Poll: How Can I Get You More Active In The RoadTest Program?

I fully agree with Clem, it depends a lot on the product. As you might have noticed I proposed a 90 day period for the 3 Series MDO Mixed Domain Oscilloscope, which in my opinion makes sense for such a versatile product. I also proposed mandatory updates after e.g. 30 and 60 days.

In general I would not make the roadtests period too long, 60 days should be sufficient in most cases. A first draft or update in 30 days sounds also appropriate for me this will keep the roadtesters focussed and gives the community the opportunity to reflect and have influence.

This seems to mirror a discussion way back when Road tests were going to be tiered based on levels of participation. To be honest most of us know our levels of experience. I use that to judge my attempting a RT. I would love to have a oscilloscope, but my need and knowledge to use one is so finite. So here is the question; how do I get the knowledge needed to make an competitive application. Only recently have I had the need for a signal generator to feed an ADC on a board. But I do not have the background to build or get one. NO! I sit in a dilemma of wishing without a clue on how to proceed. Maybe these are shared by others as well. <getting off soap box>.

Now for the antenna roadtest, i would NOT get you an anechoic chamber!

LOL as I think of UPS delivering that. Thank you for reminding me...I still want to build my own mini-chamber after seeing a great Youtube video by Andrew McNeil.

dougw  wrote:

 

rscasny  I think you are doing a phenomenal job with the road test program.

Right now it is all about the test items, so obviously the more attractive they are the higher the interest/incentive.

But in some cases the program also suffers from a lack of incentive to complete the road test.

One way to potentially improve both the incentive to participate and the incentive to complete is to offer a token prize to all those who successfully complete a road test. A PSoC4 modulePSoC4 module or an arduino MKRarduino MKR come to mind (because I like these small modules) but it could be something like a Duratool.

Some good points from dougw. I think you should give yourself more credit for how well the Road Test program is going under your guidance. If anything I think it's the selected road testers that should step up a bit. When there are missing (or token gesture) road tests, it's us (i.e. the road testers) that need to improve.

I think you've done a great job if increasing participation and applications. I like Doug's idea of encouraging the road tests to be completed. Prizes for completing one to an acceptable standard would probably work but seem unnecessary - and a further financial burden on E14. Personally, I'd be tempted to formalise the give-and-take process. i.e. If you do a good job reviewing a $50 dev board then you can apply to road test a $500 PSU.  If you do a good job of road testing a $500 PSU then you can apply to road test a $5000 oscilloscope. Right now there is no reason for someone to actually complete their road test other than their own integrity, which unfortunately can sometimes be lacking.

Thank you for the kind words. Just musings while drinking from the call of the mountain.

Sean

Well put.

Thanks for articulating this wisdom. It would be interesting to know if members can learn from your hard-earned experience, or if they have to struggle for a couple of decades for it to sink in.

As a freelance writer I have received numerous rejection letters. In most cases you get nothing after pitching a proposals. It is the nature of the beast. What motivates me to continue, is my love for writing. What I have done to reduce some of the frustration, is to decide how much time I am willing to invest. That is the only thing I can control.

I view the RoadTests application process no different than writing a proposal. Rejection and/or not knowing is the nature of the beast. I would ask reviewers to examine their reasons for participating in the program. I suspect the desire to do some cool testing or get access to hardware is a strong motivation. Does that motivation disappear if you are not awarded the review. The desire to write a application yet again to be rejected not so much but, the motivation no. Disappointment, no doubt but if doing the testing was the joy, then I suggest the motivation is still there.

Now that the RoadTest Committee have done some homework for us writer and provided some guidelines for the application, it is time to get efficient in where potential reviewers invest their time. Like a writing proposal, most of the application is boiler plate stuff. You know your skills and experience. You know what you bring to the table. These items you refine and then reuse. You need to sharpen your pen (invest your time) on the must have stuff. I see that as one possibly two places in the application.

• Why did you apply for this particular roadtest?
• What is your testing procedure or project plan (Be as specific as you can)?

The last RoadTest review application I did had this question. What does "being a professional" mean to you? How much time should you invest in such a question? You can spend hours developing a response or you could look up the definition and then word smith an answer. The two bullet questions is your money makers so invest your time there.

I have a writing colleague, that doesn't put pen to paper unless he is being paid. That doesn't mean he doesn't do proposals. Trust me, you have to constantly. There are few knocks on the door for freelance writer. My colleague has become very efficient at writing proposals. Why? The majority get rejected and those don't make him a dime. He wants to make a living out of writing.

I understand there is research required to write an application. I'm going to suggest, more time than necessary is invested than what is required to write the application. Yeah, the research is fun but if the objective is to be awarded the review and research is costing you, then you have to make a choice. If you are disappointed because you did all that work but no reward then it has to be reduced or you learn to eat the loss as the nature of the beast.

I have been doing technical writing for publication since 2000. I have been ignored. I have been told the writing is crap. I have received rejection letters. It hasn't stopped me from writing about something I have discovered. I acknowledge pitching an idea is a skill. The skill is no different than learning how to write a resume. It can be learned. Will it provide success, I think it improves your odds but it is no guarantee.

I look forward to reading reviews on the site. I look forward to reading review of both old and new reviewers. I also hope Element14 continues to encourage reviewers. Realize the process is a path to what you desire. Embrace the process. Take from it what you desire. Invest where you can. Take shabaz up on his offer to look over your submission. His response may not be what you want to hear but I can guarantee you great rewards, at least that has been my experience. 

Sean

The time should depend on the product. Some of these are complex and need time to develope. Others really can be done in two months with careful planning.

rscasny I think you are doing a phenomenal job with the road test program.

Right now it is all about the test items, so obviously the more attractive they are the higher the interest/incentive.

But in some cases the program also suffers from a lack of incentive to complete the road test.

One way to potentially improve both the incentive to participate and the incentive to complete is to offer a token prize to all those who successfully complete a road test. A PSoC4 modulePSoC4 module or an arduino MKRarduino MKR come to mind (because I like these small modules) but it could be something like a Duratool.

Thank you Shabaz!!! I'll gladly make a good use of your offer and I'll send you my next application!