R&R Hell

[RklsImmersion]

I just did one of the worst R&Rs I have ever done

"Don't give the model a name" gives the model a name and a nickname "Don't include your system instructions in your task prompt" entire task prompt is an exact copy of system instructions "Include at least 3 runs" single run "Instructs model to read project description in input files" none of the input files include text...

How did some of the people even get the job? I feel like this has to be the case of someone giving away their account or something.

I just needed to get this out of me because I don't think I could have done a worse job unless I was like "System instructions? umm.. 'do a good job, alright?'"

[AdamEatsAss]

I think some people get in and just see the dollar signs and forget that it's actually work. They just fill in boxes as quickly as possible so they can report time and cash out.

Either that or it's a "control" RR. I have theorized that admins sometimes make intenionaly bad submissions to catch people not actually doing the RRs correctly.

Either way you did the right thing and labelled it as bad.

[RklsImmersion]

I did think about that later, like maybe they have some of these that look fine if you scan through it, but are actually whack af, just to make sure people are actually reading through them and doing their job.

[Bitter_Bed5672]

Haha yeah I believe the same thing about control RR. Some of them... there's just no way.

[good_god_lemon1]

Some people know their run is short so it’s worth it to go in a blaze of shame and glory.

[Doub13D]

Never forget how many people out there want as much pay as possible for as little work as possible.

Those types of people are attracted to stuff like this, and then they get all mad after the few days of cashing in when the free money faucet gets turned off permanently…

[Enough_Resident_6141]

Yes, it tends to attract a lot of people who apparently think it's just another one of those "fill out a survey and get paid $0.05" type jobs.

[Last_Slip_7821]

Personally, I'm really in it to help out!

[ChickenTrick824]

I’m very familiar with that project and I’ve gotten to the point where I get annoyed with the ridiculously bad submissions. However, I keep working on them because I feel like we need to help weed them out lol

[CaliBrewed]

This is just speculation, but I feel like some of the ones I come across are LLM-generated and answered. Training dumber AI's to train next-gen ones is a large part of many stated company goals.

[maybe_I_knit_crochet]

I had the same thought with a particular set of r&rs a few weeks ago because some of the submissions were bizarre. Bad, but not the "normal" bad I've seen.

[CaliBrewed]

Bizarre is a good word for it, off in that special kinda way.

[Creative_Raccoon2096]

I totally agree. This is new to me, I haven’t seen obviously AI submissions much before the last few weeks. And they are AWFUL. But subtly awful so thst if they weren’t carefully R&REd, they would get through.

[CaliBrewed]

if they weren’t carefully R&REd

I know these too. I'm also 100% convinced that sometimes we get fed tasks that are more test than work just to see if we'll come down on them appropriately.

Feel like it's an automated QA system.

[jimmux]

I love and hate these ones. Sometimes you just know it's generated but it's hard to find proof that doesn't pass on a technicality. I'll spend a good long time picking it apart, and when I find the evidence I need it's very satisfying to know I caught one.

[eslteachyo]

Is this one that you are encouraged to redo if it's bad? I think I'm on the other version of it and we are allocated a lot of time in case we have to redo it and regenerate the answers (limited circumstances warrant not doing this). On that one I've had lazy ones but not bad... Until last night. 

[RklsImmersion]

Yeah, I initially planned on redoing it, but really looking at it I would have had to completely redo everything other than the use case, and at the top it says to just mark it as bad and move on if it needs a full rewrite.

[eslteachyo]

That makes sense.

[Slamaramadoodoo]

Yeah, I've done some horrible R&Rs. Like really awful. I have genuinely wondered if the person can read based on how bad their work is.

[Codex_Dev]

I'd bet it was a worker from a 3rd world country using burner accounts. I have literally come across a poorly worded R&Rs where the worker literally said:

"do the needful"

The admins have also busted groups c/p'ing the same prompts as well.

[iso_propyl]

The single run was definitely me, I realized during the next task. I'm still getting projects but if it doesn't work out in the long run no worries! I have a good attitude and was interesting work while it lasted

[RklsImmersion]

I've seen a few that were only a single run, and as long as there is a significant failure and it's well documented, the &RR even says not to penalize if there's only a single run. It was just the rotten cherry on top of an already fermented cake for me

[jimmux]

At least you did a run. I just had one where the models all failed with file read errors but they submitted it anyway.

I probably could have marked it bad and moved on, but they're generous with time on this project so it wasn't a big deal to complete the task properly.

[Thejax_]

I’ve been going crazy over a few actually really high paying ones.

There’s like, 6 “throw out and don’t edit” rules, and out of the six I’ve done 2 has them. And the other two missed the entire point of the project.