Milestone 4 Team Nike Extended Resolution System: Ideas and insights

From crowdresearch
Revision as of 23:14, 25 March 2015 by Harshpankeshkumarvyas (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "'''Problem Addressed by Resolution theme:''' Main Problem here is that there are not fair mechanisms available in current system. So that sometimes it is possible that reques...")

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

Problem Addressed by Resolution theme:

Main Problem here is that there are not fair mechanisms available in current system. So that sometimes it is possible that requester will reject tasks performed by worker without any reason. Also there is not any communication mechanism available through which worker will communicate to requester to ask valid reasons for rejecting particular task performed by worker.

Inspiration for solution:

I got inspired to find a solution to problem described above from the idea of feedback/review mechanism described in priority system (similar to DoTA2). In priority system, feedback/review mechanisms are available for both requester and worker so that the worker/requester with more complaints or malpractices assigned to low priority and pushed into a idle period where they can not do anything neither post any request/perform any request. So in a similar way we can develop feedback system for moderator who is responsible for validating work performed by worker and check the valid reason behind the rejection of particular hit of worker by requester.

Solution: To solve the problem addressed above, one can develop a feedback/review mechanism to validate the work performed by particular moderator. Moderator is a third party who will inspect the work performed by worker and then ask requester for compensation if work is valid otherwise take payment from worker for raising invalid disputation. In this mechanism there is no way that we can validate work performed by moderator. In this case it may be possible that it will not validate properly or favour on worker's side. So there should be feedback mechanism to evaluate moderator's work. Requester will provide feedback for work performed by moderator about the dispute raised by worker for rejection of particular hit. So moderator will never try to favour worker's side and also try to be neutral about the decision. This mechanism will encourage indirectly requester to not reject any HIT without any valid reason.