:bolt:
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.
Page 1 of 91
-
Melting Glacier PE: $30.01 - That's over $1.25/hour! ┬┴┤( ͡° ͜ʖ├┬┴
-
Adelaide CompCogSci [A2UKL52R7I6BX7] Categorization Study (5-7mins) - $1.50 | PANDA
[30DDVUIQK0IZTY8BN8773M8G04SB80]
Generous
Unrated
Unrated$28.88 / hour
00:03:07 / completion timePros:
Super quick and easy
Cons:
To read Adelaide CompCogSci's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 9
-
-
John C. Garcia [A1OEPO1KVOS0DG] Calling all Twitch Streamers - $0.75 | PANDA
[31O2HNG3XNHF6V7Z4TSYOUN117EGVP]
Good
Unrated
Unrated$11.25 / hour
00:04:00 / completion timePros:
Just one question.
Cons:
Writing and kind of specific requirements.
To read John C. Garcia's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 2
-
-
Title: Interesting survey about climate, health, automation, and civilizations(~ 20 minutes) | PANDA
Requester: Fatih Uenal [A3PW6V1KKS1N0N]
TurkerView: [ $10.74 / hour ]
Description: Complete a survey about climate, health, automation, and civilizations
Duration: 01:30:00
Available: 36
Reward: $1.95
Qualifications:- Inc: [19-95449] Exists
- Total approved HITs GreaterThanOrEqualTo 100
- HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 95
- Exc: [719251795-95449] DoesNotExist
- Location In US
[344RGS4J7S6LNJBL8YDT3GTF9GBMPB]-
Nom Nom Nom! x 6
-
Adelaide CompCogSci [A2UKL52R7I6BX7] Categorization Study (5-7mins) - $1.50 | PANDA
[30DDVUIQK0IZTY8BN8773M8G04SB80]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$15.84 / hour
00:05:41 / completion timePros:
Cons:
To read Adelaide CompCogSci's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 3
-
-
Emily Vargas [A3FMP0PP7KZHY7] Incivility in Hospitals- Interested in Women’s Experiences(~ 15 minutes) - $0.50 | PANDA
[3244QHISJ1445Q34RQCE2BJQDB20LJ]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$5.64 / hour
00:05:19 / completion timePros:
Cons:
All writing
To read Emily Vargas's full profile check out TurkerView! -
Title: Help us making great tools for assessing pilots (part 1 of 2)(~ 60 minutes) | Accept
Requester: cut-e mTurk [AYL89L70SAA5B] Contact
TV: [Hrly=$8.73] [Pay=2.50] [Fast=null] [Comm=null] [Rej=0] [ToS=0] [Blk=0]
TO: [Pay=3.70] [Fast=3.76] [Comm=3.00] [Fair=3.78] [Reviews=38] [ToS=2]
TO2: [Hrly=8.91] [Pen=0.01 days] [Res=null] [Rec=0%] [Rej=0] [ToS=0] [Brk=1]
Reward: 5.50
Duration: 6600
Available: 25
Description: complete 3 tests and 3 short questionnaires
Qualifications: Total approved HITs GreaterThanOrEqualTo 100; Exc: [-108413111-98249] DoesNotExist ; HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 98; Location In US
HIT exported from Mturk Suite v2.3.7
.-
Nom Nom Nom! x 3
-
-
cut-e mTurk [AYL89L70SAA5B] Help us making great tools for assessing pilots (part 1 of 2)(~ 60 minutes) - $5.50 | PANDA
[372BFDRITDUK3PG2R61VCY8MBBD1CM]
Good
Unrated
Unrated$11.91 / hour
00:27:42 / completion timePros:
• "Successfully submitting this HIT will qualify you to a 7.50$ HIT that will be launched on Monday the 30th of June." (Most likely typo for July 30 which is a Monday; June 30 was a Saturday)
Cons:
• Timed pages
To read cut-e mTurk's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 1
-
-
Emily Kothe [A3U6MHW4RZH9F8] Short study of responses to messages about scientific issues(~ 10 minutes) - $1.10 | PANDA
[3PLXPMD6WGC9K7W4QBNE9P6I8O9KBV]
Generous
Unrated
Unrated$27.31 / hour
00:02:25 / completion timePros:
Cons:
• Mild reading
To read Emily Kothe's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 5
-
-
cut-e mTurk [AYL89L70SAA5B] Help us making great tools for assessing pilots (part 1 of 2)(~ 60 minutes) - $5.50 | PANDA
[372BFDRITDUK3PG2R61VCY8MBBD1CM]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$10.05 / hour
00:32:50 / completion timePros:
Puzzle and reasoning type hit, which I like.
Cons:
You have to think.
To read cut-e mTurk's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 2
-
-
Emily Kothe [A3U6MHW4RZH9F8] Short study of responses to messages about scientific issues(~ 10 minutes) - $1.10 | PANDA
[3PLXPMD6WGC9K7W4QBNE9P6I8O9KBV]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$37.71 / hour
00:01:45 / completion timePros:
Brief
Good compensation
Cons:
To read Emily Kothe's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 1
-
-
I think this requester is a sheep, with their baa-tches. Looks like there may be some rejections coming along. These HITs never seemed that great, anyway.
Message from Cornell LIC (lic.cs.cornell@gmail.com)
---------------------------------
Hi,
You are getting this email because you are qualified for the instruction writing task. In the latest baatch we found a lot of incorrect data.-
LOL x 2
-
-
-
-
He's a really great requester and its annoying to see people doing terrible work, especially given his leniency.
As he's gone from gentle warnings, to more verbose instructions to warnings about rejection, there are yet people who keep doing poor quality work and giving crap data - such as the twits who use transitory objects [bicycles, cars, pedestrians], or "idiot speak" ['u' for you], or street names - in spite of the progressively bigger fonts, bolder text weight, and highlights used in the instructions requesting them to stop doing so.
It's not the people doing a great job, who obviously are trying their best, who need fear a rejection from him.
When I emailed the requester last night to assuage my paranoia I might be screwing up, since the segmenting task seemed like it could be a bit arbitrary with the selections, he indicated to me he's not just going to go on a general rejection bent.
He's still being infinitely patient with the same people who've continued to disregard the instructions all this time - some who even bragged on here they only skimmed his emails, and so certainly couldn't be bothered to read the actual instructions themselves.
They messed up on the previous three tasks and are continuing to carelessly do the current one. Their poorly written, rushed directions also made the lives of those of us working on the placement and final navigation tasks challenging. They have as little respect for their fellow workers as they do requesters.
After my recent mass rejection from a scammy requester, it makes me even more irate when I see a legit good requester being deluged with bad data until he's pushed to either start rejecting or abandon the platform in disgust.
Given how communicative he is, responding to feedback left in the task itself and to emails sometimes within minutes, there's absolutely no reason for anyone working on his tasks to continue doing them wrong and giving bad data, beyond their apathy and contemptuous entitlement: even requiring the most meager of effort is too much of an affront to their perception mechanical turk exists solely as their private penny dispenser.
Maybe he'll at least pull the quals of the :emoji_poop:yahoos.:emoji_poop:-
Like x 1 -
Today I Learned x 1 -
Love x 1
Last edited: Jul 20, 2018 -
-
Emily Kothe [A3U6MHW4RZH9F8] Short study of responses to messages about scientific issues(~ 10 minutes) - $1.10 | PANDA
[3PLXPMD6WGC9K7W4QBNE9P6I8O9KBV]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$30.94 / hour
00:02:08 / completion timePros:
Cons:
To read Emily Kothe's full profile check out TurkerView! -
cut-e mTurk [AYL89L70SAA5B] Help us making great tools for assessing pilots (part 1 of 2)(~ 60 minutes) - $5.50 | PANDA
[372BFDRITDUK3PG2R61VCY8MBBD1CM]
Unrated
Unrated
Unrated$12.82 / hour
00:25:45 / completion timePros:
Fair compensation
Cons:
To read cut-e mTurk's full profile check out TurkerView!-
Nom Nom Nom! x 1
-
Page 1 of 91
- Thread Status:
- Not open for further replies.