Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 91 replies
  • Subscribers 2566 subscribers
  • Views 6737 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Please Read: An Important RoadTest Program Change

rscasny

This is the third virtual "fireside chat" that I'm writing regarding the RoadTest Program. For this one, I'd like to roll out a RoadTest Program change and explain why the change is occurring.

 

To start, I'd like to share a snippet of an email I received yesterday from a vendor who participates in the RoadTest Program:

 

"We received only 13% reviews back from the RoadTests we sponsored in 2016. I would like to know the status of each of these roadtests. Are the missing reviews still being pursued? I would also like to know if the members that failed to post a review are now being flagged so we do not chose them again."

 

It was not pleasant to respond to. I had to eat "humble pie," as we say in the US, when I responded to this vendor.

 

To solve the problem, I decided I don't want to go down the road of suspending members from the RoadTest program. Suspensions sound too much like the hard rules of the military. I was in the Navy for 10 years and I didn't like tough rules back then, but I knew they were necessary given the reality of uncomfortable shipboard conditions and potentially dangerous operations we were participating in.

 

But this is a community. It should be a place to have some fun, meet new people, network professionally, be a mentor, or get mentored. Suspending people just is the wrong road to follow.

 

The way I've chosen to resolve the problem is the program change.

 

RoadTest application reports will soon include whether a specific applicant has completed all of his/her previous RoadTest reviews. I'm told by our developers this is very easy to do. We will provide this information to the vendor with a RoadTester's application. The supplier will make the decision where to select the RoadTester or not. Given the above comment by the supplier, I think the answer is self-evident.

 

Now, this change will probably cause me more work. If someone were flagged, I will have to check to see if that person is on a current RoadTest and it's before the due date of the official review. I surely don't want to penalize a conscientious RoadTester. I will also have to ensure there are not any extenuating circumstances that have caused the person not to write the review, i.e., sickness, family issues.

 

I am ambivalent about this whole thing. There are many RoadTesters who are doing a fantastic job. But a 13% success rate is not successful. I really have no choice but to implement this change.

 

Sincerely,

 

Randall Scasny

RoadTest Program Manager

Parents

  • Randall Scasny wrote:

     

    To solve the problem, I decided I don't want to go down the road of suspending members from the RoadTest program. Suspensions sound too much like the hard rules of the military. I was in the Navy for 10 years and I didn't like tough rules back then, but I knew they were necessary given the reality of uncomfortable shipboard conditions and potentially dangerous operations we were participating in.

     

    But this is a community. It should be a place to have some fun, meet new people, network professionally, be a mentor, or get mentored. Suspending people just is the wrong road to follow.

    Hi Randall,

     

    I see where you are coming from but to my mind If a member who hasn't completed a particular RoadTest, hasn't contacted you to tell you in advance of their extenuating circumstances, isn't responsive when you contact them, etc, then I don't personally see the downside in suspending them from the program. There has to be some way to dissuade people from signing up just to get free stuff and if its the price we have to pay to ensure suppliers continue to offer their products for free in exchange for a review then so be it.

     

    I was going to say we don't want a few selfish people spoiling it for everybody else, but sadly it seems it's not a few, for this particular supplier it's 87% which quite frankly is shameful, and those people (unless they have a very good reason why they haven't completed their reviews) should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

     

    Best Regards,

     

    Rachael

  • in reply to rachaelp

    I feel part of the problem of an outright suspension in that those selfish people (wether few in number or not) could generate a new account with ease. If you keep them here maybe they won't create a new account. It's a thought and I must admit not a very well thought out one, But there is always the chance of people creating multiple accounts for the larger more interesting road tests or after getting suspended creating new accounts and doing the same thing all over again.

     

    K

Reply
  • in reply to rachaelp

    I feel part of the problem of an outright suspension in that those selfish people (wether few in number or not) could generate a new account with ease. If you keep them here maybe they won't create a new account. It's a thought and I must admit not a very well thought out one, But there is always the chance of people creating multiple accounts for the larger more interesting road tests or after getting suspended creating new accounts and doing the same thing all over again.

     

    K

Children
  • in reply to kas.lewis

    Kas Lewis wrote:

     

    I feel part of the problem of an outright suspension in that those selfish people (wether few in number or not) could generate a new account with ease. If you keep them here maybe they won't create a new account. It's a thought and I must admit not a very well thought out one, But there is always the chance of people creating multiple accounts for the larger more interesting road tests or after getting suspended creating new accounts and doing the same thing all over again.

     

    K

    I would hope that there was more to receiving expensive free kit than just a user account on this forum. I would expect there would be some sort of verification of who they are, real name, address, contact details, some form of ID as proof of who they are etc. Much harder to have lots of duplicates of all that information. I also don't think we were talking about suspending their accounts on here, just their eligibility for signing up for road tests.

     

    Best Regards,

     

    Rachael

  • in reply to kas.lewis

    I suspected duplicate accounts too. People who enroll just to get their hands on the item, with no intention of giving back a review, would certainly have no moral issues with creating as many accounts as they can and enrolling with all of them.

     

    I've often wondered what these people could possibly say in their applications that they're sometimes chosen almost exclusively over actually qualified and willing roadtesters.

  • in reply to jadew

    Interesting thoughts on multiple accounts.  Not knowing the logistics that Element 14 would have to go through, but perhaps a shipping address flagged list?  Of course this could be bypassed by multiple P.O. Box use, etc...  But depending on programming resources available I would think cross referencing accounts, shipping address and even IP might allow an interesting source to provide basic tracking.  Obviously having Randall monitor individually could turn quite brutal for his time, but if the bits could be captured and placed into a tool E14 can use, then perhaps that would be of assistance.