Difference between revisions of "WinterMilestone 3 AtinMittra ReputationIdea: System ClearingHouse for HIT completion and rating"

From crowdresearch
Jump to: navigation, search
(Overview)
Line 10: Line 10:
  
  
What are the goals of the design?  
+
'''What are the goals of the design?'''
  
 
The goal of this design is to remove subjectivity from ruining reputations and providing an intermediary objective body to govern potential disputes.
 
The goal of this design is to remove subjectivity from ruining reputations and providing an intermediary objective body to govern potential disputes.
  
  
Which aspects of your design reflect each goal? How does your design solution address the users' needs?
+
'''Which aspects of your design reflect each goal? How does your design solution address the users' needs?'''
  
 
This design allows for better working conditions for both parties as it provides a system governance structure that decreases working violations and promotes a collaborative community in which users have a better understanding of their potential work parters before signing on to engage in business with them.
 
This design allows for better working conditions for both parties as it provides a system governance structure that decreases working violations and promotes a collaborative community in which users have a better understanding of their potential work parters before signing on to engage in business with them.

Revision as of 19:02, 31 January 2016

Overview

The system I propose to improve the reputation experience on the Daemo platform is a clearinghouse format in which both the Requester and Worker work through an intermediary system administrator which acts as

- Payment intermediary: Holds payment until work is completed and task is verified

- Conflict resolution: Provides case reporting system which handles grievances

- Locks in HIT as a contract which both parties must then verify completion after HIT is done.


What are the goals of the design?

The goal of this design is to remove subjectivity from ruining reputations and providing an intermediary objective body to govern potential disputes.


Which aspects of your design reflect each goal? How does your design solution address the users' needs?

This design allows for better working conditions for both parties as it provides a system governance structure that decreases working violations and promotes a collaborative community in which users have a better understanding of their potential work parters before signing on to engage in business with them.



Work Flow

Workflow.jpg

Rating System

The rating system is combination of qualitative and quantiative metrics combined through a similar process as a credit score. The system will determine a score based on attempted/completed HITs or posted/satisfied HITs. It will combine this with qualitative ratings based on people they have worked with in the past in key categories that have been communicated through research were crucial to the system such as communication and attitude. Also, if any cases were filed under that person for any grievance, the case record can be viewed through the person's page to show past situations and judgements. If a judgement was filed against the person, it lowers their overall score, the way a bankruptcy or missed payment would lower your credit score. Finally, to deal with the new users, I propose a "Pre-Start" track record in which the first 15 HITS completed by a Worker and the first 3 HITS posted by the Requester are isolated into this metric. This allows users wiggle room to learn the platform without fear of hindering future work as much. It will still provide a way for new people to show their ability to work/post after pre-start is over to potential partners, but once they have completed many HITS, they will rely more on the "Start" score - or the traditional metric used to measure overall aptitude.


Worker Rating

Worker@2x.jpg



Requester Rating

Requester@2x.jpg