| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Voters for pro/non-pro should also provide an answer or peer comment Thread poster: jacana54 (X)
|
|---|
Germaine 
Canada
Local time: 18:43
English to French
+ ...
| And it goes further... | Aug 7, 2010 |
I agree that the Pro/Non-Pro classification is now pointless. To give it back its "golden letters", each of us would have to swear to stop at the "vote Non-Pro" option after reading a question and take a moment to think about it. But doing it takes a discipline that I, for one, don't have. In fact, I realized only recently that the option was available. And I probably have realized it before... and forgotten... and so on.
Sure, there is room for mistakes; Eutychus' example speaks f... See more I agree that the Pro/Non-Pro classification is now pointless. To give it back its "golden letters", each of us would have to swear to stop at the "vote Non-Pro" option after reading a question and take a moment to think about it. But doing it takes a discipline that I, for one, don't have. In fact, I realized only recently that the option was available. And I probably have realized it before... and forgotten... and so on.
Sure, there is room for mistakes; Eutychus' example speaks for itself. But at the end, the Pro/Non-Pro status doesn't really matter since the answer will still be available for whoever seeks it. To me, the invisibility of the "disagree" option is likely to create a more serious problem. Facing the few who are almost aggressive in defending their answer, there is a mass of pros way too nice to risk a "disagree" on answers that are obviously wrong. Sure, there's room for mistakes... again! But since the asker is putting his trust in the pros, doesn't he/she deserve some pro guts? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Voting a question non-pro has more to do with the asker than with the question | Aug 8, 2010 |
A lot of people have been criticising Proz in the area of low rates offered by agencies.
However a 2nd trend is that every 5th-grader with a German Shepherd or access to Google Translate seems to start translating clinical trial texts or texts about nuclear power plants from English into German or other languages. These people have no understanding of the topic they translate and these people are at least as dangerous to the professional translators as agencies paying peanuts.
... See more A lot of people have been criticising Proz in the area of low rates offered by agencies.
However a 2nd trend is that every 5th-grader with a German Shepherd or access to Google Translate seems to start translating clinical trial texts or texts about nuclear power plants from English into German or other languages. These people have no understanding of the topic they translate and these people are at least as dangerous to the professional translators as agencies paying peanuts.
It is easy to spot these people, they normaly have an empty profile, not answered any questions and they always shoot series of questions which to everybody with even the most minimum knowledge in the area are dead easy to answer.
Independent of the Proz rules I have been voting these questions as being non-pro and from time to time I still do it. It is my way of telling the asker "in my opinion you should not have accepted this document". I know it can happen to everybody that suddenly a paragraph pops up in your text that is out of your specialty. Happened to me - happened to others, and a lot of people let you know "I have a text and it contains a section that is out of my specialty -- please help". Nothing wrong with that.
I noticed that one of the biggest LSP has been banned from posting jobs on Proz. They were well known for paying peanuts. What do you believe they are doing now? - they are hiring even cheaper translators via other channels and these people are than asking basic questions here. So it is us who answer every "non-pro" question in highly specialized fields who are supporting the down drift in rates.
Think about it when you answer the next question that was obviously asked by a non-pro translator.
By the way, the rules regarding the Kudoz questions (which prevent the community from sorting out several things) and the incredible GBK were the reasons why I stopped answering Kudoz questions a long time ago.
[Edited at 2010-08-08 06:26 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| Are you trying to vote *askers* non-pro? | Aug 8, 2010 |
The woes of downward drift in rates are widely known and I don't doubt that the practices you cite exist.
However, I think you're on dangerous ground trying to decide on others' professional capabilities, for a simple reason - how does one define a professional translator?
As pointed out at a ProZ conference I attended some time ago, the uncomfortable fact is that translation is not a "profession" in the historic sense of the word. In the Middle Ages, translators did no... See more The woes of downward drift in rates are widely known and I don't doubt that the practices you cite exist.
However, I think you're on dangerous ground trying to decide on others' professional capabilities, for a simple reason - how does one define a professional translator?
As pointed out at a ProZ conference I attended some time ago, the uncomfortable fact is that translation is not a "profession" in the historic sense of the word. In the Middle Ages, translators did not organise in guilds or the like, as lawyers and doctors did. Which is just as well for me, because translation is a second career for me (and taking a quick look at your profile, it looks like it is for you too). We're not alone, either - at a pow-wow a few years back with about a dozen people at it, it was a first career for only one of those present. The nearest thing I have to a professional qualification is a 25-year-old degree in French literature from a UK university. I don't think that makes me "non-pro", though.
Or should "pro" be rated by earnings? Does making the majority of one's living from translation make one a professional translator? Perhaps, but I'm not sure that's the best way of measuring translation ability (one would hope the better ones made more money, but who can be sure? Perhaps some brilliant translators are hopeless at keeping their invoices in order...).
If I had to choose, I'd say that a good way of defining 'professional' for these purposes would be behaviour. There may be clear instances where a "non-pro" tag is justified, but running round swatting every other question with a "non-pro" tag and no explanations doesn't appear to me to be an example of such behaviour and as my example shows, the "non-pro" tag can point to the tagger's ignorance as often as it points to their skill. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Giving an explanation is not allowed | Aug 8, 2010 |
Eutychus wrote:
There may be clear instances where a "non-pro" tag is justified, but running round swatting every other question with a "non-pro" tag and no explanations doesn't appear to me to be an example of such behaviour and as my example shows, the "non-pro" tag can point to the tagger's ignorance as often as it points to their skill.
Kudos Rulez prevent that you give an explanation, see below:
Commentary on askers or answerers, and their postings or decisions to post, is not allowed. Comments or insinuations concerning an answerer's or asker's experience or profile, his/her decision to post a certain question or answer, grade or close a question in a certain way, make a certain glossary entry, etc., are strictly prohibited (whether posted publicly, made directly to the person in question, or made to another site user).
I did not talk about "every other question" (I said from "time to time") and I did not talk about the "tagger's skills" - these are your words - not mine. I also do not want to get drawn into a discussion about who is a professional translator or not, what I said is:
"It is easy to spot these people, they normaly have an empty profile, not answered any questions and they always shoot series of questions which to everybody with even the most minimum knowledge in the area are dead easy to answer."
I do not believe in the Proz rule that everything more difficult then " I love you" is professional and I do also not believe that everybody who is able to create the most basic profile in Proz is a professional translator.
These are my personal opinions and my conclusion was to stop answering Kudoz questions. I have not critizied anybody answering these questions, I just expressed my view that if we do support this behaviour, we might be supporting a behaviour that damages the profession.
@Eutychus
I had a look at your questions that were voted "non-pro". I would not have voted "non-pro" in such a case, a) because I know how difficult it is to translated menus, b) because you do not meet my conditions for being a non-professional".
So yes, the system has its weak points, and it happened to you back in 2007.
I also had a look a the 2nd question, and in fact, I might have voted it "non-pro" too. All three answers do describe the same fact, but the asker did just not understand the source "filles règlées". If he understood the source, it would have been a question of finding the right English expression and not of " what does "règlées" mean".
If somebody who translates a text for a clinical trial does not understand these basic but "safety relevant" terms, he/she should not do it and in my opinion, we should have a means in Proz to express this opinion.
[Edited at 2010-08-08 08:58 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| KudoZ is like Wikipedia | Aug 8, 2010 |
Thanks for taking the time to give such a complete response.
If somebody who translates a text for a clinical trial does not understand these basic but "safety relevant" terms, he/she should not do it and in my opinion, we should have a means in Proz to express this opinion.
Again, I understand your concerns, but where it all falls down for me is the "we" above, or if you prefer how one defines "us" (serious, professionally-behaving, hopefully more-or-less-competent translators working for decent rates in fields in which we feel competent) and "them" (fly-by-night, cheapskate, price-gouging amateurs who will have a crack at any text). And as things stand, either category of person can vote "non-pro" without any need to explain their reasoning.
To my mind KudoZ is like Wikipedia, "the encyclopedia anyone can edit"; like Wikipedia, this is both its huge strength and its weakness. Of course some safeguards can be put in place, but at the end of the day it's "let the buyer (or in this case, user) beware". For my part, I use KudoZ much the way I use Wikipedia: a great resource provided one is aware of its limitations.
In my view, since the basis of KudoZ is that anyone can contribute, the adverse effects of the use of the "pro" / "non-pro" option without supporting grounds outweigh the benefits. It appears as an arbitrary decision, one user's word against another's.
| | | |
@Eutychus
There is nothing to explain. Voting Non-Pro by definition means that the term can be found in any dictionary.
Possible reasons given for this decision would be: "It's easy", "In any dictionary", "Do some research before you post", etc., none of which would be useful to anyone.
However, most of us will enter... /.
| | | | David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| Dictionaries do not a translation make | Aug 10, 2010 |
Certainly in my language pair, one can no longer post "[term] (here)" or the like. Many times a word can be in the dictionary, but what the dictionary cannot provide is context or register. In fact I think some of the most annoying "non-pro" votes I've seen have been on this sort of issue, and they're ones in which the dictionary definition is pretty much useless in my opnion. The on... See more Certainly in my language pair, one can no longer post "[term] (here)" or the like. Many times a word can be in the dictionary, but what the dictionary cannot provide is context or register. In fact I think some of the most annoying "non-pro" votes I've seen have been on this sort of issue, and they're ones in which the dictionary definition is pretty much useless in my opnion. The ones I've referred to on this thread are pretty good examples, I think.
If there was a space to provide reasons for voting non-pro and people abused or failed to use it, that would say something about their skills and motives. If it was intelligently used, it would be an opportunity for discerning non-pro voters to prove their worth. As it is, we have no way of telling the two breeds apart. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Neil Coffey
United Kingdom
Local time: 23:43
French to English
+ ...
| Let's sing from the same hymn sheet... | Aug 10, 2010 |
Siegfried Armbruster wrote:
Independent of the Proz rules I have been voting these questions as being non-pro and from time to time I still do it. It is my way of telling the asker "in my opinion you should not have accepted this document".
So whilst I admire you for fighting the cause, that isn't waht the Pro/Non-pro categorisation is for. There's much wrong with this classification and with the points system in general, but let's at least start by sticking to the rules, and then we can push for having those rules changed if necessary.
If you feel so strongly about a person's decision to take on a text that you feel they're not competent to translate, why use the Pro/Non-pro classification as a tacit form of backbiting-- why not just send the person an e-mail and tell them what you think? We're supposed to be adults here...
[Edited at 2010-08-10 06:00 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Definition of non-PRO | Aug 10, 2010 |
Sangro wrote:
@Eutychus
There is nothing to explain. Voting Non-Pro by definition means that the term can be found in any dictionary.
Possible reasons given for this decision would be: "It's easy", "In any dictionary", "Do some research before you post", etc., none of which would be useful to anyone.
However, most of us will enter... /.
In fact this is wrong. There is a FAQ on this issue that defines:
Non-PRO questions are those that can be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
This definition is also presented each time an user select to vote a question as non-PRO.
There is also an article where this issue is discussed in more detail.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| So can this be changed? | Aug 10, 2010 |
Thank you Enrique.
How could the plea for adding grounds for grading non-pro be taken into account?
| | | | | There would be only one reason | Aug 10, 2010 |
Eutychus wrote:
Thank you Enrique.
How could the plea for adding grounds for grading non-pro be taken into account?
Hi Eutychus,
I don't think this kind of information would be needed because the only valid reason for voting a questions non-PRO would be "I consider that this question could be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary."
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| But that's clearly not the case | Aug 10, 2010 |
Take a look back at one of the examples I referred to upthread, here. Please bear in mind that this is an old post, I really don't care this particular term was voted non-pro, it's just I think that it illustrates the issues being discussed here well.
Just because a non-pro voter A thinks "any bilingual person would know that" here. Please bear in mind that this is an old post, I really don't care this particular term was voted non-pro, it's just I think that it illustrates the issues being discussed here well.
Just because a non-pro voter A thinks "any bilingual person would know that" does not make them right. As it happens, in the above post there is a lot of discussion, including by the people who voted non-pro, so reading the post subsequently shows you their arguments in favour of non-pro (basically, they thought it was about a person called Bob and not something called a 'bob') - and why they were wrong.
I think I'm about as bilingual as they come (my Kudoz stats are almost identical both ways in my language pair) and there's not a lot I would consider 'any' bilingual person would know. And more often than not, when I think I know best, others prove me wrong. It's all part of the learning process and I find following discussions on issues like these one of the great riches of KudoZ, even years on from the original question - something a simple "non-pro"label can never provide.
In summary, I think there's a good case for being required to justify a non-pro rating. It's more useful after the event and would prevent people abusing the function simply to slap down others with no justification. If the rules stand in the way of that, then perhaps changing them should be envisaged. Is there a more appropriate place to suggest that than here? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| It is a very simple issue | Aug 10, 2010 |
I understand your position but I still believe that the only valid reason for voting a questions non-PRO would be that the voter considers that the question could be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
In his article on this issue Henry describes a very clear way of defining this:
When applying the above definitions, detach yourself from your own background/specialisation and think of a - hypothetical - randomly selected bilingual perso ... See more I understand your position but I still believe that the only valid reason for voting a questions non-PRO would be that the voter considers that the question could be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
In his article on this issue Henry describes a very clear way of defining this:
When applying the above definitions, detach yourself from your own background/specialisation and think of a - hypothetical - randomly selected bilingual person. Is it likely that this person would be able to produce a good translation of the term or phrase in question (and in the particular context shown) from the top of his/her head? If not, it is a PRO question.
This is all there is to this issue, a really simple criterion.
Kind regards,
Enrique ▲ Collapse
| | | | David BUICK
Local time: 00:43
Member (2006)
French to English
+ ...
| It's not a clear issue because it the rules are not followed | Aug 11, 2010 |
Thank you for explaining your position.
I understand that the rule is clear. What I'm contesting is whether it's a good rule.
Leaving aside the thorny question of what "bilingualism" actually means and the related issue of biculturalism...
In my experience and by the open admission of some people on this thread, this rule is by no means universally applied and I have never seen anybody sanctioned for not abiding by it. In addition, the way things are set up... See more Thank you for explaining your position.
I understand that the rule is clear. What I'm contesting is whether it's a good rule.
Leaving aside the thorny question of what "bilingualism" actually means and the related issue of biculturalism...
In my experience and by the open admission of some people on this thread, this rule is by no means universally applied and I have never seen anybody sanctioned for not abiding by it. In addition, the way things are set up seems to favour downgrading to non-pro over upgrading to pro. (If there's a way of voting pro after one person someone has voted to class a question non-pro, I haven't found it). Perhaps things are different in other language pairs; I don't know.
I would like to know whether there is a more appropriate forum for seeing whether this rule could not or should not be changed. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | changing and reclassifying again | Aug 11, 2010 |
Eutychus wrote:
(If there's a way of voting pro after one person someone has voted to class a question non-pro, I haven't found it)
Hello Euthycus,
you can find further information about re-classifying a question at
http://www.proz.com/faq/2905#2905
Three votes for either PRO or non-PRO are required to reclassify a question for the first time, and after that it will reverse its status as soon as there are more votes for the change than against it.
For instance a question asked as non-PRO will require three votes to turn it into PRO (voting 3-0). At this point the button will change to "vote non-PRO" and four votes will turn it into non-PRO (voting 4-3). After that it will take two votes to change the question again in either sense (voting 5-4, 6-5, etc.).
If you have fewer than twenty (20) KudoZ PRO points, you will not see this option.
Ciao,
Daniela
| | | | | 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 » Voters for pro/non-pro should also provide an answer or peer comment | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
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 
