OK, let me respond to pretty much everything addressed her. Some of you may not like how I respond, but unless you care to take on the burden of setting up freebies, promotions, etc., deal with vendor frustrations, put the time and effort into it that it takes, and figure out some way to make everybody happy at the same time, the policy stands as is.
(09-29-2012 11:22 AM)wiserd Wrote: Freebies come with commitments. But that being said, I wish there was some more conflict-free way option to deal with failures (or perceived failures) in those commitments than these emotional back and forths. Like... Pay for the initial tester and then get rewarded with products for reporting. Or make it clear that reporting is in lieu of payment, where payment is some high amount because a tester is a custom product so if someone decides to flake for whatever reason they can get a clear idea of the cost they're imposing on others and settle their debt some other way. Or make the date by which testing is to be completed generally agreed upon so obligations are more clear cut.
I don't know if any of this would actually help, but we seem to keep seeing this conflict and it seems like there have to be better ways to resolve it.
The only conflict is members accepting freebies and promising to report, then failing to honor their promises.
How quickly do members bitch at vendors if they don't ship promptly enough, or respond to answers or complaints quickly enough?
What if the tables were turned and the vendors started bitching at members who took free products from them after promising to test and report, then failed to honor those promises?
The only problem with that is that Vendors have to walk on egg shells, because Members can hurt and tarnish their names and reputations all to easily, while vendors can't do much about members who flake out on them.
Put the shoe on the other foot and let me know how you would react?
(09-29-2012 12:52 PM)Jolly Jumper Wrote: I think one report is fine if the product is really, really bad for you. What the hell, of course it is. If it makes you feel uncomfortable it is a reliable result. It's positive or negative effects on OTHERS I think can't be carved in stone after one single go at it.
I can agree with that, and that's completely understandable, but I'm on the fence about not testing because you don't like the scent. I do things I don't like or want to do all the time, because I'm supposed to or promised I would, because I'm an adult.
(09-29-2012 1:03 PM)Shelly B Wrote: I am saying the original testing agreement that Mark referenced - yesterday - which I think most of us signed up to - did not include detail such as how many times a product needs to be tested or even where a product needs to be tested (work, social, what types of social events) - to fulfill that requirement - simply that it take place in 2 weeks.
I am saying that it's clear that reviewing this thread - the amount of unclear, unwritten expectations - that people seem to believe are clearly understood expectations by the tester(s) - which then creates conflict and dissension - are far larger than necessary.
It does not lay out a draft of what an appropriate test result looks like. If one wanted to get really proscriptive - one could go so far as to to say this one's reports are sufficient where this one's aren't because they are insufficiently detailed to suit one member versus another. Or they don't capture enough of detail of the interpersonal communication style to justify the conclusion of human behavior they are saying they observed. And who judges that?
In reading the responses, in watching this thread develop, I am saying that I am watching a group dynamic unfold that I am uncomfortable with and that I am opting out of participating in going forward.
Oh come on! We're all adults here! We know what we look for in other peoples reports in order for us to take them seriously and feel like we can at least make a semi-informed decision about a product. That's what's expected in member reports on freebies.
(09-29-2012 1:20 PM)Jolly Jumper Wrote: What I meant was that one try ought to be enough if the user dislikes the product strongly. If the stuff disagrees with you, you're obviously not gonna enjoy using it and then any reports will of course be negative.
In that case,the member can always send it back or send to to another member who can test it enough to write a report worthwhile to the vendor, instead of just deciding to blow off further reporting.
Saying you don't like it so you're not going to test any further doesn't help the vendor out does it? Or encourage them to want to do anything with our members again.
(09-29-2012 1:28 PM)Shelly B Wrote: Hey Jolly Jumper -
I'm not frustrated at you - truly - my point is reading this whole thread is reading one massively charged mess.
There is so much room for misinterpretation of people's intent and and actions - simply because the current testing agreement leaves so much unclear.
That's easily enough remedied - it's written and clarified *going forward* so no one ever signs up for this with a lack of clarity again.
So - it get's fixed going forward. And that will be good.
Again, we're all adults here. If we've got to clarify word for word exactly what is expected of members, then they probably don't have enough experience anyway and it's just not worth doing anymore!
(09-29-2012 1:41 PM)AlternativeGirl Wrote: There have to be at least some guidelines to testing for these projects to work and for vendors to take them seriously. The perimeters have been stated before. If you volunteer to receive a free product for testing, you need to take the responsibility seriously.
LostLibra probably didn't know about projects like this in the past where 10 samples were sent out and only 2 or 3 people bothered to report back at all. It really irks the vendors who are trying to get useful feedback in a certain, reasonable amount of time. Then they think our community is unreliable for real testing and flaky in supplying them with any pertinent/ useful data or info. It makes us all look bad.
I do think a product needs to be at least tested twice to understand consistencies. In the case that a participant has a serious adverse reaction, detailing that reaction would be useful. A second application would be a way to see if other variables might have came into play to induce the previous reaction. But we are not lab rats. so if someone was really opposed to trying to give it a second go, I wouldn't think that wrong.
But having clearly stated guidelines for testing (and hoping that participating members are made aware of these guidelines) will improve the quality of data garnered and serve the purpose for which these projects are designed.
Its not a personal thing. It's simple statistics and quality control.
Very well stated AlternativeGirl. The only thing I'm opposed to is having to spell out what's required in reporting. If a member doesn't already know, then they probably aren't experienced enough with Pheromones to offer a valuable opinion that helps the vendor anyway, and shouldn't be participating.
(09-29-2012 1:52 PM)thundr Wrote: This thread is actually a very good thread. Multiple personalities brainstorming ideas often produce the best solutions. We have some great minds in this forum.
My .o2 on it would be that perhaps an early disclaimer or prerequisite may be valuable. Something like:
Company X is looking for Y testers for product Z.
Samples will be provided free of charge depending on these circumstances.
1. A substantial positive or negative review must be generated within 2 weeks upon receiving the product.
2. Barring any adverse health effects, a second concluding review will be required within 3 weeks of receiving product.
3. If you cannot fulfill these terms please do not accept tester status for this product at this time.
This way people know exactly what they are getting into with little to no confusion. If you cant complete the assignment dont sign up. Simple as that.
Im undecided about a penalty for inability to fulfill the requirements.
That's also a good suggestion thundr and we will start doing. Although, I would have expected members to realize on their own that the vendors want to see reports ASAP.
Post
Thanks given by
![[Image: flying_dragon.gif]](/forum_images/flying_dragon.gif)
