May 30

Improvement regarding Warning Policy and TLs reporting process

I do have a few suggestions for improvement which will definitely helpful not only for tester but also for Test io growth: 1. Warning Policy: The current "three warnings" policy feels a bit strict, especially considering it applies over a tester’s lifetime on the platform. I believe that after a certain period, these warnings should be reset if the tester has shown consistent improvement. People grow and learn, and offering them a clean slate after demonstrating progress would be motivating and fair. Of course, if mistakes continue without signs of improvement, stricter action would be understandable. 2. TL Reporting Process: Some TLs (not all) tend to report testers immediately without giving a prior warning or guidance. I don’t think this approach is entirely fair. Everyone can make mistakes occasionally, even TLs. For example, if a tester received a warning in the past but makes another mistake after a long period, the TL should ideally inform them first rather than immediately reporting it. This kind of feedback loop would help testers improve and would benefit the overall quality of the platform.
CompletedCompleted

Completed
changed status toCompleted·Mar 20, 2026
Progress
changed status toIn Progress·Mar 20, 2026
Planned
changed status toPlanned·Mar 20, 2026
Reviewing
changed status toUnder Review·Mar 20, 2026
Closed
changed status toClosed·Mar 20, 2026
Mar 20, 2026

Hi, Mozaffar! Thank you for your suggestion and for taking the time to help us improve the platform. We would like to clarify how the warning system works. Receiving a warning does not mean that a tester’s journey on the platform is over. Each case is reviewed individually by the Compliance Team, and if a tester has only one warning, it does not automatically lead to a ban. The circumstances behind each warning are also carefully considered. Some warnings may result from unintentional mistakes, and the Compliance Team takes this into account during the review process. Additionally, a tester’s overall history on the platform is considered. For example, if someone has been actively working on the platform for a long time without any instances of cheating, this is viewed as a mitigating factor. It is also important to note that when a team leader reports a tester, it does not automatically result in a warning. Every report is thoroughly investigated, and warnings are issued only in cases where there is clear evidence of significant rule violations. Our warning and ban system is designed to be fair and balanced. Testers always have the opportunity to contact support and request a review of their case. At the same time, maintaining certain rules is essential, as relaxing them too much could, unfortunately, lead to an increase in cheating. We appreciate the understanding and cooperation of our testers in helping us maintain a fair and trustworthy environment for everyone.

Feb 4, 2026

On the contrary, the policy is too lenient and allows cheaters to break the rules for a long time without consequences. If a tester has received a warning for pretesting, it should not matter how much time has passed if they are caught pretesting again. The tester did not correct their behavior: they were warned and should not have repeated the violation. But they did—therefore, it is an intentional breach of the rules. It makes sense to consider warning removal only when the violation is the result of an oversight or lack of attention. For example, accidentally placing an order—this can happen unintentionally, especially if the tester does not know the website’s language. However, pretesting, placeholders, and other behaviors aimed at gaining an unfair advantage should not be annulled under any circumstances.

Jan 21, 2026

Agreed 💯

Jan 20, 2026

💯