Actions
Forum Thread Details
  • Replies 32 replies
  • Subscribers 2566 subscribers
  • Views 2733 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Related

Conversation #2: Policy Change on Missing Reviews and Recommendations as an Official RoadTester

rscasny

Today, I had to audit 11 roadtests conducted this year, spanning about 50 roadtesters. For some roadtests there was 100% compliance on posting a review, which is leaps and bounds better than last year.

 

This is much appreciated. I realize doing a review is sometimes a painstaking job and I am honestly impressed by the efforts of many of our roadtesters. Yet, for some roadtests, there is still less than 50% compliance. I reviewed those closely. One variable popped out quite clearly: If a roadtester has not logged into the community recently, it is very unlikely he will complete a review. For these roadtesters, this happened 100% of the time with roadtesters who have not logged in more than 2 months ago.

 

These individuals were selected based upon their application, experience and ideas for the roadtest. But the logging-in correlation is too high to disregard it. We could have awarded the products to someone else who would have completed the review.

 

So, I feel compelled now to include in my recommendations to the supplier the last log-in of whom I am recommending. I'm sure some members will disagree with me and that's why I have started this discussion. I surely want to be fair. I understand that some people may not have logged in because of illness (I was out a week for surgery last month; it happens to every body at some point in time). But when someone hasn't logged in for 6 or as long as 8 months months, that's another story. My goal here is to award people who genuinely want to write the review.

 

Sincerely,

 

Randall Scasny

RoadTest Program Manager

  • in reply to Instructorman

    Should be able to write a script that would automate this and spit out a trend line or even a numerical participation factor.

    should be something similar to someone's level divided by the total time they are a member.

  • in reply to Instructorman

    This is what I was referring to by number of points vs signup date. If someone signed up in 2013 and they only have 100 points they are not engaged in the community. Logging in gives you 10 points so just from logging in once a week for 3 years is 1560 points, thats a lot more than the 100 or 200 points I've seen from some members. If you include comments and likes that number jumps up even more so there really is no excuse fro someone to be a member for 3 years and have less than 2000 - 3000 points.

     

     

     

    Kas

  • in reply to Instructorman

    I'm in agreement with Mark.  My guess is that the combination of recency and frequency should be predictive of a successful RoadTest.  They demonstrate an element of commitment to the community.

    Bill

  • in reply to kas.lewis

    Low points + long time membership = non participant

    That is true, but then I've seen some elevate themselves by dredging through old stuff, sticking one or two words, and simply just collecting points to look better (that's what it appears as).

     

    It is a balancing act between someone who interacts frequently, and a newbie applying for a RT.

    Unfortunately the points they have accumulated doesn't necessarily mean they will respond and provide what is agreed.

     

    Cheers

    Mark

  • I think you are 100% right to associate Login activity with the community engagement.

     

    During the Upcycleit Design Challenge it was very interesting to note the last login v the ability to do what was expected.

    For those not always here, I'd be expecting someone that either applied or wanted to apply, to be more regular right up until they didn't get selected image.

     

     

    An observation.

    Logging in with your user name gives you the stuff you're following in your inbox, and allows you to comment.

    We've had people ask why they are getting xyz or how to follow a subject, so maybe it isn't as intuative as we think.

     

    Without logging in you can still view material, read comments and generally poke about.

    So it's entirely possible that someone may have joined several years ago and has few points.

     

    Yes that doesn't make them a good community member, and in this instance probably excluded from RT's.

     

     

    Are RT details visible to anyone not logged in.?

    Maybe if they weren't, it might encourage people to actually login.

     

    Mark

  • Does "last login" mean the last time you logged in or the last time you visited the site? I come here frequently but only actually log in once a month or so because I check "keep me logged in". (I just logged out to check the process so I will currently show as recently logged in.)

  • in reply to Fred27

    Yes, it means the last time you logged in., If you came to the site without logging in, we couldn't track that.

  • in reply to rscasny

    But we are logged in - meant that we don't go through the log in process since we are logged in via a cookie.

  • in reply to hlipka

    I would expect that still means you log in, just you dont get prompted, your browser is presenting the credentials in a different way, if you exit and close your browser then your session is gone after perhaps a few minutes (Depending on server settings), once that is gone, your browser has to provide credentials again to give you access, this is either through the login page or via the cookie credentials. a simple experiment would confirm this, log in one day using normal login, note time and day, close down browser for at least half a day or the E14 pages for sure, then at a known time and day, go back to the site and check last logged in history ?

     

    I would think it would be quite a security risk to not require the users browser to provide credentials again and even this would be based on the PC logged in user.

  • in reply to fpobdoc

    I'm in agreement too. I don't think the last log-in time on its own is statistically significant enough; it's also easy to circumvent if you know it's being looked for!

     

    Can the "active" time on the site be tracked as well as the number of log-ins? That might help know how actively someone is engaged. Maybe you need to also count the number of links clicked in a session?

     

    As mentioned below, automatic log-ins must be counted (presumably most people log-in this way). I'm sure it must be, but it needs to be confirmed. I only log-in explicitly after I've been buying things from Farnell - I have different log-in details for this, but presumably E14 and Farnell are using the same browser cookie so it forces me to re log-in when I switch sites.