Backup of Free Advice Given, Round 1 –

Entry #4
>> Entry State: winning entry
>> Contest Name: Ideas To Make more better
>> Contest Prize: $250
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/09/29 15:22:37
>> Entry Description:

4th Edit Sometimes if there is no one great idea but lots of good ideas, or if besides one great idea there were other great ideas too, then there should be an option for the contest holder to break up the award amount into smaller pieces. Even as low as $1, any amount as prize makes a person happy as long as they win something. Winning nothing after trying lots of times is the worst thing that a happen in a crowdsourcing site. And there definitely are scores of sites out there who do not pay even deserving candidates after 100s of contests, because they engage in paying fake-ids of their own with their own prize money. So then it would really make people trust you if you pay a lot of people as long as they make a valid contribution even if the widely distributed amount turns out to be really small compared to if just one person was being paid. And when you pay small amounts, also allow people to buy things from your site like domain names, a set of playing cards, a sticker, anything that sells for low amounts – that would be better for contestants to receive than $1 or $15 or things like that in their paypal, so much of which paypal itself will eat up in receiving, converting and transferring to bank. 3rd Edit Please allow the contest holder to edit the contest description during the contest, if not edit then at least append, because many a times the brief changes after the client sees some entries. Also it would be great is some sort of info board having multi-media capabilities could be used by the client to express his desires. It could have pictures, audio, video, text, ppts whatever that the client wants to use to communicate his/her needs. Basically it would be the virtual white board, a much better brief than a text field with some pictures. Also allow chat feature including voice and video chat where the client can talk to contestants better and explain. This will not only help in the betterment of work but will also lend a degree of tranparency and trust to the contest. The contestants will be assured that a real person is behind the logo. Similarly the winner should be asked to put in a thank you message via a video message which other constestants can see so that they do not feel that the a fake-id was awarded the prize amount. I have personally experienced fake-id awarding on some naming contest sites and this is a very valid requirement. 2nd Edit Many people hold name contests, please put up a text-input-field option in the word formatting options, so that instead of putting name, brand name, domain name, business name suggestions in sentences, people can add them in separate text-entry boxes, that way for brand name contests, duplicate entries can be avoided, if anyone enters a name already entered then the message “already submitted by a contestant” will be shown. Also the system can check if a popular brand by that name already exists (which is the same as googling for the name to check if it exists). For domain name contests two text field will be requried, one with the name and one with the extension, it will check and show a status message next to the entry which will be one of the following “available”, “taken – DNPed”, “taken – in use”. DNPed means the domain name has been bought by someone but a fake name parking site is up, and the owner of the name intends to sell the name, which is what his/her unscrupulous business is. Another fun message could be “Taken – forget about it” if someone enters a suggestion like 1st Edit The most important thing required for success as a Crowdsourcing Ideasourcing Creativesourcing site is to Rank participants. Unless you steadily, continually and dyanamically change the worth and value of participants (both contestants as well as contest holders) it will always be like a fish-market – everyone is selling the same thing and everyone is buying the same thing, people will come and go, some will never return after frustration and disbelief and new ones will join in but the situation will more or less remain the same. But if you offer ranks, increase the value of winners, then instead of a buyers market it will move towards being a sellers market – i.e. instead of people bidding on projects it will be projects bidding on people. Both extremes are not good, it should both be a buyers as well a sellers market – i.e. there should be some sought after buyers (prestigious, generous, big-name and trusted clients) and some sought after sellers (creatives, ideastors, writers, designers, etc). I know there is no bidding involved here, it is a contest site, but what i mean is “value”, value can be assigned to buyers and sellers based on their performance and history. So if a contestant is among the top 5 percent of all contestants his/her entry should get displayed first. There are many more ideas i have to improve this site, i will write them down properly and post a long post (blog?) later. Cheers. The good thing about this site is the casual, informal, forum like nature of comments and participation. While this is good and a refreshing change from the regular crowdsourcing contest format, there needs to be some sort of professionalism added. A lot of noobs are participating here too, while they need to be encouraged too, and educated in order to make them better, it is imperative to box any unprofessional or dud entries right away – in a secondary entry section – by a live moderator/admin, so that the client has those entries available to them for glacing at, but by removing them it de-clutters the list of entries so that the client/buyer can focus more on the good ones and the serious winner-potential entries.


>> Entry #15
>> Entry State: normal entry
>> Contest Name: How could reach more people?
>> Contest Prize: $100
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/10/20 16:27:24
>> Entry Description:

Very simple, all search queries for “crowd sourcing” and a host of other related terms on Google should result in showing up as the first result. They are already doing a lot by giving away $100 off coupons. Launch a guerilla campaign where people are asked to enter as their nick name or profile picture or entry description or comment on contest page on all major crowdsourcing sites. Lucky winners will be spotted by admins and contacted about their won money. Get big brands and increase the size of the award money. Pay more than one person, pay more people if many make good contributions, pay more than promised if people deliver more than expected.
Any and every forum discussion/exchange of expertise/transfer of knowhow/idea/suggestion/anything of value can be converted to a just for fun contest on, either prizes will add money to it or one of the interested parties who are following, asking or answering the questions in the discussion will put in the money. This way every expert on any Social Network/Forum of this world will be able to win money from if they can provide the answers/solutions/ideas. Basically years down the line, every question of worth and every answer of value will have a page attached to it. All the FMCG companies of the world and all TV shows and all brands that run SMS contests and all sorts of contests, should simply shift to Google should offer them added benefit of mini sites and branding along with promotional co-branded + brand ads.



>> Entry #25
>> Entry State: winning entry
>> Contest Name: What has your experience been with so far?
>> Contest Prize: $0
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/10/24 13:20:40
>> Entry Description:

So far, it has been almost perfect. Because for a crowdsourcing site credibility and honest are the most important things. I can bet that every single person signs up on a crowdsourcing site with a bit of apprehension about whether money is honestly paid out or not. The moment i saw that is moderating heavily after winner selection, i knew i could trust the site to be safe from scam contest holders. It is by Google, and it is the only site which can afford to give away millions as initial promotional funding. And they have given away millions (maybe 100s of thousands if not millions) by way of giving coupons like the $100 coupon where the contest holder only needs to add $50 from their pocket and adds $100 basically so prize money is $150. I don’t think any other crowdsourcing site can afford to give money away like this and for the same reason the site will never try and scam people – because they already have the money, which they have proven by giving away so much. That takes care of the experience of trust. About UI – well the look is great and easy on the eyes. Basically naming contests, tagline contests, logo contests and “give ideas” contests are going to be the mainstay. Right now i think it must be tough for the contestants, lurkers as well as the contest holder to sift through the entries in the long list. Although this comment thread forum style is also unique in its own way as it feels like a youtube comment thread, should give the layout options for the contest to the contest holders. Contest holders can choose between Classic Prizes and Advanced Prizes layout. Classic being the current layout. Advance Logo Contest Layout will have a thumbnail gallery layout. Clicking on each logo will bring all the comments etc up. Advanced layouts for Naming and Tagline contests will be listed like a huge numbered list. People will still be able to rearrage the lists alphabetically, by votes, by contest holder preference, etc. Ideas contests are the tricky part, they will require advance moderation. In these contests people will post similar ideas whether they deliberately copied it from earlier mentioned entries or as a genuine entry. Whatever be the case, in these contests, the first submitted idea will become a topic just like seen in a public forum and all similar posted paras in entries by others will become replies in that topic thread. That way the idea will get developed further rahter than just being duplicated n number of times by n number of participants. In such Ideas contests, the first few forums will get quickly populated as the easy ideas and common ideas start populating the mother thread. What will be interesting is the new topics/separate ideas that get created in the later stages. These will be the ideas that are not easy to think of and thus by virtue of their rarity be deemed as better ideas. I’m not a big fan of public voting, because people don’t really care to vote for others, which is me speaking bluntly and frankly. The more important reason to let go of the voting system is that it poses the risk of fake IDs populating the system because people will create these just to self-vote for themselves. Even if doesn’t remove the voting system, what should immediately be done is to limit the voting facility to only verified members who have specified bank account/paypal details and participated in x number of contests. Simply signing up with an email should not allow a person to vote for his friend/himself/herself. I love the new leaderboards. It will certainly heat up the competition, no doubt about it. More ideas coming up later. should remove the FB and Twitter share pop up that shows everytime we make an entry. Rather than it saying “vote for me….” it should simply be “i took part in XYZ contest on, you can too, and have a change of winning $ XYZ”. That way the contests will be popularised on SNS without compromising the quality of the voting system by adding bias to it. Bias needs to be eliminated completely not promoted.



>> Entry #26
>> Entry State: winning entry
>> Contest Name: Should offer cupons for contests under $50?
>> Contest Prize: $0
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/10/24 13:33:36
>> Entry Description:

Of course, is absolutely right in their choice and strategy. If they give $100 coupon which can be directly used as a $100 contest prize then all kinds of riff raff will start making contests. They gave me $100 and a $10 coupon when i verified my account. I used the $10 coupon to launch a timepass contest. Since i was required to add $50 from my own pocket in order to use the other $100 coupon, and since i did not have any worthy contest to hold, i did not end up using the $100 coupon. I am primarily here on this site as a contest participant. But those businesses and people who require work done and are seeking ideas, will make great use of the $100. They only need to pitch in with 1/3 of the prize money and a $150 contest is quite decent on any crowdsourcing site. is only giving these coupons for an initial promotional boost and i think it is working brilliantly, the site has suddenly jumped up in buzz, contestants and contest holders are joining in droves and there is a lot of activity. Great strategy and cannot find anything to fault in it. You are wrong to assume that they should have done it in another way.



>> Entry #109
>> Entry State: normal entry
>> Contest Name: How Has Changed Your Life?
>> Contest Prize: $25
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/12/07 14:17:03
>> Entry Description:

Thanks to the image of Google being infallible, has succeeded in attracting a lot of contest creators, and has provided people with ideas an opportunity to trust crowdsourcing (which many other sites like
were giving a bad name to thanks to DNP infested Domain Name Contests). With the steady stream of contests, you can now pick and choose the ones that match your aptitude. The site is constantly improving and the Prizes Team is prompt, cheaters will exist always, but where other sites have shown apathy, thrives and quickly gets into action and investigates any doubtful contest creator or contestant. Cheaters might see the free $100 coupons as an opportunity to make a quick buck, i see it as an opportunity for to blacklist the IP addresses, email addresses, PayPal IDs, names and Social Network IDs of all those who think they can fool the system, and block them for good. Crowdsourcing could have been doubted before, but not now. The dubious sites that were taking advantage of contestants’ skills by allowing cheaters on their sites and not paying contestants on time (sometimes not paying them at all despite clear proof of using their ideas) are now going to bear the brunt of the bull run as both contest creators as well as contestants do not have to look anywhere else for their crowdsourcing needs except In the future, i see this platform not only holding creative contests or idea-based contests, but every kind of work that needs to be done. Democracy, Meritocracy, Efficiency – Long Live
Basically how has changed my life? It has brought back my belief in my ideas. It has proved to me that my ideas are worth a lot.



>> Entry #121
>> Entry State: winning entry
>> Contest Name: Have a discussion about fake accounts here!!!!!!
>> Contest Prize: $19
>> Entry Submit Time: 2011/12/10 03:31:14
>> Entry Description:

It is very simple to spot fake IDs. I am glad that listened to my suggestion and have now added a “Contest Creator” info display in every contest listed on a person’s profile under the “Contests Won” tab.
I gave the following advice to another crowdsourcing site where i caught a person cheating (like i have caught a few here too, and i hope are looking into their voting patterns)
I just noticed the same problem on and came up with a
solution that would work perfectly for you too, no matter how many
contestants 10, 100 or 1000.
So what needs to be done is more
stats need to be shown on a person’s profile, right now your four stats
(actions, ideas, points, prize money) are itself enough, As in the case
of the definitely fake accounts of Rasmi and Usha, their actions far
exceeded their ideas. Their handful of ideas did not in anyway justify
the big number of their points. Just by using these 3 statistics you can
setup a circuit-breaker as soon as a participant appears to be giving
less ideas, voting more and collecting points, by using some intelligent
programming to calculate the interrelation of the above 3 stats.
But my new idea would refine this automatic “flagging” process even
more. Show additional stats such as “Voting: Total Votes Given: 1000,
Most Voted For: Sandeep: 800 (80%)”, then “Got Voted: Total Votes
Received: 400, Most Voted By: Sandeep: 400 (100%)”.
is happening is people are creating fake Just For Fun constests and
asking their friends to quickly enter one entry, as soon as their friend
makes that entry, they close the contest and award the prize (no money,
only prestige points that help improve ranking). Then that friend
returns the “favour”. One particular obnoxious guy bragged that he had
won over 100 contests and he was the king of the world, he started
abusing a muslim girl from middle east just because she did not award
him the prize money. So i felt sick at looking the kind of abuses being
thrown at that unarmed girl, while dozens were ganging up against her.
So i decided to investigate the stats of this one idiot account “****** ****”, Prizes lists the following stats on each profile “Contests Won”
“Submissions” “Contests Created”. It would have been a much easier job
for me, if alongside “contests won” the name of the contest creator was
listed. I have given the Prizes Team to include the name of the contest
creator next to the listings. Now what i noticed was out of the 114
contests this obnoxious bragging abusive crybaby fool had won, 60 were 1
horse races, 40 were 2 horse races, 10 were JFF wins with 6-8 entries
only, and only 5 real contests were won out of which 3 seemed to have
been awarded to him by people he regularly votes for.
So if prizes had a statistic display on top of the profile page,
which showed, all extra-ordinary and unusual stats, such as for example
that 50 of the 60 1 horse-contests that someone won were created by a
single-person. This is in fact a very obvious scam but unless these
stats as displayed on the page, no one will know.
So for NL/IL, you should also show stats that show not only voted
for but also voted against, if the voting patterns (exact likes and
dislikes) of a few contestants seem to matching then there are higher
chances of those ID being a single person (for example, if you can
extract the data of the likes and dislikes entered by Sandeep, Rasmi,
Usha, and maybe even Ramya) you will notice that they must be almost
So there can be tons of different stats like this, all you need to
do is calculate formulas that set off auto “flags” and maybe add to the
scammer-likelihood-score of a person. The people who top such scores
should be kept a close eye on.


will add more later, too bored to go through the looooong un-user-friendly backup provided by when they shut shop after benefiting from free beta testing of their Crowdsourcing Platform