| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | Dirty Tactics? Peer DISAGREE and then Post your own ANSWER... (question mark added by staff) Thread poster: R. Alex Jenkins
|
|---|
Francis Lee (X)
Local time: 09:58
German to English
+ ...
| Obligations and manners | Sep 17, 2007 |
I'm 100% with Tony on this one. And there's one simple reason:
TonyTK wrote:
If I'm not sure what the correct answer is but there's one answer on the board and it's garbage (a not infrequent occurrence), then I'll post a disagree.
So Charlie and Mats are saying that even if you see an answer that's really poor - and at worst misleading to the Asker - then you should withhold a Disagree if you have no answer of your own? In many cases I (or Tony) might have a superior suggestion to the poor-quality answer: but perhaps it's still not good enough to merit posting. Geddit? Our message to the Asker is: "I'm not sure re. the right answer - but THIS isn't it!"
TonyTK wrote:
I've often been asked by the offended party to post my own answer [if I'm so clever etc.], a suggestion I find laughable.
Yes, a familiar scenario. This tends to be the reaction from colleagues who are sadly far from masters of our profession.
OK, I do see Mats' point here:
A disagree without the obligation to offer your own suggestion invites abuse
I've recently been a victim of this, i.e. a colleague I gave a Disagree to (and if I recall rightly I DID also post a suggestion of my own!) went on to give Disagrees (all on spurious grounds) to a series of subsequent answers posted by me. I should've reported her to a moderator. Next time I will ...
But I still think any such "obligation" would have an even more negative effect.
Mats wrote:
"Laughable" is IMHO to object to that obligation.
Thanks, Mats. Is this how you usually conduct a discussion with fellow-colleagues?
| | | | Mats Wiman 
Sweden
Local time: 09:58
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | The KudoZ system is not a "bickersome game" | Sep 17, 2007 |
Kim Metzger wrote: I disagree that "boosting your own chances of getting selected" is or should be "the very essence of the KudoZ system". The very essence of participating in KudoZ should be to contribute toward arriving at the very best translation of the queried term – to help the asker and to help ensure that the very best translation is entered in the glossary for future members to consult. Good KudoZ participants aren't primarily interested in having their answers selected.
Your quote is correct but your understanding of it lacks understanding.
Of course I do not say that "boosting your own chances of getting selected" is the only part of the essence of the KudoZ system BUT it is essential although there has always been people who think that it could be left out of the system.
To believe that you could get several good, well researched answers to a question without a reward for the effort is completely unrealistic.
There are some who say that THEIR help is entirely altruistic.
I find that very hard to believe or they have enough spare time to afford it. For most of us, KudoZ is an important help for us to stand out in the crowd-
Now is there anything wrong with that? IMHO no.
It proves that the answerer:
1. Is helping (whatever his motives are)
2. Provides an answer, which in most cases is chosen among several alternative answers.
With the KudoZ system anyone can scrutinize the questions and the answers to form an opinion of their own of the quality of the answerer. Not bad for a help service!
Of course its does not prove that the answerer is a good translator but it hints in that direction (some agree that a good terminologist must be a good translator - some disagree)
For outsourcers it has in my experience been proven that the see it as an important help to choose among (too) many translators.
"Your criticism is therefore directed against the whole KudoZ system and few would agree that KudoZ is a bad thing."
See above
Why is a criticism of the shady practices of some participants "directed against the whole KudoZ system"? Richard has pointed out that some members do not have the true spirit of KudoZ in mind when they enter their disagrees.
"Shady practices"? Richard did not talk about 'shady practices'. He said that disagreeing AND offering an alternative answer is wrong - to which many of us reacted.
Instead, they are treating the system as a "bickersome game" and fighting to get "their answer selected" by any means possible.
Who are you talking about? Who are "they"?
No one should be encouraged to answer a KudoZ question simply because he or she has disagreed with an answer. It's perfectly possible for a member to know that a particular answer is complete garbage without himself having the expertise to know the correct answer.
This reasoning has one great flaw: How can anyone prove that garbage is garbage without providing proof or at least present a better solution?
Answering questions is a separate issue, and KudoZ rules must be carefully phrased to cover all the bases. They must pass what Ernest Hemingway called the "shit-detector test." We should encourage people to answer pro-level KudoZ questions only when they have the expertise in the field to offer a good solution or are capable doing good research.
Again: Who should be the judge of all the goodies you are talking about. However many rules you write, they will not help ensuring quality. Neither will quality be achieved by admonishing answerers not to answer because they are in someone's view not qualified or haven't in someone's view mad e good enough research.
It's perfectly possible to know that a given answer is completely out of the question without being able to propose a good answer ourselves. If I don't have sufficient expertise in the field, as a matter of ethics, I refrain from answering the question myself and wouldn't even agree with another answer in those cases, because I don't have the expertise to do so in good conscience.
If you want to help the asker: Do not say anything.
[Edited at 2007-09-17 20:24]
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 09:58
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam
Francis Lee wrote: Mats wrote:
"Laughable" is IMHO to object to that obligation.
Thanks, Mats. Is this how you usually conduct a discussion with fellow-colleagues?
No, normally not.
In this particular case I admit I was provoked to cite the comment "laughable" about my main point of reasoning.
Mats
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 09:58
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | Being awarded KudoZ is no shame | Sep 17, 2007 |
Maria Karra wrote: Mats Wiman wrote:"boost your own chances of getting selected".
This is the very essence of the Kudoz system No, Mats, absolutely not. The very essence of the KudoZ system is to provide and receive help. Boosting your own chances of getting selected is NOT the essence of KudoZ.
"Essence" was central in my reaction to Richard's posting but I of course do not say that it is the only part of the essence of the KudoZ system: Helping AND getting points for it.
See my answer to Kim above.
Mats
[Edited at 2007-09-17 20:26]
| | |
|
|
|
| that was the idea, yes | Sep 17, 2007 |
Francis Lee wrote:
So Charlie and Mats are saying that even if you see an answer that's really poor - and at worst misleading to the Asker - then you should withhold a Disagree if you have no answer of your own?
That was indeed the general thrust of the suggestion, which as I said, met a particular need at a particular time, and one whch is no longer quite so pressing my pair, at least. It was to counter what we coud politely describe as tactical use of the system, rather than those using the system to help each other.
In many cases I (or Tony) might have a superior suggestion to the poor-quality answer: but perhaps it's still not good enough to merit posting. Geddit? Our message to the Asker is: "I'm not sure re. the right answer - but THIS isn't it!"
Actually, I'm not sure I do "geddit?", since if you have a "superior suggestion" and if you truly wish to help the Asker, or at least stop them using a poor-quality answer, why not post it, even if the confidence is 1 or 2?
It might set them on the right track, or inspire someone else to come up with the goods....
If it's better than what's there, it probably merits posting.
(which may not have been the case if the page were still blank, with no answers.)
[Edited at 2007-09-17 22:26]
| | | | | Can a moderator please moderate the moderator? | Sep 18, 2007 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
"Laughable" is IMHO to object to that obligation.
Francis wrote:
Thanks, Mats. Is this how you usually conduct a discussion with fellow-colleagues?
Mats Wiman wrote:
Your quote is correct but your understanding of it lacks understanding.
Site rule
Mutual respect, professionalism and fair play are expected. Site users are expected to treat each other with courtesy, whether posting publicly or making direct contact, and are advised to act under the assumption of good faith.
Forum rule
Speculating on others' opinions is not allowed. Commenting on others' opinions without authorization ('Jenny seems to think...') is not allowed.
Mats, as a forum and KudoZ moderator, I would think you would be held at least to the standards that regular members are expected to follow. How can you justify telling members here that their contributions are "laughable"? In what way were you "provoked" into saying that? Why not just point out the flaws you see in the arguments just as we must give linguistic reasons for disagreeing with KudoZ answers and avoid personal remarks? How can you tell me that "my understanding lacks understanding"?
Members whose breaches of forum etiquette were less offensive than the insults you have frequently tossed at people in the forums over the years have been required to have their posts vetted by moderators prior to publication. I fail to see how we can regularly punish ordinary members for breaching forum etiquette but grant impunity to someone who is supposed to ensure that those rules are followed in letter and in spirit.
The object of a forum thread is to discuss issues in a civil manner, attacking arguments but not the man. Your comments above are not conducive to a friendly and results-oriented atmosphere. Mutual respect is called for, not condescension. I think your forum posts should be subject to vetting in the future.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 09:58
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | Forgive me my passion. | Sep 19, 2007 |
Yes, passion. I have for 7 years lived by the rule I suggested:
A disagree demands an alternative along the lines: " If I claim that a suggestion is completely wrong I am obliged to explain why AND to show my command of the language in question by suggesting an alternative and IMHO better suggestion".
To me this is crystal clear and I still do not understand why it is controversial. My rule suggestion only contains the expression "is encouraged". No 'must', no 'shall' or stern... See more Yes, passion. I have for 7 years lived by the rule I suggested:
A disagree demands an alternative along the lines: " If I claim that a suggestion is completely wrong I am obliged to explain why AND to show my command of the language in question by suggesting an alternative and IMHO better suggestion".
To me this is crystal clear and I still do not understand why it is controversial. My rule suggestion only contains the expression "is encouraged". No 'must', no 'shall' or sterner measures.
To have that suggestion named "laughable" of course hurts or at least meets lack of understanding on my part.
I have attacked no one. I have criticized/argued against views which to me seems not to have understood what I am saying.
If I have offended anyone of you I sincerely ask you to forgive me for having done that.
My intention was to make the KudoZ arena a better place and definitely not to offend anyone.
I hope that everybody, myself included can reflect on this debate and maybe later, somehow revive it.
I hope this thread hereby can be closed and brought to a prozian end. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Steffen Walter
Germany
Local time: 09:58
Member (2002)
English to German
+ ...
| Not crystal-clear at all, Mats | Sep 19, 2007 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
A disagree demands an alternative along the lines: " If I claim that a suggestion is completely wrong I am obliged to explain why AND to show my command of the language in question by suggesting an alternative and IMHO better suggestion".
To me this is crystal clear and I still do not understand why it is controversial.
Hi Mats,
I beg to disagree, this is not crystal-clear at all. On the contrary, several previous contributors have made it clear that you might be in a situation, as a peer grader, where you have to disagree to help the asker (since the answer you disagree with is blatantly wrong) but have nothing to offer as an alternative at this particular instance.
So I guess we have to agree to disagree on this point
My 2c worth,
Steffen
[Edited at 2007-09-19 07:56]
| | |
|
|
|
Marcelo Silveyra
United States
Local time: 00:58
Member (2007)
German to English
+ ...
| With Steffen on this one | Sep 19, 2007 |
I think that Francis' and Kim's reasoning can be proven with a very bare-bones example:
Say that someone posts a KudoZ question in the Mechanical Engineering or Architecture category and provides the following sentence:
"Use the dog to keep the exterior window shutter open"
Now, let's assume that they don't give any further context, which I'm sure we all know is not a rare occurrence.
What happens if I don't know the appropriate translation for... See more I think that Francis' and Kim's reasoning can be proven with a very bare-bones example:
Say that someone posts a KudoZ question in the Mechanical Engineering or Architecture category and provides the following sentence:
"Use the dog to keep the exterior window shutter open"
Now, let's assume that they don't give any further context, which I'm sure we all know is not a rare occurrence.
What happens if I don't know the appropriate translation for "dog" in Spanish, but I see someone suggest "perro" (which means "dog" in Spanish - the canine, not the device)? Should I just watch helplessly, even though I know that the answer is wrong? I mean, I KNOW it's wrong, even though I don't know the correct answer myself; it's not like I just suspect that it's wrong.
Now, assume that you can't find the correct translation for "dog" in this case. What would you do? Disagree or just let it sit there? And forgive me for being so blunt, but how is letting it sit there helping the asker exactly?
[Edited at 2007-09-19 11:09] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Albert Stufkens
Netherlands
Local time: 09:58
Member (2008)
Dutch to English
+ ...
| Agree - Disagree | Nov 10, 2007 |
I find very solid arguments here.
Often I see ambitious answerers bluffing their way to more points thereby raining misty arguments, impressive sounding terms (often hardly translated), and googled hits on the Asker.
Only in such blatant cases I do not hesitate to express my "disagree", if only to guard the quality of the glossary.
Claudia Alvis wrote:
"Keep it clean":
The KudoZ system is not there just to accumulate KudoZ points or to gain visibility. One of the best things about ProZ is the KOG Glossaries. And I'm sure we've all seen entries that shouldn't be there, and, IMO, one of the reasons this happens is because people here are too politically correct. I'm not saying that we should start disagreeing with every answer that might or could be wrong but we can't be so shy about disagreeing in certain circumstances. And if someone has disagreed with one answer, s/he shouldn't be denied the right to propose an answer.
[Edited at 2007-09-17 03:47]
[Edited at 2007-11-11 12:06]
| | | | moken
Local time: 08:58
English to Spanish
+ ...
| When do YOU disagree? | Apr 25, 2008 |
1. If I am going to post my own answer, I normally only disagree if I see something I feel is blatantly mistaken or misleading and that answer is not only misleading the asker, but also other peers into agreeing with it. In this case, I do my utmost to cry it out loud, make the asker hesitate at least before accepting the answer.
This doesn't help you win points at all - it often leads to you getting a disagree posted to your own answer. Moreover, the asker seems to shy away from pe... See more 1. If I am going to post my own answer, I normally only disagree if I see something I feel is blatantly mistaken or misleading and that answer is not only misleading the asker, but also other peers into agreeing with it. In this case, I do my utmost to cry it out loud, make the asker hesitate at least before accepting the answer.
This doesn't help you win points at all - it often leads to you getting a disagree posted to your own answer. Moreover, the asker seems to shy away from people in disagreement with each other and will often select an answer who has neither agreed nor disagreed with any other. Askers prefer to keep out of it.
2. I see an answer that I feel is clearly wrong, even though I don't have an answer to suggest. Sometimes, after a certain amount of worry and research, I come back and post an answer. Both actions are unrelated.
3. Days when I hate the world - it rarely happens, but I won't deny it does. I still wouldnt disagree without a reason, but I find it much easier to enter a disagree.
4. Back in the day. Back in the day when I was convinced that I knew better than anyone else. When I thought that a lot of the Spanish that was spoken out there was utter rubbish. When I thought it was worthwhile sifting through answers until I found a slip-up on behalf of a peer who had wronged me with a disagree. Back when I was a much sadder person than I am now and when Proz might easily have banned me from the site (glad you didn't guys!)
5. Others I can't think of right now.
You can disagree in many ways and for many reasons - if you disagree based on some of the reasons mentioned above, you have a much bigger problem than the person you're disagreeing with or the asker him/herself. Hopefully I'm a bit more sorted out than I used to be.
My 2p.
Alvaro ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Dirty Tactics? Peer DISAGREE and then Post your own ANSWER... (question mark added by staff) | 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 » |
| | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
