Milestone 8 PixelPerfect 3

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search

Foundation 3: External quality ratings

Is this a group/authority? For example, Wikipedia reviews are subjective and based on voting. Or is it an algorithm?


An algorithm based rating will be a rigid, less flexible but more feasible system. We can introduce the concept of upvoting and downvoting the rating to take into consideration worker's opinions and eventually incorporate changes in the algorithm. Subjective rating system would be too tedious to process and would tick off requesters.

If it’s a group, who pays for their time to review you?

As mentioned in our page for Foundation 2: Input-Output transducers, the time spent on the voting/reviewing can be compensated through non-monetary benefits. We suggested creating a social network-like structure to enable commenting, upvoting and downvoting. Such activities can add to the social score of the worker, and would improve his/her chances of getting hired.

How do you do skills-based ratings, etc., without hindering tasks with a requirement to categorize them?

We can design skill-specific tests to place the worker in the rankings. The worker could take the tests after he/she wishes to be able to work on skill-specific tasks. As we suggested on our page on Foundation 1: Micro + Macro Task market, the workers could be then made to work with mentors(high-rated workers/requesters) on a small fee. As they gain expertise, their ratings could go up and the wage could increase too.