Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length

 
Advanced search

1370291 Posts in 64455 Topics- by 56510 Members - Latest Member: MariamThomson

December 10, 2019, 10:48:39 PM

Need hosting? Check out Digital Ocean
(more details in this thread)
TIGSource ForumsDeveloperBusinessLooking for feedbacks on our platform!
Pages: [1]
Print
Author Topic: Looking for feedbacks on our platform!  (Read 222 times)
Rubra101
Level 0
*


View Profile
« on: September 03, 2019, 10:15:50 AM »

Hi guys!

We're collecting research for our new platform, and want to hear feedbacks & opinions about the platform. The reason is that we're developing the platform and want to give the best collaboration experience to our users.

Crowdsourcer.io is a collaboration & profit sharing platform for developers where people can earn a fair share based on their contribution.

Here's our video explainer:



I really appreciate your time to take a look at our website https://crowdsourcer.io/ and explore our pages.

Please let me know your feedback & opinions about the platform. We're keen to hear your honest feedback as we really need that to develop the platform for our users.  Kiss
« Last Edit: September 03, 2019, 01:38:01 PM by Rubra101 » Logged
ProgramGamer
Administrator
Level 10
******


The programmer of games


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: September 04, 2019, 04:22:38 AM »

Sounds like this would be promising, but I have a few questions:

First, your website claims that using the platform will lead to your project "sourcing high quality talent", but how can you guarantee the skills and experience of developers you take in? If anyone can join, wouldn't this still allow "low-level talent" to contribute to projects?

Second, how is the worth of a contribution quantified? If it's determined by project leaders, then how can you prevent them from putting the worth of everyone's contribution to a really low number and keeping the money to themselves? And if it's counted by the platform, then how do you deal with disagreements between what contributors feel they are owed and what project leads feel they owe to their contributors? What prevents a contributor from claiming to have made more contributions than they really have?

Finally, what about projects which never see the light of day? Do contributors still get compensated in that case? Does that mean that your platform also acts as a sort of risk mitigator for contributors? And if not, doesn't that mean that you're spreading the burden of risk over all contributors of a project?

Unless you have clear ways of dealing with the "what if it goes wrong" side of this whole thing, I hardly see how this could work well. Projects fall apart all the time for a myriad of reasons, and you need to be ready for that eventuality, and in a way that doesn't ultimately hurt contributors.

Another issue I foresee is that contributing to a project usually takes an upfront amount of time to learn the development environment used by the rest of the team. Developers can't usually just jump between projects on a whim, they have to invest themselves in a project for their contributions to be worthwhile. If you don't facilitate this somehow, it will put a lot of friction on the whole "contributors contribute to as many projects as they wish and get compensated for it" thing you're going for.

One last thing: It might be a good idea to have a few completed example projects with written post-mortems about how the development process went. If someone is on the fence about joining your platform, then the lack of successful examples might turn them away. I understand that the platform is new, but this is still a point that sticks out to me.
Logged

Rubra101
Level 0
*


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: September 04, 2019, 01:14:13 PM »

First of all, thank you so much for your feedback  Wink

Quote
First, your website claims that using the platform will lead to your project "sourcing high quality talent", but how can you guarantee the skills and experience of developers you take in? If anyone can join, wouldn't this still allow "low-level talent" to contribute to projects?

Yes contributors whether it' a low, mid or high level talent can apply to a project, but, not all contributors' applications will be approved. when you're getting applications, you can interview them. There's an application process so you can vet contributors, and on top of that, there's a peer review system within the application to prevent poor quality work from being done.

Quote
Second, how is the worth of a contribution quantified? If it's determined by project leaders, then how can you prevent them from putting the worth of everyone's contribution to a really low number and keeping the money to themselves? And if it's counted by the platform, then how do you deal with disagreements between what contributors feel they are owed and what project leads feel they owe to their contributors? What prevents a contributor from claiming to have made more contributions than they really have?

It's done on a task by task basis, where each task has a value associated with it. This can be a function of difficulty and/or time (or whatever you like as long as it's consistent), and, importantly, it's agreed upon before the task is undertaken. So you'll never actually be accepting a task before you're happy with the value it'll reward you. There's a 14 day review process that can be used after a task is completed, when you can raise any issues with value, quality or any other problems you have. There are also limitations on how many points can be assigned in one task, how many tasks can be accepted by one person and other processes to prevent exploitation. We also have a moderation service to help if things go wrong, but our issue rates are currently at about 0.05% per task because of the protection provided by all the other systems.

Quote
Finally, what about projects which never see the light of day? Do contributors still get compensated in that case? Does that mean that your platform also acts as a sort of risk mitigator for contributors? And if not, doesn't that mean that you're spreading the burden of risk over all contributors of a project?

When contributors join a project they're investing their expertise and time. If the project doesn't see the light of day, that means those who invested their time don't get paid just like any other investment. That's why it's so important that contributors evaluate projects for their feasibility and even evaluate the project creator before jumping in. This has the added benefit of creating a meritocratic system where good projects and creators are more likely to get contributors.

We actually have the documentation where you can find all information related to project creation & contribution on this page https://crowdsourcer.io/nucleus/ . And I also understand that we need to update our web design and content to make visitors find the information they need even easier. We are working on it  Wink

Logged
Pages: [1]
Print
Jump to:  

Theme orange-lt created by panic