4 min Title: A Survey About Political Opinions Requester: G. Scott Morgan [A22WZIUWXLJ30D] (TO) TO Ratings: ★★★★★ 5.00 Communicativity ★★★★★ 3.75 Generosity ★★★★★ 5.00 Fairness ★★★★★ 5.00 Promptness Number of Reviews: 30 | TOS Flags: 0 Submit a new TO review Description: Read about a policy, and report your opinions Time: 2 hours HITs Available: 1 Reward: $0.85 Qualifications: HIT approval rate (%) is greater than 85;Location is US
back up Title: Mock Jury - Case(~ 23 minutes) Requester: John Campbell [AFOLU40A8Z0WP] (TO) TO Ratings: ★★★★★ 4.50 Communicativity ★★★★★ 4.69 Generosity ★★★★★ 5.00 Fairness ★★★★★ 4.75 Promptness Number of Reviews: 19 | TOS Flags: 0 Submit a new TO review Description: Participants will listen to a case presentation and render a verdict. Participants must keep the information confidential. Time: 30 minutes HITs Available: 1 Reward: $4.00 Qualifications: Exc: [19002-18413] has not been granted;Total approved HITs is not less than 100;Masters has been granted;HIT approval rate (%) is not less than 80;Location is one of: US
I really should have read the TO on Christian Buckner before I hammed those hits of his. 12 rejections later and I made sure to tell him that while I'm not a religious man, I'd be praying every night for his startup to fail.
3 mins, no code Title: Survey about Job Applicant Requester: Janice [A2VGT2O894XCRL] (TO) TO Ratings: TO Unavailable Submit a new TO review Description: Give your opinion on a prospective job applicant Time: 30 minutes HITs Available: 1 Reward: $1.00 Qualifications: Masters has been granted
That sucks. I made it through unscathed but I only did 15. The base pay was good but I had to return quite a few because I couldn't find acceptable photo URL's. I suspect that if you take the returns into account the rate wasn't all that good.
Crappy Sergey racy videos and even crappier Virals that require writing. My, how the Google requesters have fallen.
Which was exactly my reasoning for giving him a 1 on pay unlike all the other TO idiots who got rejected and then turned around and gave him a 5 for pay anyway. They'd have been about a 4 if he didn't expect you to just waste your time searching for something only to have to return it for no compensation if the information simply didn't exist, which I'm sure in and of itself is valuable data to him. Guy can choke on the 3 dollars he saved.
as;dlkjn basdjg ndflgjn What a humongous pile of shit. I didn't think anything could be worse than Samantha Duborw and then this hit back to back blew it out of the water for shit. I chopped 2 inches of my dick in the blender in one and a half hours. Lucky for the ladies I still have nine left. That cory was terrible. 45 minutes for 12 bucks paying constant attention and taking up one of my monitors. Not worth it at all. Incredible never ending inquisit section. Just horrible. Wouldn't ever do again.
It's amazing to me how many businesses that (presumably) want customers to find them bury their address deep in the website or have it in a graphic so it can't be copy/pasted. Thank goodness most addresses are there on the Google search page these days.
I was far more annoyed by how vague he was with what images he was looking for. "Prominent image" is meaningless. Did he want a banner image of the food or the building? Did he want a business logo if the former wasn't available? I submitted a few logos, and I have no idea if they're part of the rejections because he gives the same nonsensical rejection reason for every HIT.
I really don't trust the Google search page. They seem to get it wrong more often than I'm comfortable with.