to spam the thread with all of them though

 

Title: Participate in an Experiment on Decision Making [ $ | $ ] PANDA
Requester: Timothy J Brown [A2UG2PCDOEQPXS]
TurkerView: [ $ / hour Unrated | Unrated | Unrated ]
Description: This study will take approximately 5 to 10 minutes
Duration: 02:00:00
Available: 1
Reward: $1.00
Qualifications:

• HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 95,
• Location EqualTo US,

[3NAD71TD7UCAJUNY19F84JKZAF52LJ]​

 

Make that 6. Sticky making it rain today.