Negative Side of WWA : Possibility of Hiding the Outsourcer Name Thread poster: Ritu Bhanot
|
Hi Everyone, Well, I just discovered one negative side of WWA rating and am quite upset about it and I don't think I'll ever ask another client to give WWA rating. One of my clients (who has given me a WWA rating) called me and I was shocked to learn that someone I don't even know (I heard her name for the first time) had called them telling that I had given their number to her. Luckily, I've been working with them for over 4-5 years now so they called me, ... See more Hi Everyone, Well, I just discovered one negative side of WWA rating and am quite upset about it and I don't think I'll ever ask another client to give WWA rating. One of my clients (who has given me a WWA rating) called me and I was shocked to learn that someone I don't even know (I heard her name for the first time) had called them telling that I had given their number to her. Luckily, I've been working with them for over 4-5 years now so they called me, but I'd like to ask that person is it the right thing to do? FYI I've not mentioned the name of this outsourcer anywhere else. So the only way this person could know that I worked for them was through the WWA rating. And I'd like to request Henry and His team to kindly give us the possibility of hiding outsourcer name in WWA. It's possible in Project History and I wish it was also possible in WWA. Glad that my biggest outsourcers don't figure there. Thank you for your attention. Ritu ▲ Collapse | | | Negative side of WWA | Jan 10, 2007 |
Hi Ritu, That was exactly one of the concerns I voiced when the system was started. I shuddered to think that folks would bother my clients by contacting them. And most likely even form competition. This (my main concern) and some other issues were the reasons why I decided to opt out of the WWA. I hope that this issue is worked out. Then I might opt in again for WWA. Lucinda | | | I too, am not keen on WWA | Jan 10, 2007 |
Life is already complicated as it is. Why should one invite headache by opening one to abusive attacks? I don't say that a serious client will do that. But a client sure of getting adverse blue board rating will do just that. If Proz wants, let them open a page similar to blue board, this time for the outsourcers. After all, no outsourcer is asked to give consent to having his name included in the blue board. Or am I wrong? In that case, I do not see any reason to open ... See more Life is already complicated as it is. Why should one invite headache by opening one to abusive attacks? I don't say that a serious client will do that. But a client sure of getting adverse blue board rating will do just that. If Proz wants, let them open a page similar to blue board, this time for the outsourcers. After all, no outsourcer is asked to give consent to having his name included in the blue board. Or am I wrong? In that case, I do not see any reason to open this Pandora's box of WWA. In Urdu there is a saying "Aa bhail mujee maar", whose literal translation is "Come on bull, attack me". Having said this, I don't think hiding an outsourcer's name is a viable option. Either you opt for WWA or decide against it. Regards, N.Raghavan ▲ Collapse | | | Hiding Outsourcer Name | Jan 10, 2007 |
Well, it's a viable option that gives you best of both worlds and of course why shouldn't we have it? It tells people that we have clients who are satisfied with our work and has many positive points. But hiding the outsourcer can help us get rid of the one negative point of this feature which has helped me a lot Only I don't want people abusing my name and/ or contacting outsourcers and telling them lies... <... See more Well, it's a viable option that gives you best of both worlds and of course why shouldn't we have it? It tells people that we have clients who are satisfied with our work and has many positive points. But hiding the outsourcer can help us get rid of the one negative point of this feature which has helped me a lot Only I don't want people abusing my name and/ or contacting outsourcers and telling them lies... BTW This person was evidently a competitor (she gave exactly the same language combination to the outsourcer) and so her intention was evident.
[Edited at 2007-01-10 17:45] ▲ Collapse | |
|
|
BelkisDV United States Local time: 06:38 Spanish to English + ... My 2 cents on WWA | Jan 10, 2007 |
WWA is nothing but an easy way for ProZ to get a client list from each of us. The example given about someone contacting an outsourcer without the translator's authorization is a flagrant example of the above. THey want outsourcers names? Give them the ones that are already listed with ProZ, if you've worked for them, never and I mean never give out your clients names to anyone (does this sound like a password warning?)...such and such will never ask you for your passwo... See more WWA is nothing but an easy way for ProZ to get a client list from each of us. The example given about someone contacting an outsourcer without the translator's authorization is a flagrant example of the above. THey want outsourcers names? Give them the ones that are already listed with ProZ, if you've worked for them, never and I mean never give out your clients names to anyone (does this sound like a password warning?)...such and such will never ask you for your password...;) Good luck to all, Belkis ▲ Collapse | | | Andrea Riffo Chile Local time: 07:38 English to Spanish + ...
I requested 2 clients whom I have worked for regularly to add a WWA entry. Given that they both represent big companies, the conversation went as follows: Them: Can you guarantee I will not get unsolicited e-mails, phone calls, job requests, etc? Me: No, I can't Them: Sorry, it can't be done makes sense to me. I am not against the WWA feature per se, but I am against outsourcers being forced to add their contact information ... See more I requested 2 clients whom I have worked for regularly to add a WWA entry. Given that they both represent big companies, the conversation went as follows: Them: Can you guarantee I will not get unsolicited e-mails, phone calls, job requests, etc? Me: No, I can't Them: Sorry, it can't be done makes sense to me. I am not against the WWA feature per se, but I am against outsourcers being forced to add their contact information if they wish to help someone whose work they are happy with. ▲ Collapse | | | Textklick Local time: 10:38 German to English + ... In memoriam Hidden agenda? | Jan 10, 2007 |
BelkisDV wrote: They want outsourcers names? Give them the ones that are already listed with ProZ Maybe. I think it makes sense to make the information available to people both in our own backyard - and to whichever other outsourcers take a look in. A reference is a reference is a reference, and people can always see it where it came from. If other freelancers want to pitch to my outsourcers then I can live with that, otherwise I would not bother to ask for a WWA in the first place. ...if you've worked for them, never and I mean never give out your clients names to anyone (does this sound like a password warning?)...such and such will never ask you for your password...;) Belkis Apart from seeing it as an imposition upon direct and loyal clients, asking for a WWA hardly makes commercial sense to me in such specific cases. Or is there indeed some hidden agenda here for marketing purposes?
[Edited at 2007-01-10 23:05] | | | Not exactly hidden | Jan 11, 2007 |
Textklick wrote: Or is there indeed some hidden agenda here for marketing purposes? As was posted here over the Christmas/New Year break, and which may have passed you by: http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/news/global_watchtower_one.php?wat_id=326 As has already been said by proz management, the idea of WWA is to enable a quicker and better fit between those looking for translation skills and those providing them (I paraphrase). The above explains why (in the author's view, I presume). | |
|
|
Thanks for the suggestion, Ritu | Jan 11, 2007 |
Ritu Bhanot wrote: And I'd like to request Henry and His team to kindly give us the possibility of hiding outsourcer name in WWA. It's possible in Project History and I wish it was also possible in WWA. Glad that my biggest outsourcers don't figure there. Thanks, Ritu. I will have a look at this and see what we can do. | | | is it not voluntary? | Jan 11, 2007 |
I agree there are positive and negative sides to everything. But personally I find WWA quite helpful in terms of getting some kind of reference and I wouldn't ask just everybody to give me one. If the client is the BB outsourcer then without any doubt he/she is already exposed enough. Getting a WWA entry from them doesn't present any big problem. As to other translators contacting my clients looking for jobs... Funny... They can freely contact any outsourcer listed on the BB... See more I agree there are positive and negative sides to everything. But personally I find WWA quite helpful in terms of getting some kind of reference and I wouldn't ask just everybody to give me one. If the client is the BB outsourcer then without any doubt he/she is already exposed enough. Getting a WWA entry from them doesn't present any big problem. As to other translators contacting my clients looking for jobs... Funny... They can freely contact any outsourcer listed on the BB anyway! Problem comes only in the case of direct clients; I think those ones should be kept in private 100%! And for the colleagues who still feel insecure or don't need any kind of references, there is an option to hide the entire WWA feature. What else to ask for? What is the use of hiding the referee name? What kind of reference is that? I've seen some profiles in my language pair having WWA entries referring to completely empty profiles making me think that it’s a perfect fraud. If it will be possible to hide the outsourcers’ names, another opportunity for the abusers of the system will be opened. Anyway I think it's a "take it or live it" feature. I take it at this moment, later I might opt out. Nice day to all, Irina ▲ Collapse | | |
BelkisDV wrote: WWA is nothing but an easy way for ProZ to get a client list from each of us. If you mean this is an easy way for site staff members to get contact information, for some reason, that is not so. We don't contact your clients. | | | Thanks for sharing that, Andrea | Jan 11, 2007 |
Andrea Riffo wrote: I requested 2 clients whom I have worked for regularly to add a WWA entry. Given that they both represent big companies, the conversation went as follows: Them: Can you guarantee I will not get unsolicited e-mails, phone calls, job requests, etc? Me: No, I can't Them: Sorry, it can't be done makes sense to me. I am not against the WWA feature per se, but I am against outsourcers being forced to add their contact information if they wish to help someone whose work they are happy with. Thanks for this information. As a practical matter, having a login (and an email address for notifications) can make the process of responding to requests for WWA easier for outsourcers. (Especially when requests come from more than one translator.) I understand that people working for big companies, who do not necessarily have the authority to post something like this on behalf of their companies, would have concerns. Your answer to them was the responsible one. Maybe someone has a solution that would work for these cases, though? | |
|
|
Yes, Charlie, views of the author | Jan 11, 2007 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Textklick wrote: Or is there indeed some hidden agenda here for marketing purposes? As was posted here over the Christmas/New Year break, and which may have passed you by: http://www.commonsenseadvisory.com/news/global_watchtower_one.php?wat_id=326 As has already been said by proz management, the idea of WWA is to enable a quicker and better fit between those looking for translation skills and those providing them (I paraphrase). The above explains why (in the author's view, I presume). Hi Charlie. Thanks for posting this. As you correctly point out, the views in the article are those of the author, based on an interview of Mike from our team. The bit he wrote about WWA (in a different story, I believe) was speculation on his part. WWA is not currently part of the Project Connect platform. And as I have said, we don't market to clients entered for WWA purposes. | | | Right to make these considerations, Irina | Jan 11, 2007 |
Irina Romanova-Wasike wrote: I agree there are positive and negative sides to everything. But personally I find WWA quite helpful in terms of getting some kind of reference and I wouldn't ask just everybody to give me one. If the client is the BB outsourcer then without any doubt he/she is already exposed enough. Getting a WWA entry from them doesn't present any big problem. As to other translators contacting my clients looking for jobs... Funny... They can freely contact any outsourcer listed on the BB anyway! True. Problem comes only in the case of direct clients; I think those ones should be kept in private 100%! Our assumption is that people are taking this into consideration. Please evaluate your own business situation and display (and request) only those WWA entries that make sense for you in your business. And for the colleagues who still feel insecure or don't need any kind of references, there is an option to hide the entire WWA feature. What else to ask for? Right. Use of WWA is optional. Thanks for posting. | | | Please implement this | Mar 6, 2018 |
Ritu Bhanot wrote: Hi Everyone, Well, I just discovered one negative side of WWA rating and am quite upset about it and I don't think I'll ever ask another client to give WWA rating. One of my clients (who has given me a WWA rating) called me and I was shocked to learn that someone I don't even know (I heard her name for the first time) had called them telling that I had given their number to her. Luckily, I've been working with them for over 4-5 years now so they called me, but I'd like to ask that person is it the right thing to do? FYI I've not mentioned the name of this outsourcer anywhere else. So the only way this person could know that I worked for them was through the WWA rating. And I'd like to request Henry and His team to kindly give us the possibility of hiding outsourcer name in WWA. It's possible in Project History and I wish it was also possible in WWA. Glad that my biggest outsourcers don't figure there. Thank you for your attention. Ritu I'm necroing this thread to request that this option be implemented, as it already is for outsourcers' feedback on projects entered in the Project History. | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Negative Side of WWA : Possibility of Hiding the Outsourcer Name CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |