Milestone 3 Opera Redress: Redress forum for workers

From crowdresearch
Revision as of 11:44, 18 March 2015 by Aksharauke (Talk | contribs) (Design aspects covering the goal)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Goals of the design

  1. Happy workers
  2. Fair evaluation of work

Design aspects covering the goal

  1. Since the platform provides a flow for having re-evaluation of the rejected task, workers are more happy with the system and trust that the system is unbiased.
  2. Since the platform has a redress flow, requester can be subjected to re-evaluation for rejection, he knows that it will cost him time/reputation to reject in haste or without a genuine reason, so the requester will be fair when evaluating the work.

Users needs addressed

  1. The need that the worker will trust that the system is not biased is met and also that user will trust that he has an equal say in the system.
  2. The need for the worker to trust that his work will be fairly evaluated and that he will not be exploited due to unjust rejection is met.


The platform must have give a voice to the worker where they can request for re-evaluation of the rejected task. This is to help build trust amongst workers that the platform is fair and not biased towards requesters. If the task that the worker completes, gets accepted by the requester, there is no problem. But when the requester rejects the task, the worker will have an option to request for re-evaluation. When the worker submits for re-evaluation, the task will be studied by a committee of the platform and will be forwarded to the requester to give justification of rejection. Unless this justification is provided, the task is not marked as complete and is open for payment. If the requester will ignore the re-evaluation, the platform will make a note of this or tag the requester such that other workers are aware. If the requester justifies the rejection, the task will be marked as closed. Redress.png