Live data entry at events



Many groups do not want to use a “scroll”. Some collect data on a table - see Leicester’s scroll/form hybrid (@Divya_Pujara @Marie_Lefebvre), but they told me they want to move to using an A4 form per participant.

Nottingham (@Sarah_Maloy) and Barcelona (@Stephan_Fortelny) created their own Google Form. Also noting that Repair Cafe International encourages groups to use forms, also as a disclaimer. (In Barcelona it is used for pre-registration but this might be slightly more problematic in terms of dealing with no-shows…)

In Nottingham this weekend, they were trying to register stuff directly as it arrived. This was an experiment and seemed to initially create a queue out the door. I will try to debrief organisers about this. No matter how the outcomes were noted, data entry into the Fixometer represents a duplication of efforts.

I know @Dave has thoughts/experiences attempting live data entry.

Needs for live data entry at events - beyond styling/interface

• Addition of a name field (that would get scrubbed post-event?)
• Reminders about the need for safety testing (of relevant categories)
• A way of easily entering comments and repair status after having entered all the rest - perhaps a way of visually flagging what is unfinished as the event progresses?

Please let us know what is missing from the list above, and you can vote on this feature if you feel it’s really desirable/urgent


Thanks for this Janet,
One thing that is on our Scroll that isn’t on the online entry is whether the item had done and passed or failed incoming and outgoing PAT tests. I’m very much pro the idea of online entry, but ideally it would mean each station would have live live screen that they could follow the item on and update as they went along. This might not work well for many. The A4/A5 form per item is just a paper alternative and follows the item (or items) around along with the participant. But this could create a lot more data entry than practice post event if meaning fun details are entered on the form. It is a useful subject for discussion though and I’m keen to hear what others think.


As an additional point related to this conversation… it would be useful if there was some way of tracking an item by say a reference code that can be independent of where/what event the repair was done.

So to clarify with an example… A member of the public comes to an event… say Hinkley Fixers… start work on a device but is not able to complete the repair. The same device is then subsequently bought to some other event e.g. to Leicester Fixers or a followup session at a Leicester hackspace Open Hack night. Rather than create a second entry for the device (which in the stats makes it look like two devices) it would be useful to just enter a case ID reference for the device it pull up the original data on it and that entry be modified with the completed repair. personally I’m less interested how the carbon Kgs is shred between different organisations or participating contributing groups but rather that the successful follow up repair get logged and that the original entry doesn’t get logged as a failure to repair. Any thoughts?
I’m sure this scenario must occur amongst the London events and even in the same fixer groups but when a repair is spread over two events.



I think it’s a very good point @Divya_Pujara - and you’re right, the idea of a job id/case id has come up before in London -