10/08 - Treats Thursday

Strawberries and raspberries even have "berries" literally in their name, and yet... not technically berries.

 

Are there other sites you can share with me to work on other than Connect and Prolific? Appreciate any help you can provide.

 

well literally can now mean dramatically, half the south thinks couple can mean three, no one uses biweekly correctly... english was already three other languages in a trench coat, now even the meanings are useless.

 

I am wholly of your persuasion, and that without the smallest reservation. 'Tis most lamentable that the tongue of Shakespeare and of Milton should be so grievously neglected in these latter days, and I do heartily concur that the populace stands in sore need of instruction in the proper and becoming use of our noble English speech.

 

so eloquent, if albeit a might verbose.

 

biweekly means twice in a week, not every other week, and i WILL die on this hill.

 

Fixed that for you.

 

chances are low, but not zero.

 

https://cash4surveys.fun/ You need to be really quick to hit this button though.

 

Anyone have experience disputing the automated messages for certain studies on a certain particular platform about tasks running out when tasks did not run out and you in fact completed the whole project and submitted? Does anyone actually read the responses? Is there a timeframe I should expect a rejection and then have to dispute?

Edit: welp seems some other people getting same issue when i glanced at the reddit so maybe itll work out i am worn down and frustrated here recently with issues i have been running into overall but fingers crossed

 

I'm guessing from context that you're referring to something on Prolific. In general, none of the researchers that conduct the bigger commercial studies pay any attention to messages, with the occasional, very rare outlier (one researcher on one tiny project from ABC... of all places). When dealing with them, my policy at this point is to open a case immediately. If I don't, I'll just never get around to it.
I have an open support case with Prolific about issues with googly eyes' dynamic studies. Someone from Prolific is working on that and I have been made whole for everything that I've reported. They are aware that there is an issue. The pay timer for those studies isn't tied to the Prolific timer, but it's not even following its own rules consistently.
If you're referring to the conversational dynamic studies, I haven't done any of those, but I would think the same basic principle applies: nobody but Prolific support will do anything about it, and you may need to be persistent, patient and polite in order for that to happen.

 

That's been a thing over there for a few years. I'm more pissed about the one I was able to complete that only had 50 spots but the error message said it was limited to 100 at a time earlier today. Best option is to spam the button but not so much that they shadow ban for 30-60 minutes...

Chris if it's Treat Thursday, where are the badges lmao

 

I've a hunch (right or wrong) perhaps you may be referring to some "confidential" studies, so I (adhering to the confidentiality) won't say much here. – Yes others have experienced what I think you're describing, possibly with some specific instances of a type (or subtype) of study. I don't really know anything, but I suppose, as generally with any studies, when some odd undocumented issues occur and recur, and if the researchers might not respond to inquiries and if platform support can't help, there might be no immediate recourse for the time being. – What I would do is: just "move on" and keep doing various studies of various kinds and types. If a specific problem recurs with just some specific type or subtype of study, consider reducing participation in the specific type or subtype of study where that problem tends to happen. HTH

 

I've noticed discrepancies on those and never reported but maybe I should... I've just been spending the entire time (usually), even on the shit I hate to make sure I'm paid right.

 

All of these make sense, the other way around did not

 

FYI ICYDK, there are 2 subreddits about "that" platform. The name of one sub (that I assume you've visited) is the name of that platform. That sub's moderation is limited, and appears to be relatively lenient about some posted content.

The other sub's name is: the platform name and "Ac" appended to it, and that sub does have some active moderation with some platform staff involvement. That includes restrictions and removals of some posts and comments about certain studies.

Note also, both of those subs suffer from some downer subculture (e.g. a few industrious downvoters and sometimes an unfriendly reply here-and-there), which can be disregarded i.e. don't let any of that bother you. Moderation of both subs is, IMO, not helping enough to establish a more welcoming tone (I speak from experience visiting my favorite unrelated sub where the quality of moderation is really vastly superior and wonderfully effective; would that all subs' moderation could be so good!).

Note also that Reddit has a user-blocking feature, which can be useful sometimes.