A general "skip" button with reason?

[robgur]

Put this in the "just an idea" category, but I have run across a few cases where I wanted to skip a specimen entirely -- either there was clearly not enough information on the label to make it worth my while, or in a couple cases, there was a HUGE amount of information, and I wasn't really sure I could transcribe it all. I wonder if others have thought "I'd love to skip doing this one".

The only way to skip right now, I think, is to restart at the collection or to hit "Done" and have it count as a record transcribed. Both are kind of cumbersome. If one could "skip" a record, maybe they could also say "Not enough information", "Label problem" or some other detail that would be valuable for the collections folks to know.

[chrissnyder]

Definitely worth the time I think Rob.

I'm particularly interested in continuing to do edits like this until I think we've covered basically any potential cases for a record that somebody might see. At the very least, it's valuable lessons for later, and hopefully it eases a bit difficulty for newcomers to the site.

[robgur]

@kycan cool. like to hear from @cerabilia and @denslowm and others to verify this.

[cerabilia]

Skip with the option, but not the requirement, to tell us why seems like a good idea. I don't want to force them to say why, maybe they just don't like the look of the bug or don't want to do Mexican data. But, if we could know that an image has been skipped by flagging it that would be useful. If it gets skipped say 5 times, we should pull it to see what's up. If they do want to comment on why they are skipping, maybe that can be captured in the soon to be implemented "other data" field. This would be useful to quickly identify problem images or missing data.

[denslowm]

I would vote for the Skip option as well. I agree with Kip, but think we would probably want to try and give a few options as to why it was skipped and include 'other' to cover things we didn't think of. I also agree that we shouldn't force them to say in order to skip.

[robgur]

@chrissnyder looks like some of the transcribers also like this idea. Maybe we can make it a priority?

[arfon]

I'm not sure I agree with this. It's kind of a general principle with our projects that we don't allow skips. This seems to allow for incomplete records to be transcribed. Given that we're really not very well set up to measure 'completeness' for a record dynamically aren't we just giving people a reason to avoid the hard ones and just do the easy ones?

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:30 PM, Rob notifications@github.com wrote:

@chrissnyder https://github.com/chrissnyder looks like some of the transcribers also like this idea. Maybe we can make it a priority?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18456980 .

[robgur]

You know, I think that is fair, although Kip's point about maybe quickly tagging the hard or broken records that way might be, in itself, something of an experiment?

[arfon]

I'd much rather a 'this record is junk' option than a 'skip because it was too hard'.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Rob notifications@github.com wrote:

You know, I think that is fair, although Kip's point about maybe quickly tagging the hard or broken records that way might be, in itself, something of an experiment?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457041 .

[robgur]

I like that idea of "this record is junk". There are records with enough missing data that I wonder if the teams want people spending time on them versus focusing on those that meet a minimum standard. Seems like the main question.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Arfon Smith notifications@github.comwrote:

I'd much rather a 'this record is junk' option than a 'skip because it was too hard'.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Rob notifications@github.com wrote:

You know, I think that is fair, although Kip's point about maybe quickly tagging the hard or broken records that way might be, in itself, something of an experiment?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub< https://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457041>

.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457121 .

[cerabilia]

I suppose the minimum standard is whatever is on the label. This runs from nothing but the EMEC code to verbose information not covered by the current NfN fields. The more I think about it, the more I am convinced that a general skip button is not such a good idea. They can just hit "next record anytime." Perhaps if they hit next and have entered no data at all we should ask them why. But as long as some sort of data is captured it may be useful. At this point I think that getting the "other" field up is a higher priority.

kip

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 7:53 PM, Rob notifications@github.com wrote:

I like that idea of "this record is junk". There are records with enough missing data that I wonder if the teams want people spending time on them versus focusing on those that meet a minimum standard. Seems like the main question.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 8:50 PM, Arfon Smith notifications@github.comwrote:

I'd much rather a 'this record is junk' option than a 'skip because it was too hard'.

On Sat, May 25, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Rob notifications@github.com wrote:

You know, I think that is fair, although Kip's point about maybe quickly tagging the hard or broken records that way might be, in itself, something of an experiment?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub<

https://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457041>

.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub< https://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457121>

.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/zooniverse/notesFromNature/issues/274#issuecomment-18457145 .

pterostichini.wordpress.com twitter @cerabilia

It's All Natural http://www.the-brights.net/ " Humanists recognize that this is the one life we have, and we should make this life better not just for ourselves, but for others."