Prevent applicants from signing up for multiple exam sessions at the same time
Some examinees are hedging their bets by signing up for multiple remote sessions, often several in the same week. When they do that with the ones that our CVE sets up, we can see that and we phone them and ask which one they want. If they wanted to do that to take multiple exams, we suggest studying ahead of time and doing all exams in one session. With the demand so high, we don't want examinees taking up registrations in multiple sessions. At the time they key in their email address, check to see if there are any other sessions they've already signed up for, across all VEC's and CVE's sessions within a week.
Comments: 31
-
06 May, '20
n2ygk MergedPerhaps a popup saying, "You're already registered for XXX/YYY, are you sure you want to register again?
-
06 May, '20
Richard Bateman Admin MergedThe only way to do this would be based on FRN number; that may be sufficient, but it's worth noting that currently you are most of the way through the registration process before we find out what that is
-
10 May, '20
Todd N7TMS MergedI like the idea of a pop-up notification or warning message, but I don't think candidates should be prevented from registering for multiple sessions. I had a case this week where a candidate tested for technician. As I was reviewing next week's sessions, I discovered him in another sessions. When I asked him about it, he said he intends to take his General next week. Kudos to him for planning a head!
-
23 May, '20
n2ygkPerhaps do this based on FRN rather than email address? Some people share their email accounts among family members, although that seems to be happening more for boomers than others. Or, they use gmail "+stuff" tacked on the end to make the email addresses look different.
-
23 May, '20
Richard Bateman Admin"Limit registrations to one per week" (suggested by Norm Goodkin on 2020-05-08), including upvotes (2) and comments (1), was merged into this suggestion.
-
09 Jun, '20
n2ygk MergedMerge this with https://features.examtools.org/suggestions/94716/disallow-signing-up-with-the-same-email-address-for-more-than-one-remote-session ?
I had an Extra candidate just cancel on me today because he passed earlier. Clearly he was not thinking ahead but gaming the system and hoarding time slots. We will likely have an empty slot at today's test session or I'll have to scramble to get him registered during work hours. -
09 Jun, '20
n2ygk MergedSorry, by "him" I meant "a new candidate".
-
09 Jun, '20
Michael, WT9V MergedThat might have been the guy in Mass that passed extra with us last night, there was a lot of disapproving silences when we figured out he'd spammed session registrations.. he actually had registered with two of the other CVEs that were in the session.
-
09 Jun, '20
Michael, WT9V MergedI think people should be prevented from registering for multiple sessions.
-
09 Jun, '20
Fuat - N2YGN MergedI agree, there should be an FRN based limit on multiple registrations. Perhaps no more than one pending session in any 30-day window. Prevent gaming the system by signing up for every open slot, but accommodate someone wishing to plan a sequence of upgrades.
-
09 Jun, '20
Nick n1cck MergedI’d rather see it as a flag on the applicant on our side than a straight block. There are plenty of legitimate reasons to sign up for multiple exams in a 30 day window. I don’t know how that crosses information disclosure policies though.
-
09 Jun, '20
Rob, W2RCT MergedA related, but possibly separate request -- would there be a straightforward way in the beta examtools where a CVE could see/check whether a candidate has registered for multiple sessions? That way the CVEs could implement their own policies?
-
09 Jun, '20
Fuat - N2YGN MergedIf it were a flag, how would you propose resolving it when flagged? Determining the legitimate reason, possibly coordinating with other CVEs? These days exam slots and VE time are a rare resource that should not be abused.
-
09 Jun, '20
LAZARO MUNOZ - K2LAZ MergedThere maybe cases where a candidate may want 2 or more sessions but rarely the same week, in the case where he plans on taking subsequent elements in the future. I would recommend that 1 session pre-registration per week should be the limit for a FRN. I say pre- because if he takes session and passes or fails (but at least takes it), he can schedule the next one, probably the same week if he fails and wants to try again.
-
09 Jun, '20
Richard Bateman MergedThis is definitely something I'd like to find a good solution for, but there are some challenges. 1) many couples share email addresses; many children use their parent's email address. Many people have multiple addresses; I have literally hundreds. Thus basing it on email is of questionable use. FRN is a better one to base it on, but that's also not 100% reliable (you can have multiple FRN numbers, etc). There are also privacy / information concerns.
-
09 Jun, '20
Nick n1cck Merged1. Now is not forever; yes, exam resources are currently limited, but that doesn’t mean they will be the same way in 2/3/4/12 months.
2. Yes, I would propose the session owner contact the candidate - “hey, ExamTools flagged that you are signed up for a session ahead of mine; do you plan to be bringing a CSCE? I just want to know so I can warn my team.” Adjusting from there shouldn’t be difficult, and doesn’t require additional information exposed. -
09 Jun, '20
Fuat - N2YGN MergedI'm fine with a solution that isn't perfect and if people game the system with multiple FRNs, then they slip through... Managing this directly in the system limits what information needs to be exposed to others.
-
09 Jun, '20
Michael, WT9V MergedLimiting FRNs makes the most sense to me.
-
09 Jun, '20
Chris Flinn MergedI think limiting people being able to register for more than one session is a bit extreme. Flag it on the CVE side and let that person determine the action they want. Create a email template that you can just put a name in and ask if the person is planning on taking each element separate or just wanted to make sure they are going to get tested?
-
09 Jun, '20
Howard^ Doing it by FRN makes sense.
-
09 Jun, '20
Fuat - N2YGN MergedAsk which CVE? The first one, the latest one? The one with the later dated session?
-
22 Jun, '20
Norm Goodkin K6YXH GLAARG VE MergedGLAARG VEC notes examinees who are registered for multiple GLAARG VEC sessions, but we have no way to see applicants who are registered for non-GLAARG VEC sessions. We contact every applicant who registers for multiple GLAARG VEC sessions and ask them to choose only one if all they're doing is hedging their bets. We admonish them to not even attempt an exam unless they're sure they're going to pass, so there's no need to register for a 2nd session "in case I don't pass."
-
22 Jun, '20
Norm Goodkin K6YXH GLAARG VE MergedIn almost every session, in the past several weeks, as more and more exams are available, we've had applicants email us to remove them because they already passed the exam in another VEC's session (in person or remote). It's a little annoying, and causes us a little extra overhead to edit our docs, but it's not a serious problem.
-
30 Jun, '20
Neil K6NCXI support the intention, I think, but not the plan. I've seen more than one person pass their Element 2 in one session, then (at least) Element 3 in another soon after. In at least one case, maybe more, the sessions were with different VECs. One person got their Tech on June 22 in a W5YI session, then General and Extra on June 23 in one of my GLAARG sessions.
-
21 Jul, '20
Falcon Darkstar MomotI suggest that as time presses on and the flood wanes, this will become a misfeature. It may be a better strategy to display, along with the candidate's registration, how many active registrations they have - perhaps even split by dates between now and the session you're looking at, and dates after it, to make this abusive behavior visible.
-
19 Aug, '20
Frank DriesFRN check for one session per week makes sense to me too.
-
20 Aug, '20
Nick n1cckI don’t see this as useful - it won’t discourage those who want to hedge their bets from doing so a different way, and it will penalize those who legitimately want to test multiple times a week. We have one Extra candidate that we tested 4 times in 2 days to get them to pass in front of the pool change.
-
16 Sep, '20
Norm GoodkinMaybe we should trust the Applicants to manage their Registrations and provide a way for them to cancel a reservation? Since there's no way to do that, we get a bunch of emails near the session date, asking us to cancel for various reasons.
-
06 Oct, '20
Norm GoodkinNaomi says that she doesn't want this to be Richard's problem. If the applicant has to re-register, then let it be his problem instead. Even though this has a lot of upvotes, I'd now vote to withdraw it, or at least give it low priority. We are not having a problem with this and we're testing well over 100/week between all our teams. It is annoying to invoice, threaten to delete from the roster and then get an email saying they passed in another session, but it's all part of running exams.
-
06 Oct, '20
N6ATFProbably fodder for a separate feature request, but a compromise could be to have (for example) GLAARG registrations throw a prompt or indicator or email or...? when a license or upgrade has been granted via an ARRL session (for example ;-p) to someone who registered for a GLAARG session in a previous state of licensure.
I'm happy to continue grep-ing the weekly DB for FRNs of registrants who didn't have a license at registration time, but I'd also like my grep practice to be made obsolete. :) -
26 Jan, '22
Richard Bateman Admin"Limit the same person from booking multiple exam slots" (suggested by n2ygk on 2020-05-06), including upvotes (11) and comments (19), was merged into this suggestion.