The part that I don't fully understand is the methodology which is described as:
"by assigning a unique ID which remains on their PC, and can detect multiple accounts"
To me this sounds like a cookie. If it is in fact a cookie, first, easy on the technology bragging, and secondly, I doubt this is very effective as I suspect the heavy survey takers are the heavy ad clickers and the ones that clear their cookies multiple times per day. If it's not a cookie, it would be interesting to get a bit more information on exactly what is being installed or stored on the users PC.
The article further quotes:
My 2 cents on this matter is that the answer lies in this very statement. For many years panels have been run providing little transparency on methodology and quality. It is easy to find and join a panel that will send me 2 - 4 surveys per day. This immediately raises questions of quality. While all sample sources have their deficiencies and challenges, these can only be addressed and accounted for if the providers abide by this call to transparency.
The core problem which is being ignored, is that these mega panels are littered with professional respondents. It will be interesting to see whether attempts to remove these will merely result in mega-panels turning into micro panels of non-responsive members.
Many still consider RDD (random digit dialing) as the true form of survey recruitment despite it's own issues. Though this methodology has not translated well to the web - not yet at least.
Pete Comley is quoted summing it up nicely:
. . . and I'm hoping someone can provide further insight into these issues . . . ?