RoadTest Rule Update: Submitting Identical RoadTest Applications Under Different Names

Some folks collaborate on projects and even with RoadTests so it might be possible where one person comes up with the idea and another publishes the proposal.

Besides, how is it possible to prove any of this?

Making the submitter process more complicated may discourage more than just the RoadTest abusers.

If so, you still wouldn't get verbatim applications. Also note terms where applicants must not submit someone else's idea nor submit on behalf of another. That is clear and already existing in the terms.

If you collaborate, submit one proposal from one person then do the project together. Perhaps name collaborators in proposal rather than submitting identical proposals under different names.

Proof for some things could be found in the metadata of the submission that site admins probably have some level of access to. IP addresses, login times, cookie tracking, user agents, screen resolution, OS, languages installed, etc. There are many ways to fingerprint a browser that makes random coincidental results fairly unlikely - e.g. demonstrated by Panopticlick. Just testing my browser today showed:

Making it more complicated may discourage people, but this is not about making the application process more complicated or difficult. The terms I listed are already the currently operating terms of RoadTests. The new rule is more like a warning to potential repeat submitters, but mainly only affect how RoadTests are vetted - that affects the staff. If people fail to read and understand this, that's not exactly the fault of element14, nor should we condone mindless enrollment. The issue is ensuring quality, legitimate RoadTest proposal submissions and some level of fairness, transparency in selection, in part to avoid needless waste of time on the submitter and judger's behalf.

As it stands, a RoadTest review is a commitment at least 20-times greater than that of a proposal alone. If a potential reviewer isn't willing to pony up a decent proposal, it seems unlikely they would be able to put in even greater effort to deliver a quality RoadTest.

- Gough

Interesting how this has gone from a discussion about a something we don't have a clear understanding of to being decided and definitely determined. Sounds like in future the FBI, Scotland Yard, CIA, NSA MI5 among others should be involved in the selection process to be sure al rules, regulations and correct intentions are followed.

OOPS let's not forget a full complement of lawyers to be sure any interpretation of the rules fits with the best "intentions" of the road test community.

Kas

Well, as with everything, it's both clear and unclear at the same time depending on how liberal you want to be in your interpretations. I'm only providing my views as I see it from the T&Cs as published on prior RoadTests.

I mean, the outcome of this discussion is likely going to be another rule that will probably go into the T&Cs, so if the problem is about the interpretation of the T&Cs, then basically we're back to square one ... It's always a case of definitions?

That being said, I do agree with the fact that adding more stuff to the T&Cs isn't going to change much on the premise that so many people don't read them anyway. People still probably submit poor applications despite all the "how to apply" tips provided. I guess this was more about warning anyone else thinking about doing the same?

- Gough

Some sweepstakes or free giveaways are encouraging multiple application from the same person as each access to that page increases some page access number, resulting in more numbers of advertising displays. It is not the case for applying and winning a RoadTest review. This must be clear for all participants and, this large discussion will make easier to find the right answer for those who will search on element14 site about "Submitting Identical RoadTest Applications" AND/OR "Under Different Names" 

One can create an environment that will prevent from being detected so there is not guarantee with that.  However, thanks for showing the attitude that has led me to never participate in another RoadTest on this site again.

Of course, there will always be ways to evade it, but that doesn't mean we should just turn a blind eye to it either, especially if there isn't a legitimately good, fair and just reason for it happening.

Each to their own, but you don't see me participating in design challenges here either for a particularly good reason as well ...

- Gough

What salary does a RoadTest biblical Solomon garner today?

I chuckle at the self awareness or lack of each post provides. You are either the sheep or lemmings herder of the technology myopic and heads in the sky. I do not envy your role but, do wish you the best of luck

Please continue to share your experiences as the RoadTest overseer. These opportunities provide us mere mortals, insight into the program. When I first joined the site  You provided the chance to explore and provide feedback on the RoadTest application process. This exercise enabled me to recognized the potential of the RoadTest venture for Element14 and why it must be well managed.

Keep up the good work! Your focus and investment will continue to improved the program. Please accept this post as it's intended. A shameless, overt plug to gain favour in the eyes of the RoadTest judge, so I get a larger half of the next FREE child.

Sean

Gough Lui

Each to their own, but you don't see me participating in design challenges here either for a particularly good reason as well ...

Nope you just apply to the high end gear RoadTests, I guess it's bang for your buck.

It's interesting how you complain bitterly about multiple entrants (seems poorly written ones) but the thought of sharing opportunities for good gear does not enter the equation. Your complaining sounds like more of its not fair that you might get a slight disadvantage from someone else than real concern about fair players in the RoadTest Environment. I guess each to his moral self.

To all commenters,

I appreciate everyone's input. It's made me think about our RoadTest Rules. Here's an update.

Yesterday, we researched the two accounts (our developer team and community manager) that had identical applications. They may be coming from the same person, or two different people working together. We aren't 100% sure. If you are going to work with a team, I would recommend submitting one application with both names so we know, but this team effort is primarily for school teams.

Every applicant needs to submit his own application. No one can submit an application for someone else. I recall recommending a few times a guy who does not write great. But he did his best and his reviews were informative.

Beyond that, I found some old correspondence from this person's email; he said he didn't receive a roadtest product that he was sent. We checked the tracking number and it was already delivered. He was unaware of it. It seemed odd to us at the time although I guess this situation is possible, to give him the benefit of the doubt.

Whether these two applications are from one person or two doesn't matter since one of the accounts has at least one outstanding roadtest review that I am waiting on from him to submit. I've been told by another one of our program managers that he was sent product for another project that he has yet to complete.

When I see someone is completing their reviews by the deadline, the person's credibility rises in my eyes.

Randall Scasny

RoadTest Program Manager