Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] >
Release announcement: New KudoZ features
Thread poster: Enrique Cavalitto
mrose
mrose
Local time: 05:41
English to Spanish
+ ...
quality vs. convenience Jun 22, 2006

"When posting a question, a KudoZ asker is now given the option of waiving the right to choose the best answer, instead taking the first answer judged acceptable by the answerer community. In this mode, questions close automatically as soon as any answer receives two peer agreements.
...
Once again thanks to you, our members, for making these improvements possible."



I'm another one who totally disagrees with this idea. How can it possibly be called an "imp
... See more
"When posting a question, a KudoZ asker is now given the option of waiving the right to choose the best answer, instead taking the first answer judged acceptable by the answerer community. In this mode, questions close automatically as soon as any answer receives two peer agreements.
...
Once again thanks to you, our members, for making these improvements possible."



I'm another one who totally disagrees with this idea. How can it possibly be called an "improvement" when it jeopardizes accuracy and excellence? A "benefit" to the people who maintain the website is not equal to an "improvement" of the website. It appears that the website is desiring to "close" questions quickly in order to keep their log cleaned up as much as possible, but at the detriment of the very service that they have been providing.

If this FVA thing displaces substantial interaction, the service and usefulness of the site will decrease. Then the web people will wonder why the professionals don't use it any more. When they sacrifice quality for quantity, they will end up losing in the long run, even though at first it may appear to them that they are making better use of their own time.

But why is this web site up in the first place? Time efficiency and money are factors, I realize. But they should not be placed before the quality of service that they provide. Any time a service provider in any field starts acting selfish and decreases the quality of their service, they end up with dissatisfied customers who leave, seeking better providers or becoming successful competitors.
Collapse


 
Yaotl Altan
Yaotl Altan  Identity Verified
Mexico
Local time: 04:41
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
+ ...
39966 in-crescendo Jun 27, 2006

Terry Thatcher Waltz, Ph.D. wrote:

Henry wrote:

And, as I have told you before, creating traffic through this and other programs, for the sake of traffic, is not an objective of ours. We gain nothing from it.


Sorry, Henry, I've got to call you on this one.

Anyone who runs a Web site for profit (and yours is definitely for profit) is concerned first and foremost about the number of paid subscribers, and the key way of promoting a site is by claiming a high number of hits.


The other day in the Spanish forum I considered the possibility of moving the site to Cuba or North Korea just in case the directives agree to share profits with those states.

Of course the site runs under a profit logic. I suppose that's how firms work under capitalism. But I wouldn't say that's #1 goal of Proz because the moderators moderate themselves and listen to users. Maybe changes are not implemented as promptly as we'd like but there's always an open communication channel.

By the way, Proz is not announcing right now 39966 registered members (26/VI/06 at 23:20 hrs, Mexico City time) in the front page as the other site does. That's an evident proof of the registered -members-based format of the other site.


KudoZ and quality control essentially have never coexisted, as I have said (and been slapped for saying) in the past. It's interesting to see that the problem seems to have spread to other language combinations as well, based on the comments in this thread. But since KudoZ is an astonishingly successful psychological construct for the site (grappling for points that can't even be redeemed for jellybeans) it certainly works from a commercial standpoint.


Kudoz work. They are an interesting way to teach and learn. Of course, there are good and bad musicians, good and bad translators, good and bad professors. At the end of the day, the asker assigns 1 to 5 points according to his/her thought but that doesn't mean we are supposed to make history in linguistics. It's just a Kudoz. Peers are an excellent option to further explanations and still we could propose changes in order to better this dynamic system.

But I have a doubt. If the Kudoz system is so pathetic, then, why the other site implements a fake copy of it?


And no one is suggesting that the site should be obligated to behave like a non-profit, after all. It's a business, pure and simple. People always tend to take ownership psychologically of sites where they post or are active, but at the end of the day the site belongs to the owner, who can do as he or she pleases.



Not at all. I dislike one or two things of this site, but at the end of the day there's no AMIGUISMO here. May be moderators are friends or make love before/after they use Proz but I haven't seen friendship reigning over rules. Other sites have no moral on this point as most of their prominent members forgot the best of Proz in their copies. Even if they have a big potential to grow up, friendship restricts their development. I haven't seen here 17 consecutive messages of a same guy.


Feel free to navigate in several translation sites and use the one you like the most. I consider astonishing labeling Proz members of being draconian while they answer you respectfully without labeling anyone.

Other sites have become, paraphrasing Pink Floyd, uncomfortably numb ruled by an elite which considers Proz users vile Amateurs. Labling others is the best way to hide one's failures.

[Edited at 2006-06-27 04:55]

[Edited at 2006-06-27 04:57]

[Edited at 2006-06-27 12:26]


 
John Colangelo
John Colangelo  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 06:41
Member (2006)
Arabic to English
+ ...
I second the motion ... Jul 20, 2006

Yaotl Altan wrote:

Terry Thatcher Waltz, Ph.D. wrote:

Henry wrote:

And, as I have told you before, creating traffic through this and other programs, for the sake of traffic, is not an objective of ours. We gain nothing from it.


Sorry, Henry, I've got to call you on this one.

Anyone who runs a Web site for profit (and yours is definitely for profit) is concerned first and foremost about the number of paid subscribers, and the key way of promoting a site is by claiming a high number of hits.


The other day in the Spanish forum I considered the possibility of moving the site to Cuba or North Korea just in case the directives agree to share profits with those states.

Of course the site runs under a profit logic. I suppose that's how firms work under capitalism. But I wouldn't say that's #1 goal of Proz because the moderators moderate themselves and listen to users. Maybe changes are not implemented as promptly as we'd like but there's always an open communication channel.

By the way, Proz is not announcing right now 39966 registered members (26/VI/06 at 23:20 hrs, Mexico City time) in the front page as the other site does. That's an evident proof of the registered -members-based format of the other site.


KudoZ and quality control essentially have never coexisted, as I have said (and been slapped for saying) in the past. It's interesting to see that the problem seems to have spread to other language combinations as well, based on the comments in this thread. But since KudoZ is an astonishingly successful psychological construct for the site (grappling for points that can't even be redeemed for jellybeans) it certainly works from a commercial standpoint.


Kudoz work. They are an interesting way to teach and learn. Of course, there are good and bad musicians, good and bad translators, good and bad professors. At the end of the day, the asker assigns 1 to 5 points according to his/her thought but that doesn't mean we are supposed to make history in linguistics. It's just a Kudoz. Peers are an excellent option to further explanations and still we could propose changes in order to better this dynamic system.

But I have a doubt. If the Kudoz system is so pathetic, then, why the other site implements a fake copy of it?


And no one is suggesting that the site should be obligated to behave like a non-profit, after all. It's a business, pure and simple. People always tend to take ownership psychologically of sites where they post or are active, but at the end of the day the site belongs to the owner, who can do as he or she pleases.



Not at all. I dislike one or two things of this site, but at the end of the day there's no AMIGUISMO here. May be moderators are friends or make love before/after they use Proz but I haven't seen friendship reigning over rules. Other sites have no moral on this point as most of their prominent members forgot the best of Proz in their copies. Even if they have a big potential to grow up, friendship restricts their development. I haven't seen here 17 consecutive messages of a same guy.


Feel free to navigate in several translation sites and use the one you like the most. I consider astonishing labeling Proz members of being draconian while they answer you respectfully without labeling anyone.

Other sites have become, paraphrasing Pink Floyd, uncomfortably numb ruled by an elite which considers Proz users vile Amateurs. Labling others is the best way to hide one's failures.

[Edited at 2006-06-27 04:55]

[Edited at 2006-06-27 04:57]

[Edited at 2006-06-27 12:26]


I totally agree with Yaotl on this. Henry and his equipo are doing an excellent job and offering an effective service. I consider the arguments from the critics at the other site without foundation. Maybe the others can learn a lesson from this site and stop monopolizing it. Then instead of being a table in a café. It will be a real café.

Proz team!! Keep up the good work!!!


 
Valeria Faber
Valeria Faber  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 11:41
English to Italian
+ ...
I completely agree with GoodWords Dec 1, 2006

GoodWords wrote:


* Another new KudoZ feature is something we are calling the "first validated answer" option. When posting a question, a KudoZ asker is now given the option of waiving the right to choose the best answer, instead taking the first answer judged acceptable by the answerer community. In this mode, questions close automatically as soon as any answer receives two peer agreements. It is expected that this feature, which provides the possibility of "leaving the decision to the pros", will be useful for askers who do not speak the target language. These “first validated answers” will be of the “not for points” category.


Allowing askers to close questions before 24 hours have passed has long been a factor contributing to poor choices and incorrect glossary entries. I foresee the above feature reinforcing this trend instead of working to counteract it. At what price convenience?

What happens all too often is that it doesn't take long for a quick but misguided early answer to accumulate two (or even many) agrees in a "bandwagon" effect. However as the hours go by, and one or several better, more correct answers are proposed and backed up with solid reasons and reliable references, later visitors to the query have a better choice; in the end the majority generally votes for a correct answer. Their comments and references then help the asker to choose correctly even if s/he doesn't speak the target language.

[Edited at 2006-05-18 15:39]


 
momo savino
momo savino
Switzerland
Local time: 11:41
Italian
+ ...
unreliable glossary Jan 22, 2007

Sarah Kersley wrote:

Closing a question based on the number of agrees will make the glossary and term search features even more unreliable than they already are.

I thought that this site is aimed at professional translators, so I do not understand the point of encouraging people who do not know the source language to post questions. I think this site is trying to be too many things at once.

Henry - Do you know the difference between translators and interpreters?!? Kudoz has nothing to do with interpreting!

Sarah
momo savino

I have often had the feeling that the KOG is unreliable and this happens becuase there is not an appropriate control on the entries. This is such a pity.

If the gloss entries gave no points, maybe they would be a more serious matter.
Or there could be a specific area where translators discuss each gloss entry and only after deep research and steady explanations and many votes ("agrees") the translation goes (or does not) for good in the Proz Glossary. Not for points of course. Then it would become a good reference for many others. Does anyone think mine is a viable idea?


 
moken
moken  Identity Verified
Local time: 10:41
English to Spanish
+ ...
On KOG peer reviews - a question for the moderator or related Proz.com staff Jan 22, 2007

momo savino wrote:

If the gloss entries gave no points, maybe they would be a more serious matter.
Or there could be a specific area where translators discuss each gloss entry and only after deep research and steady explanations and many votes ("agrees") the translation goes (or does not) for good in the Proz Glossary. Not for points of course. Then it would become a good reference for many others. Does anyone think mine is a viable idea?


Hi Momo,

I fully agree in that the KOG is unreliable. Nonetheless, I still find it to be one of the most useful tools on ProZ, since apart from the actual entry you can access the actual question which it originally came from. After that, it's up to your own judgement as to whether the entry (or any other of the non-selected answers) fits your bill.

Further, for some time ProZ enables peer reviews on glossary entries. Although I am yet to find out their exact use, on occasions and time-permitting, I enter a review comment, either to endorse the entry or to enter and justify an alternative suggestion.

However, I am yet to discover its aim - be it long or short-term. Perhaps somebody from the site, e.g. the moderator for this thread, could explain the long-term aim of this function and where our peer review of glossary entries go. Are they made visible when re-visiting that particular question and if so, where and how?

If this function does have a specific use and aim, perhaps it should be encouraged and featured sowmehow.

Of course, feedback from other site users is also welcome. Thanks for your replies.

Keep smilin'!

Álvaro))


 
Enrique Cavalitto
Enrique Cavalitto  Identity Verified
Argentina
Local time: 07:41
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER
Global plan, part 2 Jan 22, 2007

Álvaro Blanch wrote:

I fully agree in that the KOG is unreliable. Nonetheless, I still find it to be one of the most useful tools on ProZ, since apart from the actual entry you can access the actual question which it originally came from. After that, it's up to your own judgement as to whether the entry (or any other of the non-selected answers) fits your bill.

Further, for some time ProZ enables peer reviews on glossary entries. Although I am yet to find out their exact use, on occasions and time-permitting, I enter a review comment, either to endorse the entry or to enter and justify an alternative suggestion.

However, I am yet to discover its aim - be it long or short-term. Perhaps somebody from the site, e.g. the moderator for this thread, could explain the long-term aim of this function and where our peer review of glossary entries go. Are they made visible when re-visiting that particular question and if so, where and how?



Hi Alvaro,

This will be part of the second section of the global 2007 plan, dedicated to KudoZ and term search mechanisms.

Regards,
Enrique


 
moken
moken  Identity Verified
Local time: 10:41
English to Spanish
+ ...
Thanks Jan 22, 2007

Enrique wrote:

Hi Alvaro,

This will be part of the second section of the global 2007 plan, dedicated to KudoZ and term search mechanisms.

Regards,
Enrique


Hi Enrique,

Thanks for your prompt reply - how does that affect current input - is there any point to peer review KOG entries at present?

Thanks again. Sonrisas,

Álvaro


 
Hamid Damiry (X)
Hamid Damiry (X)
Local time: 14:11
English to Persian (Farsi)
Im agree with Sarah Kersley Jan 17, 2009

Im agree with Sarah Kersley,sometimes people asking questions are not eligible to choose the best answer.

[Edited at 2009-01-17 22:11 GMT]


Ali Sharifi
 
punam
punam
Local time: 10:41
English to Gujarati
+ ...
i agree too Jan 20, 2009

Mikhail Kropotov wrote:

Agree on all points!

At least, the number of agrees should be raised to 4 or more . I don't know the exact number because it must be tied to the number of active answerers in the pair, and I only participate in 2 major pairs.

I would much rather see a 24-hour moratorium insituted on question grading.


Erzsébet Czopyk
 
Olga Rbl
Olga Rbl
United States
Local time: 06:41
English to Russian
+ ...
Validated answer May 25, 2012

I join the opinions of those who vote against the first validated answer policy.

Erzsébet Czopyk
Ali Sharifi
 
Mahta Karimpour Natanzi
Mahta Karimpour Natanzi
Canada
Local time: 06:41
English to Persian (Farsi)
+ ...
thanks Feb 7, 2017

hi
i did not know anythong about these rule....actually i knew....but i forgot

by the way thanks for your remindness


 
lcasasola (X)
lcasasola (X)
United States
Local time: 03:41
English to Spanish
+ ...
Quick replies are often wrong Mar 25, 2017

I agree with you, GoodWords. And in my experience, quick replies are often the least accurate ones. Decisions and responses which are made quickly tend to have a higher likelihood of error. In time, people will begin to reply with more focus on being one of the first replies as opposed to providing an accurate response.

Erzsébet Czopyk
Robin Dufaye
Ali Sharifi
 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Release announcement: New KudoZ features






Anycount & Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000

Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.

More info »
TM-Town
Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business

Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.

More info »