I was thinking about this last night, as I know me and a few others have struggled with this. Often testers are accepted, but they dont test the pattern on time, often because they have multiple patterns to test.
I was wondering if something could be added to ribblr that people who need testers can activate that only allows people who arent currently testing anythiny to apply for the testing. Im not sure how feesible this is, but I think it would be useful.
Having read a bunch of the comments I think it would be better to add some stricter guidlines for both tester and person wanting testers, my initial idea would probably be unfair to the testers that actually do test things on time, and doesnt address the pattern owners who ghost the testers.
Idk what tho, definitly read the comments because they have some good ideas.


I love to test and my opinion is that if you make an appointment you should keep it. and if something happens that you communicate it


In theory, it’s a good suggestion and I’d maybe like it as a designer–but there are also testers (me included) that have tests that are completed but not gifted+removed on the designer’s part. So in essence, it would take away the chance for those testers who had designers ghost on them once the release date came. There are also designers who wait with gifting the pattern until after the deadline, meaning that there will be testers who have completed the tests in their library, but since the due date hasn’t passed they still have the pattern in their testing tab.

Something that I think could be something of an option to this is that if you have some testers who don’t communicate/don’t complete the test, you get a pop-up when you remove them that will tag them if they apply in the future;
i.e. Click: “Remove”
Pop-up: “Do you want to flag this tester? If you flag a tester they will have an orange/red highlight over their name when they apply to your future tests.”
Or something like that. It wouldn’t help with current tests, but it might help with future ones :thinking:

I have a list, and I saw in another thread that other designers have lists as well, and keeping one seems to be the way to go at the moment.


I don’t test or design. But I’m pretty sure that there are testers out there who have lists of designers they won’t work with anymore. I’ve seen a lot of posts (on Ribblr and other sites) where designers complain about testers that ghost them and a lot of posts from testers who have issues with designers who ghost them. It works both ways.

I think perhaps the guidelines for both need to be more specific and detailed, and have consequences for not following the rules. Perhaps making them read and agree to adhere to the guidelines before they are allowed to ask for testers and the same, testers must read and agree to follow the guidelines before they are allowed to test.

The “system” should keep track of how many tests a tester has signed up for and perhaps set a limit on how many. A similar thing for designers, how many tests are they running and set a limit

And some kind of reporting feature when one side fails to communicate in a timely fashion


I think you make some good points, but the issue with designers is that the patterns are their property, meaning they have the final say in what goes and what doesn’t. I absolutely see it as a two-way street, but enforcing the guidelines both testers and designers would need to agree to would be hard, and if implemented, it might have more of a negative effect than positive. That’s what’s making it really tricky in my mind :sweat_smile: I think it’s a good idea, but I’m not sure how well it would work practically.

[quote=“tygger428, post:4, topic:282304”]
The “system” should keep track of how many tests a tester has signed up for and perhaps set a limit on how many. [/quote]
That’s a really good idea! I’m not sure about the designer test limit though, because the more active a designer is, the more responsive they seem to be (in my experience).


Perhaps Ribblr can set up some kind of virtual committee with an equal number of testers and designers discussing the issues one by one so at least some kind of guidelines can be established. Where each side can bring up their concerns. Ghosting should be against the rules. Don’t sign up (or don’t set up a test) unless you are willing to communicate with the other side in a timely manner


I dislike this idea from a tester perspective.
I usually do 2-3 tests at a time and I’ve never missed a deadline.
I’ve had quite a few designers ghost me so I usually have a lot more tests open than are actually active, so the limit wouldn’t really work unless there was a way to hold designers accountable for removing people and gifting the pattern.
I think there should just be stricter guidelines, and maybe a reporting system. Like you get (temporarily?) banned from testing if a certain amount of designers report you missing the deadline with no communication.
I think it should also go for the designers too.


Yep it goes both ways doesn’t it.


Even if I finish all my tests, i still have many tests in my tab cus pattern makers wait for everyone to finish before gifting a pattern, and sometimes they completely forget. I think the most completed tests ive had in my tab at once was 6, if a pattern maker could look at that, theyd think im irresponsible for applying to that many.

I know that there are many kids on here that get excited and apply to multiple tests , but there are also many testers that can and will successfully work on many tests at once.
However, I can see why a maker wouldn’t want to risk that, it is their pattern after all, and they should be in control.

I personally think a better solution would be to let testers see a note next to the person saying (this person is currently testing) instead of blocking out completely. Then you could look at the karma, if there is high karma, you can assume they have experience working on multiple patterns. You can also look at their status, if they have multiple patterns but a new user, you can assume they probably dont know what is expected of them.

I like working on 2-3 patterns; I finish most patterns pretty early, and only had 1 instance of finishing on the due date, and that was because the pattern had a major change made to it towards the end that needed extra work from me. I’ve never been late, and I dont apply if I dont have at least triple the time i need just incase.

I usually prefer doing 1 big test and 1-2 small ones. With how my brain works, I will get bored of just the 1 big test. To keep my attention span, I take a break from a big test, and quickly whip out the small one then go back to the big one. Once I finish the small ones I apply to more, so that I have more little breaks planned for the future.
The little finishes give me a serotonin boost to keep me going on the longer projects


i just got an idea, i dont like removing myself from tests, but what if you could archive a test or (mark as finished). that way it wouldnt show up as part of your testing tab, but you still have the pattern until the maker gifts it


I tried to test something but dont know how to do it (didnt receive any instruction on the pattern, etc) so maybe it is not that user frienly for testers?


I would say yes but I too can see many cons with this If it’s implemented


the first test is always the hardest, makers can see how many tests you’ve done before, and often reject people who havent tested before. You dont get notified if you werent chosen, so thats why you might not be getting instructions.

when I was starting out, I applied to many tests and didnt get accepted to any for a few weeks. Now that I have done some I get accepted to about 3/4th of the tests I apply for

To help, you can make public journals so people can see your projects so that you’re more likely to be accepted.
I also recommend commenting in the tester call to show that you’re active. Even something as simple as “I’d love to test!” can make a huge difference.

some tester calls also say that they accept people with 0 karma ( karma is how many tests you’ve completed). So i recommend applying to those first.

Good luck with future tests <3


That would be wonderful! :smiling_face: I also don’t like removing any of my tests :confused:


I love this thread. So glad the dialog is there. I have had most of these thoughts also. As a designer. As a tester, I do what I say I will. I think communication is key. I keep getting more and more specific in my tester calls which takes the fun out of it. I like to get newbies to testing, so zero karma, look for mine (in the future). I hope something better can be worked out. Getting kinda disillusioned about testing myself. Not from all of you! I have had some amazing testers.

Sadly, I really don’t know how to fix this issue. I was thinking about limited tests ongoing also. But then archiving the finished tests would be good also. Unless that system is abused. There is always a way around things. Temporarily restricting test applications with flags is interesting. Maybe clicking that there has been no communication yet. Or no proof of test (pictures).

I am confident @Ribblr will come up with something that may work better than we have so far. #ilovethishobby


Thank you for the great conversation! We’re actively working on improving our testing tools even further and all this feedback is great.


Maybe if we can click on a “great job” button for good ones, after enough, you could gift them a pattern or yarn from a wishlist. hmmm :thinking: Edited to say I would gladly offer mine to get some results.