| Vom Thema belegte Seiten: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] | The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) Initiator des Themas: Catherine Bolton
|
|---|
| Locking the thread - will post some summary feedback | Aug 11, 2006 |
While it may not be apparent to the average user, this thread has deteriorated to the point that moderators are having to hide threads that are clear attacks. We are therefore forced to lock the thread.
This is unfortunate, because there was a lot of valuable information herein. In order to retain it, I am going to post my summary feedback here and then open a new thread.
Thanks to cbolton, and to all those who contributed.
| | | | | Summary feedback | Aug 11, 2006 |
* Thanks to cbolton for raising the topic. While I would not go so far as to say that "a clearly wrong answer deserves an onslaught of disagrees", I would reiterate that the disagree option is there for a reason: as one more means for the community to work together to find the right answer(s). This being the case, I would join cbolton in encouraging its use for that purpose. As Dan put it, "It is not a case of being unkind to the answerer, but helpful to the asker, the community at large,... See more * Thanks to cbolton for raising the topic. While I would not go so far as to say that "a clearly wrong answer deserves an onslaught of disagrees", I would reiterate that the disagree option is there for a reason: as one more means for the community to work together to find the right answer(s). This being the case, I would join cbolton in encouraging its use for that purpose. As Dan put it, "It is not a case of being unkind to the answerer, but helpful to the asker, the community at large, and indeed, being true to the principles that serious professional translators hold dear." And I hope Kim is right when he says, "I'd say this thread will result in more people understanding that it's OK to disagree when answers are clearly wrong."
My feedback on concrete proposals
* I understand Charlie's point of view that the system in place is adequate; after all, the ability to disagree already exists. I also see Mats' point that "doing nothing will produce nothing." Of course, there are some things we can do to improve KudoZ.
* I am not for getting rid of the neutral button. As Ian wrote, "Sometimes it is important to be able to add a comment without adding a plus or a minus."
* Very interesting idea to make disagrees blue (or at least not red), Nik-On/Off. That might be worth a try.
* A general point: If the point is "weeding out the rubbish", encouraging disagrees is not a direct approach. To weed out the rubbish, we need to weed out the rubbish. However, more effective use of disagrees might result in less "rubbish" going in in the future.
* I can confirm virgynet's point (picked up also by df49f) that the ability to respond to disagrees is provided so that answerers have an opportunity "to defend [their] answer[s] and to justify [them]". This is important part of KudoZ discourse and while I understand the logic in Mats' proposal, I do not support it.
* I like your idea, Kim, of listing examples of clearly personal comments of the type that are not permitted. You also raise some interesting points about the need for further clarification on where to draw lines.
* I do not rule out langnet's idea of getting rid of the "agree/disagree/neutral" labels altogether. But I would like to experiment with less abrupt suggestions before resorting to something like this.
* Regarding Cilian's suggestion: "IMO we should not be able hide. Period." There was a time when it was not possible to hide, and offering the option to hide was an improvement. I don't see a compelling reason to revoke the feature, which as Charlie points out has valid uses (removing known-wrong answers, accidental duplicates, etc.). Similarly, Ian, we would not want to burden moderators with the additional responsibility of hiding answers for members in such cases (regardless, thanks for your willingness, Steffen.)
* It might be interesting to try Cilian's less "radical" suggestion though: "how about at least showing the names of those who have hidden answers and their reasons given".
* I appreciate the suggestion you gave, Anna, of spinning off forum threads to hash out disagrees. However, as a design decision this is outside of the KudoZ approach. We do not want to foster side conversations, but instead, encourage participants to make their main points succinctly and move on. (Which is not to say that it is impossible to bolster your references, etc... but this can be done within the context of your own answers, rather than in dialogue.)
Other thoughts
* Thank you, Niraja and others, for your common sense perspective. Niraja said, "It's quite normal in any discussion to agree or disagree." Also, writeaway wrote: "disagrees can produce useful feedback and brainstorming". Graciela: "people can learn through giving disagrees."
* As writeaway wrote, disagree-ers should not be "marginalized."
* Early in the thread, Mats reiterated an important philosophy. When you disagree, consider offering a better alternative.
* I disagree with Kim when he says that some answers "don't really deserve much of an analysis because it is so obvious to any translator in the language pair that the answer is absurd." Though it may be tempting at times to be dismissive, actually being dismissive without linguistic justification, is not welcome. To be fair, perhaps I have misunderstood your intention, Kim.
* Thank you, Ian, for clarifying that: "... I'd just like to point out at this stage that I have never said - or proposed saying - 'buy a dictionary, stoopid' as a peer comment..." This clarification was necessary, as evidenced by gad's misunderstanding even later in the thread. I appreciate Kim taking the time to respond by saying, "I and everyone else in your language pairs have always considered you a model of decorum and respect for others in KudoZ."
* I have to point out that remarks such as Ian's, "The comment "If you do a search on the phrase "knee-jerk reaction", you will find that most of them are descriptions of you!" are a violation of our general rule 2, which prohibits attacks. Please refrain, Ian. Calling someone a besserwisser is also a violation; thank you, Mats, for retracting and apologizing. I will appreciate if avoid comments like: "Your elitist discussions about what is chaff or not is uninteresting and pathetic." in the future. Vito, your song quote is similarly out of place. Also, as writeaway points out, it is offensive (my word) to "dismiss the discussion as 'bickering'"... so please don't. (It is also offensive to say that someone has "hijacked" the discussion, or to paraphrase them with "blablabla", df49f.) Andy: "...everyone who's posting here seems to have got past Sesame St. level." Cilian: Saturday Night Live sketch (since removed.)
* Mats is right in saying, "To encourage Disagrees (presumably for quality) you have to stifle unnecessary aggressive responses". This is why rules, and enforcement of them, is necessary and useful.
* I do not share your opinion, df49f's, that "1) saying "buy a dictionary" is NOT contempt, just good advice." "Buy a dictionary" is an order, after all. I do share your opinion that "the point is precisely how to find a way of saying it without being offensive"... so perhaps we don't really disagree on this.
* df49f', you say that you think in terms of "genuine translators". I wish you would not. Please consider thinking in terms of the terms, not who posts them. It should be about the language, not the person.
* I tend to agree with cbolton when she says "I think a thicker skin is probably the answer." I know it was just a thought of course... but as Mats says, in practice we can't expect everyone in our large community to be thick-skinned.
* It is insightful of Heinrich Pesch to recognize the relationship between peer agreement and confidence.
* gad, thank you for taking the time to evaluate the thread and offer your comprehensive feedback.
* Personally, I don't regard KudoZ points as a form of payment from asker to answerers. (That's a topic for another day, though.) ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| | | Vom Thema belegte Seiten: < [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 » The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) | 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 » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
