| Vom Thema belegte Seiten: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | Confession of a KudoZ limits supporter Initiator des Themas: Nikki Graham
|
|---|
| Let's stick to Nikki's topic. | Aug 1, 2006 |
Charlie, Ian, Mats, df49f...
Let's stick to Nikki's topic, please. Thanks.
| | | | Gerard de Noord 
Frankreich
Local time: 00:44
Mitglied (2003)
Englisch > Niederländisch
+ ...
| Confession of a member in favour of Mats' ideas | Aug 1, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Nikki Graham wrote:
b) I thought this was a site for (dare I say professional?) translators, not "everyone"
Dear Nikki,
Don't you know that it is, but not exclusively. I'm sure you are one of these pros.
What I and others are trying to say is, that there is no contradiction between the whole array of members and users and there being a great number of true professionals.
They not only should coexist. They thrive from it or IMHO should thrive from it.
I have used the metaphor "Perfect flowers do not grow out of perfect soil. They thrive on rich humus consisting of a great variety of substances (suggestions/members)."
Big trees were once small and a pros should and could recognize that.
What is too much for someone should be controlled with selective/dashboard tools, not limits.
The longer I think about it, the more I agree with Mats, and I've spent quite some time following these forums lately. I also admire Mats for his courage to not keep his thoughts to himself. I love the debate on this site.
I didn't go back to find the original poster, but someone remarked that KudoZ isn't the same in all language pairs. Without over-romanticising: the FR>NL, GE>NL and EN>NL pairs aren't suffering from any of the problems other KudoZ pairs seem to have. Besides, grabbing points has become hard, there. No more easy questions. Just translators of all kinds trying to help each other.
Kind regards,
Gerard
| | | | Gina W
Vereinigte Staaten
Local time: 18:44
Mitglied (2003)
Französisch > Englisch
| I agree with Mats | Aug 1, 2006 |
...and Gerard. Also, I don't particularly see how Mats' posts are not on topic, Henry, I believe that they do stick with Nikki's topic.
| | | | Nikki Graham
Vereinigtes Königreich
Local time: 23:44
Spanisch > Englisch
THEMENSTARTER | Different experiences in different communities | Aug 1, 2006 |
Gerard de Noord wrote:
I didn't go back to find the original poster, but someone remarked that KudoZ isn't the same in all language pairs. Without over-romanticising: the FR>NL, GE>NL and EN>NL pairs aren't suffering from any of the problems other KudoZ pairs seem to have. Besides, grabbing points has become hard, there. No more easy questions. Just translators of all kinds trying to help each other.
I don't remember anyone saying that in this thread (but there have been a lot of posts today), but it was said in a different one today. I appreciate that the KudoZ experience is not going to be the same for everyone because there are very many subcommunities and that is the reason why many may feel that there is nothing to fix.
I have just done some research and discovered that there are 635 language service providers in the FR-NL section, with 99 paying members. The GE-NL has 569, with 98 members and by far the largest one you mentioned, EN-NL has 1,888, with 239 members. By comparison, GE-EN has 6,744 language service providers and 747 members and the subcommunity I am a part of, SP-EN, has a staggering 11,278 providers with 1,045 Proz.com members. Given these figures, I don't think it is surprising, therefore, that those of us in the larger subcommunities encounter problems that may not even exist in other parts of Proz, so please forgive us if we go on about it sometimes.
[Edited at 2006-08-01 22:28]
| | |
|
|
|
Nikki Graham
Vereinigtes Königreich
Local time: 23:44
Spanisch > Englisch
THEMENSTARTER
Henry wrote:
In the meantime, let's stay focused on our shared objective (quality) and keep it courteous and professional!
sorry if I have stepped out of line today. There was a point when I was feeling particularly bombarded, but I had hoped I had managed to keep things in check!
| | | | Nikki Graham
Vereinigtes Königreich
Local time: 23:44
Spanisch > Englisch
THEMENSTARTER | IMHO, filtering is not a solution, just a cover-up | Aug 1, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
From the start, one could deselect non-pro question if one couldn't fly over an "I love you".
With the Dashboard, everyone can deselect any asker, fields, specialties etc., not to be too much bothered, so I can't see any reason for general limits at all.
So much for logic.
Nikki Graham wrote:
I already filter out the questions of just over 80 askers, but filtering is not the solution to this problem. Just because some people don’t see these questions, doesn’t mean they are not there and not lowering the standards in KudoZ as a whole (after all, every question comes up in the glossary search process, filtered or not, and the more rubbish there is, the more difficult it is to find the gem). I think that the harm this does is that it damages the reputation of Proz.com as a professional site for translators and it renders vast chunks of the glossary worthless.
As I stated in my original post, I do not believe that filtering gets to the root of the problem. Whilst my KudoZ experience is certainly much better now and I have been able to turn notifications of KudoZ questions back on after years of having it switched off, I am still aware of what is going on (especially as I come across questions asked by people I filter in the glossary anyway) and would not like the situation to get even worse.
[Edited at 2006-08-01 22:44]
| | | | | Thanks, Nikki | Aug 1, 2006 |
Nikki Graham wrote:
Henry wrote:
In the meantime, let's stay focused on our shared objective (quality) and keep it courteous and professional!
sorry if I have stepped out of line today. There was a point when I was feeling particularly bombarded, but I had hoped I had managed to keep things in check!
Not at all, Nikki. Excellent thread.
| | | | Gerard de Noord
Frankreich
Local time: 00:44
Mitglied (2003)
Englisch > Niederländisch
+ ...
| Please Nikki, this is a great thread | Aug 1, 2006 |
Nikki Graham wrote:
Gerard de Noord wrote:
I didn't go back to find the original poster, but someone remarked that KudoZ isn't the same in all language pairs. Without over-romanticising: the FR>NL, GE>NL and EN>NL pairs aren't suffering from any of the problems other KudoZ pairs seem to have. Besides, grabbing points has become hard, there. No more easy questions. Just translators of all kinds trying to help each other.
I don't remember anyone saying that in this thread (but there have been a lot of posts today), but it was said in a different one today. I appreciate that the KudoZ experience is not going to be the same for everyone because there are very many subcommunities and that is the reason why many may feel that there is nothing to fix.
I have just done some research and discovered that there are 635 language service providers in the FR-NL section, with 99 paying members. The GE-NL has 569, with 98 members and by far the largest one you mentioned, EN-NL has 1,888, with 239 members. By comparison, GE-EN has 6,744 language service providers and 747 members and the subcommunity I am a part of, SP-EN, has a staggering 11,278 providers with 1,045 Proz.com members. Given these figures, I don't think it is surprising, therefore, that those of us in the larger subcommunities encounter problems that may not even exist in other parts of Proz, so please forgive us if we go on about it sometimes.
Please don't get me wrong. I do understand ProZ is a huge machine, trying to provide for all members and users. Maybe I shouldn't even comment, in a general way, because I just roam in my part of the site. I read all the English stuff just to stay on top of things. My posting was foremost meant to support Mats.
It's funny you did the same research I did when WWA was introduced. I concluded there would be very little to gain to me in my pairs.
Your figures should remind all Prozians of the magnitude of things and of all those other languages offered here. I'm quite convinced many members and users would be really miserable on a SP-EN and EN-SP-only site.
Regards,
Gerard
| | |
|
|
|
| Perhaps, then, a "once size fits all" approach could be reviewed? | Aug 2, 2006 |
Inspired in part by Nikki "Not-from-Big-Brother" Graham's research, I took a look at the number of Qs in/out of French & the languages in the Baltic states. One page only in each case (except Lavtian -> French, where there has never been a question!) since 2001. I was a bit surprised it was so few.
But anyway, it seems increasingly obvious that there are plenty of sub-communities where limits are not required, or wanted, and are irrelevant perhaps. Indeed, if anyone ever does transl... See more Inspired in part by Nikki "Not-from-Big-Brother" Graham's research, I took a look at the number of Qs in/out of French & the languages in the Baltic states. One page only in each case (except Lavtian -> French, where there has never been a question!) since 2001. I was a bit surprised it was so few.
But anyway, it seems increasingly obvious that there are plenty of sub-communities where limits are not required, or wanted, and are irrelevant perhaps. Indeed, if anyone ever does translate anything from Latvian into French (:-)), say, it would seem only reasonable that they could ask plenty of questions, as I would imagine that web resources for such minority (in apparent terms of volume, judging from the above) languages are scarce, and also that translators in the less-widely spoken languages are perhaps less specialised, either through choice or economic neccessity (including pressure from the client, who having finally tracked down a Bulgarian into Icelandic translator, might not be to thrilled to hear "I don't do tractors", for example).
So perhaps then, in addition to the "panic button" suggestion (made here, or was it only in the poll thread?) which seems reasonable, perhaps stricter limits could be imposed only on certain language combinations where that particular sub-community feels the need?
Quality expectations and views of what is reasonable and is what acceptable clearly differ wildly, perhaps a differentiated (but not infinitely variable) approach could work...? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Heinrich Pesch
Finnland
Local time: 01:44
Mitglied (2003)
Finnisch > Deutsch
+ ...
| There's more going on in big cities... | Aug 2, 2006 |
...than in small villages.
Charlie Bavington wrote:
Inspired in part by Nikki "Not-from-Big-Brother" Graham's research, I took a look at the number of Qs in/out of French & the languages in the Baltic states. One page only in each case (except Lavtian -> French, where there has never been a question!) since 2001. I was a bit surprised it was so few.
Finnish translators do not use the Kudoz-system, but have a mailing list, which provides peer assistence very swiftly.
For small languages, especially when translating from e.g. Finnish into German or French, we are rather on our own. But we have to deal with the same kind of jobs, the same kind of terminology search like the "big" language groups.
So I do not understand why some people complain when there is too much traffic in large Kudoz-communities. In big cities there is more of everything, also garbage.
Regards
Heinrich
| | | | | Finding solutions | Aug 2, 2006 |
Hi Folks,
I'm one of those who voted for stricter limits although, admittedly, I was once a staunch supporter of Mats' laissez-faire attitude. My experience as a Kudoz moderator has somewhat diluted this attitude, so it's now hovering between the "mind your own biz" Swedish jingle and the "besserwisser" refrain (using Wiman-ian terminology).
Focusing only on question limits and their ramifications, here are some observations that I've made over the years in the German>E... See more Hi Folks,
I'm one of those who voted for stricter limits although, admittedly, I was once a staunch supporter of Mats' laissez-faire attitude. My experience as a Kudoz moderator has somewhat diluted this attitude, so it's now hovering between the "mind your own biz" Swedish jingle and the "besserwisser" refrain (using Wiman-ian terminology).
Focusing only on question limits and their ramifications, here are some observations that I've made over the years in the German>English SC I co-moderate (specifically, in the technical domains such as engineering and science). It's the 3rd or 4th largest, by the way, in terms of traffic (boss Henry posted stats way back):
1) These much maligned Kudoz abusers seldom visit the forums and even more seldom offer their opinions. They're probably too busy annoying Ian and his allies, accepting jobs they shouldn't and peppering us with questions that only newbies, recent and still enthusiastic members and dedicated Wiman-ians answer. The old-timers (and most of them include outstanding specialists) stay away. The filters must be their saving grace.
The serial askers in my SC do not appear in the Kudoz forum at all. So we can only surmise from their pattern of asking what their motivations and professional weaknesses are. "Out of their depth" is easy to bandy around but there are probably explanations that are as myriad as the variety of askers. My pet peeves are a combination of lazy with a touch of ignorant and sometimes just plain beginner.
2) Imposing limits will satisy the majority of users as evidenced by results of all the polls that have been posted so far about Kudoz. Most moderators belong to this camp. But there are still Nikki's 22% who want ever stricter limits. One of the reasons mentioned above is that questions get buried under the avalanche of new questions.
A possible solution for the major pairs, in particular, is to expand the default setting for displaying Kudoz questions on the main Kudoz page from 50 to 100. In De>En, it's currently set at 50. In a busy European workday, during working hours, questions get air time of about 3 to 4 hours, much less of course when abusers and their ilk come nosing in with quizzical brows. Expanding the default display setting will provide more air time for most questions. This can only work naturally if dedicated answerers would have the tenacity to scroll down the page and select what they want to answer.
3) The 60/20 paradigm still reigns supreme so we, folks, will probably have to live with it until the next crisis arises (or until Ian and Nikki form a union and announce a general strike). We should all collectively accept the fact that there will always be novices around who will blithely ask in spite of protestations, pro/non-pro classifications, squashings and dashboard filters.
Solution 2: to minimize the impact of false entries on the glossary, perhaps moderators and active members ought to exercise collective vigilance and weed out the incompetent by not shying away from posting 'disagrees' when a particular howler merits it. The De>En SC, I think, is a tight ship with members who are dedicated to quality and excellence. It works if done with succinct objection and linguistic foundation. I myself, in rare moments of annoyance, have written these winnows among sharks and proposed that they should temper their readiness to answer questions about radiotelemetry and robotics with restraint...after mulling over their true calling. So after being bombarded by peer disagreements they usually get the hint and stay away...or stick to their proven fields. The old-timers get satisfaction from having educated novices. Champagne all around.
So, as boss Henry said above, the limits would only be an indirect solution. The real work has to be focused on this clean-up, which, by the way, I do almost everyday when I'm online and have the Kudoz search page open for hours.
Suggestion 3: perhaps the techies could find a solution on how to combine similar questions under one supra-question/supra-answer box, so potential researchers can read on one display the more important discussions and not have to deal with several scattered discussions. In this case, it is not the chosen answers that are importat but the accompanying discussions and the players in the field.
More later folks,
Marcus
[Edited at 2006-08-02 02:57] ▲ Collapse
| | | | tazdog (X)
Spanien
Local time: 00:44
Spanisch > Englisch
+ ...
| confessions from another Kudoz limits supporter | Aug 2, 2006 |
I’m late getting here (we’re in the midst of a move), but wanted to make a few comments.
I have to say that I agree with all of Nikki’s observations--maybe because I work in the same languages, where I think the quality issue is particularly glaring.
One of the reasons why I supported tighter limits on the number of questions that can be asked is directly related to quality: if a serial asker knows that s/he can only post a relatively small number of questions per... See more I’m late getting here (we’re in the midst of a move), but wanted to make a few comments.
I have to say that I agree with all of Nikki’s observations--maybe because I work in the same languages, where I think the quality issue is particularly glaring.
One of the reasons why I supported tighter limits on the number of questions that can be asked is directly related to quality: if a serial asker knows that s/he can only post a relatively small number of questions per day/week, then it stands to reason that s/he would be forced to rely on other resources, including (*gasp*) doing a little or even a lot of digging to find the answer on his/her own. This would mean that only the "higher quality" questions would be posted (i.e., the ones that are truly difficult).
Here is just one example of how this might work. In the last week, the question “ancas de rana” (frog legs) was posted. By simply Googling “ancas de rana," the asker would have found (in the first 20 results) a thesaurus from the FAO with the translation of this term in several languages. I’m sure it took the asker longer to post and grade the question than it would have taken to find the answer on his own. (This is beside the fact that the term is in at least two general Spanish-English dictionaries—I checked. I used the Google illustration to counter the argument that is so often proffered, that not everyone has the same dictionaries.)
I think that part of the problem is that some younger and/or newer translators, who are used to having instant access to a dizzying amount of information on the Internet, simply see Kudoz questions as a fast and easy way to get answers, so why bother doing their own research? (I have seen the same thing on e-mail lists for translators, where recent translation graduates or students ask questions that could easily be found in general dictionaries or grammar books that should be part of any translator’s basic equipment.) Related to this is the failure to provide context with their questions, even when asked (in my experience, this is very often the case with those who post the most questions); it probably takes too much time and effort. I am sure some of these serial askers don’t even think about the implications (e.g., the fact that they are asking colleagues to help them do their work, the image of laziness or at the very least inexperience they might be projecting, etc.). If they were forced to be more selective with their Kudoz questions (and limits readily come to mind as a means of ensuring that), they might learn some of the research skills that those of us who started translating before the days of the Internet had to develop. This would benefit them personally as well as raising the overall quality level of Kudoz.
I hasten to say, before the usual voices are raised accusing me of trying to make people work according to my style, that I don’t really care how they do their research—just that they should DO it, period, before posting a question. Think about it: however these askers got into translating, doesn't it make sense that they should at least learn the skills of the trade if they plan on working in this field? (and that includes having a full command of their working languages—but that could be another thread in itself).
To veer off the topic of this thread ever so slightly: 1) I am not averse to the idea of a panic button feature, to be used in conjunction with stricter limits; 2) I think that the KOG could definitely use an overhaul, especially ES-EN, as Nikki mentioned; and 3) being relentless in slapping disagrees on the really ridiculous answers seems to have little effect on point grabbers, at least on the no. 1 offender in this respect in the ES>EN area. Hide like a rhino… ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
IanW (X)
Local time: 00:44
Deutsch > Englisch
+ ...
Gerard de Noord wrote:
I also admire Mats for his courage to not keep his thoughts to himself.
Hi Gerard,
Let me just point out that no-one has told Mats to keep his thoughts to himself - those are his words.
All the best
Ian
| | | | Irene N
Vereinigte Staaten
Local time: 17:44
Englisch > Russisch
+ ...
Before I step forward with a much longer post containing my thoughts regarding certain Proz realities, I would like to share another suspicion - in many cases, I believe, asking a "dictionary" question proves not so much laziness but an utter incomprehension of the subject and field lexis, a total blind spot where no dictionaries can help. In other words, it reveals a known problem yet on a much larger scale, the true level of incompetence, the level we do not even dare to embrace with our old-f... See more Before I step forward with a much longer post containing my thoughts regarding certain Proz realities, I would like to share another suspicion - in many cases, I believe, asking a "dictionary" question proves not so much laziness but an utter incomprehension of the subject and field lexis, a total blind spot where no dictionaries can help. In other words, it reveals a known problem yet on a much larger scale, the true level of incompetence, the level we do not even dare to embrace with our old-fashioned ways and previous century values:-).
I shall speak for myself. I know for sure that, should I open medical or chemical dictionary, in ~85% of all cases I shall see nothing, especially when they offer a choice. Whenever an accidental medical term shoots at me from around the corner, I would be willing to ask and reconfirm even something very easy to anyone half-literate in the subject (hopefully I'll handle "flu" or "clyster", but not much more:-)). The only reason I do not flood Kudoz with medical questions is that I do not accept jobs in this field.
Eng-RU polytech dictionary renders over 50 options for the term "bar", aside of a pub, that is! In Russian it may require an equivalent of a guide, a spacer, a stick, a guard, a handrail, a rod, a lever, a rail, an extention and so on, and we have not even started with electronics vocabulary. Any half-decent translator would be going out of his way to see a picture/sketch/drawing of that or similar hardware before choosing the term.
This might be an additional argument in favor of shutting some doors. Why I do not believe that it would be possible with Proz, shall come next, a bit later.
Undoubtedly, translation business, reputation of the trade and quality of final products suffer tremendously from a year-round open house and free cheese, and it would be very naive to think differently. The question is - is Proz designed to prevent, ignore or support (let it be unwillingly) such degradation? I'll share my thoughts on it tomorrow.
Respectfully,
Irene
[Edited at 2006-08-02 08:19]
[Edited at 2006-08-02 08:20]
[Edited at 2006-08-02 09:26] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Marc P (X)
Local time: 00:44
Deutsch > Englisch
+ ...
| Not just Finnish | Aug 2, 2006 |
Heinrich Pesch wrote:
Finnish translators do not use the Kudoz-system, but have a mailing list
There are many such lists. Some for specific languages, some for specific subjects, some maintained by translators' associations for their members. Some are private, others public or semi-public. In many cases, they predate ProZ/KudoZ. Professionals generally know where to find them.
I prefer such lists, particularly the private or semi-public (i.e. with open membership, but requiring a log-in) lists, for two reasons. Firstly, if I'm unsure of a term, I can consult colleagues without informing anyone capable of using Google of the fact. Besides the image issue, there is also one of confidentiality: I can often justify publishing one sentence from a customer's text when I know that it will be read by 150 fellow members of my professional association, but would not be willing to post it where it can be found by any search engine spider.
Secondly, proper discussion is not impeded on these lists by having to take place within the framework of a party game. The party game has a certain appeal, I admit, but once the novelty has worn off, it's just an obstacle. As anyone with experience of proper terminology discussion lists knows, a system which attempts to define terminology issues in terms of a quiz with a question and a range of possible answers is far too simplistic. That colleagues nevertheless manage to engage in some form of constructive discussion within the KudoZ system despite these constraints is a tribute to their ingenuity, not to KudoZ. Nevertheless, as discussions of KudoZ show with monotonous regularity, the signal-to-noise ratio on KudoZ, at least in some language pairs, is annoyingly low.
This is just my perspective, and may be helpful or not, but that's the way things are in the real world, folks. Others are free to ignore it, tell me that it's irrelevant, or consider it as one piece in the larger puzzle of things. Just as in proper terminological discussions, in fact. As the saying goes, test everything and keep what's good. I can't tell you where the saying comes from, I'm afraid - RuleZ are RuleZ.
Marc
| | | | | Vom Thema belegte Seiten: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Confession of a KudoZ limits supporter | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance |
|---|
The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | LinguaCore |
|---|
AI Translation at Your Fingertips
The underlying LLM technology of LinguaCore offers AI translations of unprecedented quality. Quick and simple. Add a human linguistic review at the end for expert-level quality at a fraction of the cost and time.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
