| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] | Clearing up PRO/non-PRO confusion Thread poster: Neil Coffey
|
|---|
Aniello Scognamiglio (X) 
Germany
Local time: 17:43
English to German
+ ...
| If ProZ is supposed to be a professional portal for translators | Jan 23, 2010 |
Henry Hinds wrote:
My opinion is that PRO/non-PRO should just be eliminated; it appears to have little significance. How many others agree?
there should not be non-pro KudoZ questions at all
Fully agree, Henry!
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 16:43
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Why are there non-professional questions? | Jan 23, 2010 |
It's a professional translation portal, but ProZ is bombarded with questions that a professional translator would not waste his/her (or our) time asking.
So where do these questions come from?
They come from non-professionals who take five minutes to register and can then ask many, many questions without a second thought. And from those who call themselves professional translators, who take on jobs in language pairs they don't fully understand, in technical subjects wh... See more It's a professional translation portal, but ProZ is bombarded with questions that a professional translator would not waste his/her (or our) time asking.
So where do these questions come from?
They come from non-professionals who take five minutes to register and can then ask many, many questions without a second thought. And from those who call themselves professional translators, who take on jobs in language pairs they don't fully understand, in technical subjects where they don't have a clue, and commit to deadlines that are totally impracticable. They, too, inundate the site with their questions, knowing they can save themselves a lot of time that way.
Surely, professional translators will be prepared to pay for help with difficult words, won't they? Many of us pay, through our membership subscriptions - maybe the time has come for everyone to pay. Of course, dispensing with the "basic site user" status may be a little too dramatic - I know many users are infrequent visitors who would not get good value from an annual subscription, but who nevertheless use the site facilities in a civil, professional manner.
But why not ask basic site users to pay for the KudoZ questions they ask? A per-question fee could be paid in KudoZ or Brownie points or, if necessary, in hard currency. I seem to remember that a similar payment scheme is already in place for access to the Blue Board.
It would still represent good value to basic site users who would get quality help for their occasional problem translations. But it should stop some of the site spongers firing off questions before they've even opened a dictionary. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Fuad Yahya wrote: Mar 31, 2005 Marcus Malabad wrote:
We will always have newbies and assorted wannabes asking nonsensical questions. But if serious members and pros were to STOP answering these questions, then the well will dry up and newbies will be discouraged.
For people to stop answering silly questions, ProZ first needs to rededicate KudoZ unequivocally to the mission of being a space on the web for collegial consultation among professionals, not for silliness -- and silliness needs to be defined and concretized by specific examples. The structure of what is allowed and what is not needs to be put in place so that when a question is squashed or when the asker is directed to conduct his/her search professionally (start by consulting dictionaries, conducting online corroborative searches, consulting the KudoZ archives, etc.), this response to the asker would be seen for what it is, i.e., implementation of the KudoZ vision. Currently, dealing with irritating askers is perceived by many as being more irritating than the silly questions.
http://www.proz.com/forum/kudoz/30873-restrict_kudoz_askers_working_into_non_native_languages-page2.html?action=Reply"e=1&post_id=215078&start=15
| | | | Ron Willems
Netherlands
Local time: 17:43
Member
English to Dutch
| Nice one: confusion cleared up! | Jan 23, 2010 |
Thanks Enrique, for clearing up the confusion and adding a confirmation prompt to clarify the current definition of non-PRO to those who want to change a question to non-PRO.
A recurring misunderstanding and source of irritation should be resolved now:
- Several KudoZ users were voting questions non-PRO because these questions are non-PRO according to their own, personal definition (or their own perception o
... See more Thanks Enrique, for clearing up the confusion and adding a confirmation prompt to clarify the current definition of non-PRO to those who want to change a question to non-PRO.
A recurring misunderstanding and source of irritation should be resolved now:
- Several KudoZ users were voting questions non-PRO because these questions are non-PRO according to their own, personal definition (or their own perception of the "official" definition), such as "easily found in a dictionary / on Google" or "too easy".
- Several askers were taking offense at these re-qualifications, because they checked the currently valid ProZ-definition and then felt insulted because their question got compared to silly questions of the "I love you" variety.
It's simply is a good thing to make sure everybody uses the same definition, to avoid misunderstandings and irritations. That definition should, obviously, be the "official" definition as determined by ProZ.
Leaves us with the 1 million dollar question: is that definition adequate?
Perhaps it's time to change the definition, and to have a good, clear discussion about that.
In the meantime, let's use the definion that we have. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Rob Grayson
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:43
French to English
| Time is of the essence | Jan 24, 2010 |
Ron Willems wrote:
Leaves us with the 1 million dollar question: is that definition adequate?
In my opinion, nowhere near – at least not if Proz wants to be anything like a professional community. If it keeps and enforces the current definition of pro vs. non-pro questions, it shouldn't be surprised when more and more of the remaining serious professionals drift away and KudoZ becomes nothing more than a place for those with little or no linguistic competence to get "help" from those who have nothing better to do. At that point, perhaps the site should change its name to one that more accurately reflects its identity as a community – such as amateurz.com.
Perhaps it's time to change the definition, and to have a good, clear discussion about that.
In the meantime, let's use the definition that we have.
I see nothing suggesting that the site owners and staff see any need to change the definition – apart from to encourage users to dumb the site down even further, which I believe is the implicit effect of this latest new definition. And the clock is ticking – the proz community will soon be a shadow of its former self and it will be too late to do anything about it.
Rob
| | | | | It's all about inclusion (or something) | Jan 25, 2010 |
Rob Grayson wrote:
if Proz wants to be anything like a professional community.
It doesn't. Or rather, it was said in a thread many moons ago (wish I had kept a link/bookmark, but I didn't) that (I paraphrase) no-one would ever get turned away*, so it is not exclusively professional.
(* not to be confused with being chucked out )
dumb the site down even further, (...) the proz community will soon be a shadow of its former self and it will be too late to do anything about it.
I would argue that time has already passed. It was already a shadow 2 years ago, if not before. It's not just the Qs in kudoz. You get people asking what an invoice is for these days (not the technical details, just "do I need to send one and if so, what goes on it") and this is apparently a website for professionals.
There will come a time, Rob, when the likes of us will be doing our reputations more harm than good by being publicly active on here.
| | | | Rob Grayson
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:43
French to English
| Is there no hope? | Jan 25, 2010 |
Charlie Bavington wrote: Rob Grayson wrote:
if Proz wants to be anything like a professional community... It doesn't.
In that case, as I said earlier, words and figures don't agree – proz should stop trying to overtly pretend it's a professional community. It ought to recognise it's a duck and stop trying to sound like anything else...
There will come a time, Rob, when the likes of us will be doing our reputations more harm than good by being publicly active on here.
Alas, I fear you may be right.
Rob
| | | | Ildiko Santana
United States
Local time: 08:43
Member (2002)
Hungarian to English
+ ...
MODERATOR | easy points for easy answers -- and an easy solution | Jan 25, 2010 |
Stéphanie Soudais wrote:
I believe that the problem is not that askers ask basic questions (or questions without context). The problem is that people keep on replying to them. Doing so, such askers are not encouraged to use other resources (or to explain what the context is).
Bingo!! As long as points can be earned so quickly and easily by answering non-pro (easy/ridiculous/etc.) questions, we will always see those who reply, regardless of the difficulty level. The same applies to answering questions with absolutely no context (while complaining about the lack of context, mind you). Why? Because we are human. However, I believe there is a way to put an end to this practice. If it is not an option to drop the pro / non-pro classification altogether, then let's at least implement a system where ALL non-pro questions+answers automatically end up in the "not-for-points" category.
; )
| | |
|
|
|
| PRO and non-PRO points | Jan 25, 2010 |
ildiko wrote:
If it is not an option to drop the pro / non-pro classification altogether, then let's at least implement a system where ALL non-pro questions+answers automatically end up in the "not-for-points" category.
Hi ildiko,
In fact, points earned by answering non-PRO questions are not used for ranking purposes. Only the PRO points are meaningful in KudoZ leaders tables and directory searches.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | Rob Grayson
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:43
French to English
| As if that makes any difference... | Jan 25, 2010 |
In fact, points earned by answering non-PRO questions are not used for ranking purposes. Only the PRO points are meaningful in KudoZ leaders tables and directory searches.
But since so many frankly inane questions are posted as pro, and unfortunately quite a lot of them stay that way – which will only be encouraged by the recent decision to further dumb down the definition of non-pro – there is still ample opportunity for those with more flexible standards to pick up pro points by posting slapdash answers to hopeless questions.
Rob
| | | | hazmatgerman (X)
Local time: 17:43
English to German
statement of Jan 23 concerning proper English rendering of German terms I, as a German n.s., can fully support.
[Edited at 2010-02-03 18:17 GMT]
| | | |
Rob Grayson wrote: Charlie Bavington wrote:
There will come a time, Rob, when the likes of us will be doing our reputations more harm than good by being publicly active on here.
Alas, I fear you may be right. Rob
That day edges ever nearer... probably time to duck under the radar again for a while.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Clearing up PRO/non-PRO confusion | 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 » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
