06/15 - Tasty Thursday!

Don't hop on the pole just yet. I am sending back 7 Theater labs.lol.

 

Where

 

What are those?

 

According to the TO, everyone! Take a screenshot and email. Mine has already approved.

 

Apparently I have done the Galileo too? Sending it back ugh

Title: Perform a task about perceptual decision-making (40 minutes, $6) | PANDA Worker: Preview | Accept | Requester Requester: Galileo [A206I79EPQNKDS] (Contact) TO 1: [Pay: 4.38] [Fast: 4.71] [Comm: 4.83] [Fair: 4.89] [Reviews: 51] [ToS: 0] TO 2: [Rate: $16.00/hr] [Pen: -- days] [Res: -- of 0] [Rec: 100% of 1] [Rej: 0] [ToS: 0] [Brk: 0] Description: - Time: 5 hours HITs Available: 20 Reward: $6.00 Qualifications: Total approved HITs GreaterThanOrEqualTo 1; HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThanOrEqualTo 90; Location EqualTo US;

 

A decent easy hit posted daily. Judging stick figures.
Group ID: 3VVLLQBOO87XMRS9PH3C8WWXB3OQ7U

 

It looks like I'm missing a qual for it, can someone link me to the requester's quals?

 

if you go to the qual tab and search by requester, any available come up

 

Title: Answer questions about storybook characters | PANDA Worker: Preview | Accept | Requester Requester: Nadya Chernyak [A3S5EIYI3M3EP4] (Contact) TO 1: Not Available TO 2: Not Available Description: Read and look at some storybook pictures. Answer questions about the stories. You may also be asked to complete a color‐naming task. Time: 2 hours HITs Available: 1 Reward: $3.00 Qualifications: HIT approval rate (%) GreaterThan 95; Location EqualTo US;

HIT exported from Mturk Suite v1.21.10​

16

 

Very useful information, but I don't know the requester for these either

 

The Theater Lab

 

I don't even care about WBC, but the message would help quite a few relationships here.

...

Summation of her main point topics:

• Don't assume bad intent - Assuming ill motives almost instantly cuts us off from truly understanding why someone does and believes what they do. We forget that they are a human being with a lifetime of experience that shapes their mind. And we get stuck on that first wave of anger.
• Ask Questions - Map the disconnect between differing points of view... we can't present effective arguments if we don't understand where the other side is coming from. And, it gives them an opportunity to point out flaws in our positions. It signals to someone that they're being heard.
• Stay Calm - I thought my rightness justified my rudeness. People often lament that digital communication makes us less civil - but this is one advantage that online conversations have over in person ones. We have a buffer of time & space between us and the people whose ideas we find so frustrating. Instead of lashing out we can pause, breathe, change the subject - or walk away.
• Make the Argument - One side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is - or should be - obvious & self evident. That we shouldn't have to defend our positions because they're so clearly "right" and "good" that if someone doesn't get it that's their problem. Its not my job to educate them. But if it were that simple we would all [already] see things the same way.

Everything she said are basic tenants of good communication skills. Like Com 101 level stuff. Interesting to see people can apply it to such divisive topics like hatred & politics.. shame it doesn't work on mundane stuff like posting hits & garnish preferences.

Cool video @hofrungur - though if I can take a little dig its slightly ironic you called them idiots in the same post when the entire video is about how humanizing "one of them" is actually the only method that worked.

 

Now I just feel outright stupid

 

C-SATS!!!