Summer Milestone 4 Micro+Macro : Analysis and Addressing Deeper Questions littleball
I was thinking about the whole milestone discussion we’ve had. So here is an idea of how it could work:
Micro Tasks: Whenever a task is posted, up to 10 people can pick up. The system releases the first 5% of the task for each worker. Once submitted, the requester can review and approve or deny (or maybe suggest changes to be re-submitted prior to approving). The approved worker receives the remainder of the task to work on it. Considering Ryo’s prototype based on the initial ideas, I’d keep his page for reviewing milestonesjust adding the approval buttons at the bottom:
Macro Tasks: I think this is a lot more complex than micro tasks. What I believe could be done is the following: the requester, when posting a task, has to break it down in at least two parts, one being an introductory task. Each break is a milestone review, the first being milestone 0. The system guides requesters through this phase, teaching them how to make a good milestone 0. My huntch is that the use of the platform will teach requesters to make a good one. For example: if milestone 0 is almost all the task, and it is not paid, no one will make it (or at least only very desperate people). The requester will then realize he has to follow the instructions. Making a better milestone 0 = more responses from more qualified workers. So the idea is that it will level itself over time. This whole teaching in steps part is due to the fact that nobody reads a full document. If you make it in parts, people will pay more attention (at least this is something I have been seeing a lot lately in UX Design). If a requester has been using the platform for some time and already knows how to post a good task, he can dismiss it. Also, considering something that was brought up during brainstorm discussion, perhaps after evaluating milestone 0 the worker and requester can discuss the number of milestones to avoid over reviewing and delaying the delivery of the task.