Back to top

Add "Response Rate" to Advanced Filters in Search

21 сообщение / 0 новое
Последняя публикация
WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Add "Response Rate" to Advanced Filters in Search

Since there is an ongoing problem with hosts not responding to messages, I would kindly suggest that an additional filter be added during the next update.

What I envision is a filter where the guest, when searching using the Advanced Filters at the page bottom, can select if a minimum response rate is require in the search returns.  Perhaps something like 50%, 75%, or 100%.  This way, the guest knows there is an increased probability of getting a response.  Even a "sorry, can't host" response is better than no response.

Yes, the filter may cause the responding hosts to get more guests.  A response does not mean a Yes, to the request so the actively responding  hosts can always decline for whatever reason.

Just a thought.  Tailwinds, John

FP Promote: 
Not on Front Page
WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
good idea BUT

the % of response is only by mail 

an host receiving only texto or phone call will have 0% even if he answser 

 

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
I assume you meant email

I am pretty sure you meant email, not postal mail.  I agree but I then the filter could easily include those with no ranking, i.e. 0 respones to 0 messages. Just trying to come up with something that improves the search results given that realistically poeple will not change.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
the worst is

for the moment I seach in korea and I found those profil :( 

last  connexion 2 ans 4 mois

Réactivité: 0%

(0 réponses pour 9 demandes pour l'année écoulée)

  • Actuellement disponible ?????? 

 

maybe also a filter connected in the last 3 month ? 

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
That is a shame.  With my

That is a shame.  With my suggestion, that specific profile and those like it would be not be included as they are not responding.  I have also said in the past that those profiles that do not respond to email over a long period of time are automatically deleted.  By long period, I am talking at least 18 months. I have also suggested an annual opt in requirement since those that really want to host will opt back in while those that don't, won't opt back in.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Frustrating especially when

Frustrating especially when searching in cities so many unresponsive host, needs to filter out people

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
I just saw this: 

I just saw this in Eskilstuna: 

  • Member for 4 years 6 months
  • Active 4 years 6 months ago
  • Message responsiveness: 0% (0 responses to 2 requests over the past year)

So they signed up and never logged in again. And were not purged this year. And were not purged last year. And not in 2017.  

There had been no purge in 2016 either: https://www.warmshowers.org/comment/19690#comment-19690

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
membership count seems more important

This member just adds to the membership count. That seems to be a priority. This issue has been discussed for quite a few years now without much progress.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Totally agree

I totally agree not much progress is made.  I have actually cut back my financial support of WS since the admin really does not seem to care, or at least try something different since what is currently used (and has been for a while) is not very good.  Tens of thousands of $$ spent with a website that seems to be less reliable and less helpful.  I will continue to host but will refrain from donating until I see some improvement.  Sorry to be a grouch but I really do not like rewarding poor performance.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Totally agree

I totally agree not much progress is made.  I have actually cut back my financial support of WS since the admin really does not seem to care, or at least try something different since what is currently used (and has been for a while) is not very good.  Tens of thousands of $$ spent with a website that seems to be less reliable and less helpful.  I will continue to host but will refrain from donating until I see some improvement.  Sorry to be a grouch but I really do not like rewarding poor performance.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Non responsive members

- I saw so many of those kind of members Pieter Kuip..

- Posted this tread about non responsive members begin this summer twice.
Also under reporting bugs as no staff was responding. Wasn't very helpful though. I had  no reactions from the staff.

https://www.warmshowers.org/comment/27018#comment-27018

https://www.warmshowers.org/node/316659

 

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
yesterday's newsletter gives some hope

It looks like WS will do something about non-responsive hosts.

Patrick

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
6 Months is too short

While I totally agree inactive members should be moved to inactive, 6 months is too short.  For instance, I have a 100% response rate and host 3-8 cyclists per year.  However, the cyclists almost always come in either May or September, maybe October.  Therefore, in April I become inactive just before the "busy season".  If I don't remember to login just for the sake of being active, I am moved to inactive.  What about the hosts in the more northern/southern latitudes.  I would say Canada is not active for 9 months of the year.   Good idea but poor criteria.

I suggest making the inactive period at minimum 10 months and at most 18 months.

Otherwise, I am thrilled the WS board is finally actiing.  Let's see how long it takes though.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Inactive users

Great news that WS are going ti do something about this. Agree with John Nettles that the date filter could be longer but still believe this is a good move. Every journey starts with a single step, etc etc......

WS Member Аватар пользователя @wsadmin@
Inactive users

We are in the stages of development to automatically move an inactive user to an inactive status.  We heard from many users that 6 months is not long enough, so we will use 12 months as a standard.

You will still be able to search for inactive users in a geographical area, but your map will show only active users within 12 months, that have self-selected as available to host.

We are in the testing stages and will provide an announcement in the newsletter when the change has been implemented.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Great finally, thank you so

Great finally, thank you so much! 
I never ever received a newsletter. Could you maybe also announce it at website too? 

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Great finally, thank you so

Great finally, thank you so much! 
I never ever received a newsletter. Could you maybe also announce it at website too? 

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
6 months is too short considering worldwide area!

Great finally the board is handeling some of the issues - thank you! Don't know when they start cleaning up warmshowers by making people who weren't active 'non active' but six months is not givven much consideration to the world wide aspect of WarmShowrrs. You will loose lots of active hosts who are only a certain period active. I know for instance some really active hosts in Iran but most of them are inactive durong 6 -8 months due to the lack of cyclists in the hottest season. And what about people in New Sealand and so on in the Southern Hemisfere. WarmsShowers is more then the US ;-

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
I would take off the map when

I would take off the map when searching anyone who hasn’t been active in 12 months, which takes in consideration as some have said that certain areas only get request at certain times of the year. Would add an except if you have had zero request than you should stay active. I have only had 2 request to host in 7 years, so if I’m not touring may not access Warmshowers at all.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
That would be a reasonable

That would be a reasonable exception, but it would be more work to implement it in the algorithm. What Warmshowers used to do was to send this pester mail to accounts that had not been active in a year. This has not been done in 2016 or in the years since.

I agree that 6 months is too short. Activity is now calculated by year. It would be reasonable to send a pester letter after a year of inactivity, and then purge.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
Clarification

Pieter, Let me clarify.  I was only saying change the number of months, not have a range of dates.  In other words, the date they select would change from 6 months to a new number of months to automatically de-activate an account. As stated above that date would be sometime between 10 and 18 months, say 12 month.  I think to deactivate before 10 months excludes too many unintentionally but anything beyond 18 months allows too many that are truly inactive.  I personally would prefer 12 months to deactivate them and then at 24 months, deleted the account.

Of course, WS should send a courtesy reminder to login to keep the account active for the members who either rarely, if ever, get requests, and/or do not tour much.  I know a few who have been members for years and have never received a request AND they do not ride due to health.  They just want to be able to help should someone request it.

WS Member Аватар пользователя WS Member
When will the upgrade to

When will the upgrade to remove long term inactive members actually happen? 
There has been some work with the server lately as the website was offline, but I don't see much changes to the inactive members?
Also why isn't the board communicating these facts on the website? I don't get a newsletter so probably others neither. ;-)