04/29 - Super Mellow Sunday!

Uh oh, CT is catching up on the thread now.

 

Minju Han [A1ZTMLZ5IGZT1A] Short study about your perception (~ 3 minutes) - $0.30 | PANDA

[3T9V9E4TMO61W2X7R0BRKU0R60WQXI]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Generous[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $21.18 / hour
00:00:51 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:
Fast
Cons:

To read Minju Han's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="34869" data-reviewerId="2602" |[/div]

 

Julia Hur [A3AYYY0T3VKP78] [S1] Short survey on decision-making(~ 5 minutes) - $1.00 | PANDA

[333IBSSEKJ5LVY1GQNWQ2Q7BA4BZTG]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $14.23 / hour
00:04:13 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:
Freakin easy dollar. Bubbles, sliders, two sentences of writing.
Cons:

To read Julia Hur's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="34870" data-reviewerId="1245" |[/div]

 

Oh hello I might have missed the email since there are several HITs going on at the same time. Feel free to resend the email if you didn't get a reply after a couple days.

 

Issues with the HITs mainly being that half of them fall into the "very similar" picture category causing the hourly to be trashed due to cherry picking, at least in my experience.

 

No confirm = no flair

Also does this mean I have to stop making fun of the spam emails?

 

Yeah

 

The requesters reading this thread like...

 

Oh wow I honestly wasn't expecting this hahaha. I think I may have sent it from mturk I'll redo it from the actual email next time ^_^

 

@angel do you know what hits for cornell you did before getting blocked? If you are still blocked that is.

 

The images are intended to be similar since we don't want it to be an object recognition task. It's more like finding difference(especially relational reasoning/logical composition) in similar pictures. If you can take a screenshot of a few sets that you find difficult to write about when you come across it and post it here maybe I/everyone can take a look and give you some pointers on what kind of stuff you can write about it. It does take a bit of time to find the trick of doing those HITs. But I agree that there are maybe 5% of the images that is nearly impossible to write any sentence about, we will cancel the batch eventually if everyone skip those.

 

Totally unrelated, but you know when you are at work and the boss comes to sit near you on lunch break? Kinda got that feeling right now.

 

M-F normal business hours it is rare that there isn't a Requester here FWIW. Its why we tend to be a bit more strict with some content during daylight hours

 

Title: Qualifier for Two-Part Faces Study(~ 2 minutes) | PANDA
Requester: uwaimpressionsproject [AJMN78CX1MIO8]
TurkerView: [ $9.77 / hour ]
Description: A brief paid qualifier for a $7 two-part study.
Duration: 00:10:00
Available: 1
Reward: $0.22
Qualifications:

• Total approved HITs GreaterThanOrEqualTo 100
• Exc: [-1783794056-85572] DoesNotExist
• HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 90
• Location In US

[37WX97CR5VXEF5XM0VSK6YQWLALKIH]​

 

For what it is worth I'm pretty sure that the cornell folk are night owls for the most part

 

bill2008 [AF0ERWE9G15YJ] Answer a short survey_0.1$ for 2 minutes (may win extra bonus ) - $0.10 | PANDA

[3WC6MIR2GRSAWVISXWUG1IW3ST6YJC]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Underpaid[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $2.61 / hour
00:02:18 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:

Cons:

To read bill2008's full profile check out TurkerView!​

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="34872" data-reviewerId="2172" |[/div]

 

since you're active right now the message I sent you was about the first round of screening hits. I clipped a screenshot showing that the majority of the images where ones that needed to go, so I suggested that you place an option at the beginning of the hit to "select all" and then the user (myself) could deselect the images that are okay. In some instances (the majority of them when I looked at the batch the other day) it would make it much faster that way. Does that make sense? My original email I sent had screenshots

 

uwaimpressionsproject [AJMN78CX1MIO8] Qualifier for Two-Part Faces Study(~ 2 minutes) - $0.22 | PANDA

[37WX97CR5VXEF5XM0VSK6YQWLALKIH]​

[div] style="border: 1px solid transparent; padding: 10px 0; display: flex; align-items: center; border-color: #ecf0f1; box-shadow: 0 1px 1px rgba(0,0,0,0.05); text-align: center;" |
[div] style="float: left; width: 25%;" |
Generous[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 41%;" |[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 50%;" |
Unrated[/div][/div]
[div] style="float: left; width: 33%;" | $15.53 / hour
00:00:51 / completion time[/div]
[/div]

​

Pros:
-Pretty well paid screener.
Cons:

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

[div] style="display: none;" data-type="tv-review" data-revId="34873" data-reviewerId="2326" |[/div]