Well if that's the case Halo - I'm opting out of test projects by the community in the future - because really - the Mojo for women - quite literally - stunk.

I liked the self effects - and said so - but I can't wear it. Can't make myself. It smells horrific on. I can't cover it and I have the biggest set of covers...I reek. I have a million other things to wear and there is no reason to wear something that smells like hot buttered Deep Woods Off on my body chemistry so I'm sending it to Alternative Girl - who doesn't it seem - amp a reek with it. If you are going to have to carry Aspirin to wear it to manage the head ache from the smell - it's a bad scent package.

Beyond that - I was a beta tester for Empathy for Love Potion. I got raging head aches and One-Itus with that. We've talked about it - something in that blend is a really bad negative reaction. Funky vision affects and bad personality stuff and all. I tested it twice before realizing it made me so sick - that it wasn't worth spritzing on again. If I end up in bed, in a dark room, with a 3 Alleve headache like I did with Empathy - is that sick enough to end a test commitment or do I keep going because the community set an "limit" and I'm violating a cultural norm to quit.

If that's the case - I'm out. Which is fine. I think reading this thread I'm delighted to just buy my own, get whatever sample is at the bottom of the box and report on what I bought or got that way.

I was not directing that at you Shelly. But to be honest it's what you signed up for. Testing includes the good the bad and the ugly. The whole point of it is that it's the unknown. You do not get to pick the effects or the smell or anything else about it. If its good then great but if not, oh well. Do you not agree that results that have not been duplicated are not reliable?

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 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.

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.

(09-29-2012 11:27 AM)halo0073 Wrote:  Personally as someone who tests a lot, I think it's imperative to test more than once. One test can easily be a fluke. One test doesn't mean you really understand what you are testing. There are subtleties to learn. Results HAVE to be duplicated IMO to be deemed valid. So along with a time frame given for testing reports to be in I would like to lobby for a minimum amount of reports. This one report shit pisses me off.

Halo, I agree 110% with you on this!!...I do not take reports where the tester has used the product ONCE to heart. Serious testing takes days, weeks, even months IMHO. As a mone user myself I know how so many other factors in your day to day living can impact results one day. For women, something as simple as what you wear can change results. For men, his confidence level that day, type of target etc. ...Yes sometimes you can get a feel for the product right away, example Glace for me. But not truly understand it yet, or know most things about it, that takes time and repeated use....that takes testing.

My humble 2 cents on the Libra thing is that I would much rather a person NOT report on a product, if they don't have time to test it, than make something up. And if a person says they're going to test something keep your word and please do it right, bc we are the founders of this Pheromone thing, we must do it right for each other.

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.

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.

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.

Yes! When I first saw the mojo pro offer. I was tempted to join in on it. I know myself though; it'll take a while before I pump a review out. As you saw with Corpo, Laid Hair Paste and a few others, I like to test a product out for a few months before I make a conclusive opinion on it.

This thread is a great way to sort out the past problems we've had with product testers. I agree, things need to be changed and established before we can go on further.