4 ms·

How would you compare it to a Google form with notifications enabled for new submissions? For Google forms, they are: - anonymous - free - data can be exported

How would you compare it to a Google form with notifications enabled for new submissions? For Google forms, they are: - anonymous - free - data can be exported (google sheets, excel, csv) - customizable (text, choices etc.)

renewiltord 6y ago
Presumably the platform can guarantee anonymity a little more than that. For instance, you could uniquely generate a Google Form for each person you're emailing and so that removes the 'safety' they'd feel responding. However, if the platform said "The user you're giving feedback for has received 10 unique pieces of feedback over 15 different links" you skip reviewing that guy but if it says "The user you're giving feedback for has received 10 unique pieces of feedback over 1 link" then you feel more like it's trustworthy. The platform could have a "which email did you receive the request from" and you could punch it in and the platform can tell you how many unique feedback requests the person has and so on and so forth.
- Decker87 6y ago
  You're not wrong, but... I feel like if there's that much distrust then there are significant other problems and the distrust is going to persist regardless of which tool is chosen.
  - andrewdb572 6y ago
    From my experience, as a user requesting feedback, I have zero knowledge regarding the origin of that feedback unless it is given within the feedback itself (within a specified channel).
  - renewiltord 6y ago
    I'm thinking of it in a 'nudge' sense. Like if you make someone feel super safe, you move the marginal person into a participant.
- alphachloride 6y ago
  This project is closed beta, so I am guessing here, but couldn't this also be used to de-anonymize users like with Google forms? I think it comes down to trust. Trust that the platform is not complicit with the feedback organizer. I see not guarantee of that provided. People can establish trust with google forms too. For example, recipients can cross check if they are getting the same link for feedback.

renewiltord 6y ago

Presumably the platform can guarantee anonymity a little more than that. For instance, you could uniquely generate a Google Form for each person you're emailing and so that removes the 'safety' they'd feel responding. However, if the platform said "The user you're giving feedback for has received 10 unique pieces of feedback over 15 different links" you skip reviewing that guy but if it says "The user you're giving feedback for has received 10 unique pieces of feedback over 1 link" then you feel more like it's trustworthy. The platform could have a "which email did you receive the request from" and you could punch it in and the platform can tell you how many unique feedback requests the person has and so on and so forth.

Decker87 6y ago
You're not wrong, but... I feel like if there's that much distrust then there are significant other problems and the distrust is going to persist regardless of which tool is chosen.
- andrewdb572 6y ago
  From my experience, as a user requesting feedback, I have zero knowledge regarding the origin of that feedback unless it is given within the feedback itself (within a specified channel).
- renewiltord 6y ago
  I'm thinking of it in a 'nudge' sense. Like if you make someone feel super safe, you move the marginal person into a participant.
alphachloride 6y ago
This project is closed beta, so I am guessing here, but couldn't this also be used to de-anonymize users like with Google forms? I think it comes down to trust. Trust that the platform is not complicit with the feedback organizer. I see not guarantee of that provided. People can establish trust with google forms too. For example, recipients can cross check if they are getting the same link for feedback.