Anonymous Evaluations Team FAQ
Hi Everyone! There's been a lot of questions about Anonymous Evaluations Team. We'd like to clear some of those up.
We wanted to compile this list of questions we’ve received about the Anonymous Evaluations Project in an effort to bring more clarity to the community as to what our team is for, what we’re doing, and how this may impact you as part of the 7 Cups community.
What is the purpose of the Anonymous Evaluations Project?
The Anonymous Evaluations Project aims to focus on overall safety and listener quality across 7 Cups. Evaluators are checking in on listeners to see how they’re doing in terms of their active listening skills, as well as attempting to report and remove any potentially harmful accounts to ensure that members are as safe as possible while seeking support. We will take the data we gather and use it to increase listener quality through education.
How do the anonymous evaluations work?
Evaluators will use anonymous member accounts, provided to them and monitored by admin for safety and anonymity, to contact listeners by way of General Requests and Personal Requests. The manner in which a listener is contacted is up to the evaluator’s preference. Evaluators complete a form after each chat noting down different items they’re trained to look for within their chats.
Will I know when I’m being evaluated?
No. The purpose of these evaluations is to be anonymous and see you listening naturally without any pressure from completing a mock chat from a mentor or verifier. These chats will appear as any other member chat would.
Who can be evaluated?
Anyone. All listeners, regardless of if they’ve been on the site one day or if they’ve been here from the beginning, if they’re verified or not, or are in leadership positions or not, are able to be evaluated.
What are the anonymous evaluators looking for?
Evaluators take note of the following items in their chats: sexual and inappropriate chatting, bullying and harassment, a listener being underage or on the wrong side of the site, requesting or sharing offsite contact information, ghosting or incorrectly blocking, empathy, professionalism, giving advice, response time, a listener talking about their own problems, and a listener imposing beliefs and views. On the evaluation form, evaluators will note both what the listener is doing well on, as well as what areas they could potentially work on.
Who are the evaluators?
Evaluators are trained Mentors (from any mentor track) with experience in conducting mock chats and giving constructive feedback.
How can I apply to be an Evaluator on the Anonymous Evaluations Team?
You can see HERE for information on the role and how to apply.
Do evaluators leave reviews and ratings?
Evaluators will not leave any reviews or ratings that will negatively affect your personal statistics on your profile. However, they are allowed, at their own discretion, to leave positive reviews if they feel a chat went very well.
I feel like this is violating my privacy and is tricking me so I get in trouble or get reported. Should I be nervous?
There is nothing to worry about if you’re following training and community guidelines. We understand that this can feel like 7 Cups is spying on you and trying to trick you into doing the wrong thing so you get in trouble. However, just like the Verified Listener mock chat, these mentors are simply here to see how you’re doing. Evaluators will never do anything inappropriate, harass you, or break guidelines to see how you respond. They will also only pick topics from your profile in an attempt to be sure it’s a comfortable topic for you. In general, these should be relatively easy and comfortable member chats, checking for an overall basic understanding of and ability to apply active listening skills.
This is taking time from me supporting a real member. How is this fair to members waiting to speak with a listener?
While this does take you away from members briefly, this allows us to gather data on what skills the community as a whole should be bolstered. While we want to be sure all members are heard, we also want to be sure that the listeners here are continuing to grow and provide quality support.
What is the impact of this project? When will we see results?
We will collect data and then be able to have some findings in regards to how this project is impacting the community and overall listener quality. We appreciate your patience as we work hard on this effort.
Who can I contact with questions or concerns about this project?
@EvelyneRose - Admin Overseeing Project
@InternalAcceptance - Ambassador/AE Team Lead
(Last updated by @Evelynerose on August 2, 2022)
@EvelyneRose, thank you so much for this informative post, Evelyne! I hope all who read it will now have a much better understanding of AE and how the project works 🙂
@EvelyneRose
Hi Evelyne! 
Thank you for this post and it certainly is going to be beneficial to us all. I had a question and maybe it relates to this but also relative to all chats. So, @GlenM did come out with a forum post explaining that they would be adding "spirituality" as one of the "lived experiences" to click on and add to ones profile page in an effort to help others. While I thought that was a nice thing to do, even at that time, my comments were on that very post, well, this sounds nice but get ready for it everyone because this could end up getting a listener into trouble and under the category of "imposing beliefs and views". I hoped for the best, and still did add "spirituality" to my lived experiences only in the event that a member would want to speak to me based on that. Just trying to be helpful.
So, I had a chat, someone came to me and wanted to speak about spirituality. Okay, I figured I would do my best. The member was under the impression that spirtuality meant if I believe in ghosts or not. I do not think this was the intention of Glen. Well, I guess these things happen, a chat is a chat and so I did my best. They asked me a direct question, do I believe in ghosts? I explained what I thought the lived experiences meant, but did finally share my thought process and views about it in an effort to be helpful since Glen asked us to list it if we felt comfortable providing support in that way.
So, I recieved an email saying I did get a negative review and it was based on sharing religion and sharing spiritual beliefs. I was asked to list it, I did so, I showed up for the chat. But it did not work out so well. After that, I immediately took "spirituality" off of my lived experiences as I did think all along this would be a slippery slope for any listener to navigate. I truly do try to be most careful, not impose beliefs or opinions about anything at all. I have even held strong in a chat in regard to hatred of someone that would fit the mold of "me" or my family members. They had no idea that the exact type of person that they had complete and utter hatred of, based on their feelings was me, the exact type of person that was helping them and supporting them. Now that one for me was a true victory and a huge mile stone for me as listener. Yes, I can do this with out imposing my beliefs! I understand that people grow up in certain households and beliefs are imposed upon them and adopted or they had a couple of bad experiences with someone that kind of "fit the mold".
Wondering if maybe the Eval team should maybe shy away from any topic related to "spirituality" even if listed on the listeners profile page as that could qualify as "Imposing beliefs and views"?
Again, many thanks for the great post! 
@SparkyGizmo I cannot find any forum post by @GlenM explaining what you describe.
I can only find one that says:
Right now you can search listeners by the following fields: keywords; sort by cheers, availability, and other metrics; listeners by age; listeners and therapists; country (189 countries); language (140 languages); gender; and topic (42 topics)…
…we will soon be adding the ability for members to search for listeners by belief system. Listeners will need to proactively choose a belief system in order to be found by members seeking support in these domains. The default will be to have none listed for each listener. The community guideline of not imposing a particular belief system on another person will be more important that ever before; this is solely for people to have the option of finding support from people that share similar beliefs.
That never happened, as far as I know.
I agree that listing "spirituality" as a lived experience is a slippery slope. I commented in that thread:
If we formally encourage listeners to indicate their beliefs in their profiles, by implication that legitimizes bringing the listener's beliefs into chats, and in turn that implies it is no longer valid to report a listener for imposing beliefs.
But because the change never happened, I don't think my comment applies.
My feeling is that it's risky for a listener to share details of any lived experience, because a member might disagree and give a negative review.
But I also feel it was wrong for someone to accept a negative review against you simply because you answered a direct question. This kind of error can easily be prevented in future if 7 Cups bans screenshots and uses chat transcripts to validate negative reviews. In this case it would have been obvious from the transcript that the member asked you a direct question.
Unfortunately, discussing issues like this in the forum is very unlikely to result in positive change, even when there's an actual proposal that would solve the problem.
Charlie
@RarelyCharlie
I agree with you. And the "spirtuality" button was included after that forum post. I did add it to my profile page and then after that experience, just as you mentioned what could happen and as did I, I then chose to remove it from my lived experiences.
@SparkyGizmo I think this could possibly be a good idea, although like Evelyne stated, I don't think the evaluators are going to try to trick anyone. Let's say they did decide to talk about spirituality in their member chat, they're not going to then flag someone for sharing their beliefs if they asked for it. This is unlike a regular member who, as you've experienced, can take things the wrong way. I think in this case, the only reason an evaluation would flag imposing beliefs, even if the chat was specifically about spirituality, would be if say, the "member"/evaluator was talking about their beliefs, and the listener starts saying they're wrong and they should actually believe this, OR the listener goes on and on about their personal beliefs that are not related to the member's/evaluator's beliefs. This is a true issue that I've experienced as a member, that should certainly be looked for in evaluating listener quality, but I don't think it'd be used as a "trap" to try to catch listeners in that way.
As for regular member chats coming with this issue, I guess that's sort of a different issue, of member-listener misunderstanding :/ I personally did not like the idea of having religious/spiritual views listed, but as Charlie mentioned, I never really saw it implemented. I tend to just go with the flow of whatever the member's views are and take myself out of the equation (belief-wise, anyways)
Thank you for sharing this informative story
@EvelyneRose Thanks for such a clear informative post. This will be really useful!
Listening - One Step At A Time!