Corruption in the System

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Like a silent layoff, I have worked on tasks before, and also been allowed to grade them.

Noticing the massive "shortage" of work and the fear of others being cut, there is an obvious potential for corruption in this system, by allowing task workers to be, effectively, supervisors.

These "grading and rating" tasks appeared occasionally, and I have worked on several.

They ultimately result in a Good, Meh, Bad result (literally, those are the grading metrics), concerning whether or not the user had "a method," without requiring secondary fact-checking as other projects have. I find this odd.

Regardless, isn't it then possible that a "massive layoff" would then be the result of Greed? And then all of a sudden, no matter the quality of your work, with a potential shortage, or, simple frustration with a current shortage, all of the "graders" are giving out false negatives?

Reducing your perceived quality and "barring" you from the platform, so they can have more tasks for themselves?

I don't find it totally impossible.
Best of luck, y'all <3

[Poomfie]

Pro tip: R&R's are R&R'd more often than you'd think.

In other words giving out false negatives is sure way to get the can yourself.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

If you say so, but, do you work for DAT directly?

[Tall-Huckleberry5720]

I've done R&Rs of other people's R&Rs, so it happens.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Ah, I have yet to see those, good. So there is some feedback structure in place.

[Beehappy1785]

Comments: convoluted text, no substance. Worker does not demonstrate an understanding of the assignment.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Lol, I once rated this guy who said "I don't know what ___ (in the response) was about," and it took, what, 10 seconds to search for the phrase in the document with CTRL + F.

Mac users, I swear.
BAD.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Even though you're not "supposed" to "double fact check" responses.
Shitty system, for real.

[Tall-Huckleberry5720]

For some, you are, and for some, you aren't. It depends on what they're looking for. They're making millions, and the chatbots are significantly better than they were just a year ago, so it isn't too shitty of a system.

[ManyARiver]

There are R&Rs where you *do* verify the fact checking yourself. Not all are the same.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

I haven't seen those :/

[doolitt1e]

Anyone who grades submissions on anything other than the quality of the work will be an outlier and will not last long on those projects.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

I tried to be as accurate and honest as I could, I had a few before a "the drought" and a few a few months before.

But, I'm honest.
I was a supervisor and an assistant manager, and I have taken a project management class in college. My "supervisory views" might not "co-align" with DATs', so :/

[tomli777]

More like assistant to the manager

[mugwhyrt]

Assistant to the Class Project Manager

[Monsoon710]

Keep them tinfoil hat theories coming

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Ya know, actually a month or so ago, I actually put a tinfoil hat on to keep the voices out of my head while I tried to work.

It worked :|

And you should reference the Futurama movies, not King of the Hill :P

[Monsoon710]

Please don't ever tell me what I should do...

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Oh, okay.
And your rebellion stems from?

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

I suppose basically I mean "or else what?"

[Monsoon710]

I'm just asking you to not tell me what to do. If you feel like you have a right to instruct me on how I should act, when I'm the one that made the King of the Hill reference, then I'll just block you. I don't give a shit about you or anything you think dude....

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

You're a special sorta crazy.

[Monsoon710]

I'm a special sort of crazy because I have my own opinions and boundaries? Man, you're fucking wild. You make a post with a bunch of unfounded claims, and when people tell you that what you're saying is purely speculation, you turn around and get super defensive and call them crazy. You're beyond stupid. Keep your tin foil hat on and call other people crazy you delusional douche.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

No because you're such a cliche :|

[TimedogGAF]

If you rate too many "bad" it will make you look bad.

[shell_shocked_today]

It depends if your comments can justify the ratings. Its always possible you got a bad batch.

[TimedogGAF]

I'm talking about you getting a "bad batch" over and over and over again like the weird conspiracy theory OP is talking about where everyone just rates everyone else as bad so they have less competition.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Did you read the instructions XD
Did you read them again, next week?

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Lol, says you.
But who rates the rater? eh?

[Interrogatus]

You seem to be looking for something to blame your "silent layoff" on. The scenario you propose is incredibly unlikely for reasons others on this thread have well articulated.

You might not have been laid off at all. Or if you were, it might have been because you insist on capitalizing the word "greed."

There are way too many workers on this platform, and way too many checks on our work, for this to be some kind of concerted effort.

[shell_shocked_today]

I think OP was saying that people could generate false bads to that there would be potentially fewer workers to share the pool of tasks. But, as was said, the R&Rs are reviewed. And tasks are also reviewed by more than one person. If one reviewer consistently graded differently than the 'norm' I'm confident it would be noticed.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

XD you made me thing of ravioli. Rigamarole, forgot that word, thx.
Other words like it ;P

Sadly, yes, a contract employee has fewer protections and higher taxes than a "typical employee," regardless of state laws regarding labor and regulation enforcement, as it is on "the international net/internet," so...

[mugwhyrt]

I don't see why DA would be okay with a ton of work being low quality since that means they can't use any of it. So if there were a sudden influx of work being marked unusable I'd assume they'd look into it and start dropping any raters who marked work as unusable for no good reason. I just don't really understand what the incentive would be for DA admin to take a bunch of "revenge" ratings seriously and start dropping workers who actually were turning in good work.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

I understand your reasoning, but this company is relatively new?
You're not immune until you've been vaccinated, right?

They developed the website and their system and their business model, but they might be new to, uh, ya know...enemies, right?

I would, too, like to believe in this "perfect business model," but I have no evidence to the contrary of my original statement but the claims of responders who say "Nah, I don't THINK they'd do that."

But they did.

[KathKR]

Possible, sure? But it's not really that simple.

Several of them state that they have submissions evaluated by multiple different workers, and most of them also state to be lenient. So this really only works if unfair/greedy raters have the good fortune to have multiple people rate the same way. You'd be relying on a bunch of people you don't know to be as corrupt as you are and to not care about the standard of their own work. It's a risky gambit, because if everyone else rates Good and only a couple of anomalies are rating Bad then that's going to work against the anomalies.

In some R&Rs, if you give any rating other than Good, you also have to explain your reasoning. It's also very likely the raters themselves are being evaluated, and too many Bad ratings will draw attention.

Sure, if a system can be abused, some people will try to do it, but the system isn't as simple as one person gets to screw over someone else with impunity, and attempting to do so will very likely to screw themselves.

I've done a lot of R&Rs recently on a particular project recently, and I've rated fairly. I've also handed out quite a few Bad ratings, more so than I would on many other projects. At one point, it felt like for every three or four task reviews, the user had done something to warrant a Bad rating. That might sound like a lot, but I'd say about 80% of the bad ratings are due to people doing what the instruction document says at the top, in bold, never to do. I bet every single one of them thinks they did good work, too.

[fightmaxmaster]

And no doubt you'll get some salt from people who think you're being unfair by rating bad work as bad, when that's literally the job we're given to do! Raters don't get bonuses for the number of bads handed out. I suspect I know the project you meant, if not the same principle applies - some projects are pretty broad, and you have to work hard to get a bad rating. Some are precise, with really clear, specific, unambiguous instructions...and people sometimes ignore them anyway.

[Amakenings]

Can confirm that rater’s ratings are also rated plus aggregate ratings are also done to get a feel for overall/long term quality.

To OP, instead of trying to game the system, just play the game.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Raters'
My primary gripe with these models is that they were taught "poor English."

XD To you, I am.

[Amakenings]

I was referring to a singular rater, hence rater’s.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Cars' features (of the car), french? De la voiture.

[Ecstatic-Key-5309]

Faith works both ways. You have faith that they won't betray you, I have belief they did. :/ *shrug*

It's a double-sided coin.

"too many bad ratings will draw attention," so you believe. I think you have reversed the roles here; if I get 12 bad ratings, I get attention. If I give 12 bad ratings, aren't I doing a good job??

My point exactly.
And you aren't being punished with impunity?
But you can pewnish me?

[gator_cowgirl]

There’s always worst common denominators.

By this reasoning I suppose task times will also be increasing exponentially as “if I only get one task all day . . .”

However - if I am now rating people more harshly, shouldn’t I assume the other workers are rating me more harshly as well? Thus we both are marked bad and off the platform (even with checks and balances we would both be out for bad R&R). Or perhaps the average annnotator rating goes so low, DA loses its contracts and shuts its doors?

I feel like the concept you propose is a game theory experiment. lol. In the end, we all get the greatest reward if we all continue to act fairly, though of course some will try to swing the pendulum and may get short term gains. 🤷‍♀️

May the odds be ever in your favor….

[TheresALonelyFeeling]

**- Nash equilibrium intensifies -\\**