We need to make Disagree system more complex and perhaps more unbiassed Thread poster: Igor Boyko
|
|---|
Igor Boyko 
Russian Federation
Local time: 18:31
English to Russian
+ ...
Recently I answered question and got Disagree from one of the peers.
As for me - it was unjustified Disagree based on personal opinion.
All my arguments in comments were useless.
Disagree remained.
My version of answer was supported by other peer, who also supported my position: we are translators and we should deliver the idea from original text to the reader. We should not soften it because of some (let's say) vulgarity (existing or imagined). Or for some other reasons.... See more Recently I answered question and got Disagree from one of the peers.
As for me - it was unjustified Disagree based on personal opinion.
All my arguments in comments were useless.
Disagree remained.
My version of answer was supported by other peer, who also supported my position: we are translators and we should deliver the idea from original text to the reader. We should not soften it because of some (let's say) vulgarity (existing or imagined). Or for some other reasons.
As result I felt abused.
I could start my Holy War - seek the answers of my 'Disagreetor' and find among them several that deserve Disagree for the same reason: I do not like them or form of them or whatever.
But I think that most of us find such approach as something deeply wrong and unconstructive.
I think I found solution to such situations.
What we need is more complex Disagree system.
Every peer should get the possibility to Agree (place some +) or Disagree (-) with Disagree (maybe with exception of the peer who got original Disagree).
And if Disagree got more "+" than "-" - it will not be counted as valid one.
And peer will not get Non-Pro for it.
What do you think about it? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Vanda Nissen
Australia
Local time: 01:31
Member (2008)
English to Russian
+ ...
I like Igor's idea. The system of ''disagrees'' requires some elaboration. If the answer has been supported by peers who specialise in the field and receives one ''disagree'' from someone whose experience in the field is not that impressive, it certainly should be of a less value than those ''agrees''.
| | | | | Disagrees don't prevent you from getting points | Dec 1, 2016 |
A Disagree rating doesn't normally prevent you from getting points. Your answer can still be chosen as the most helpful—that is, if the asker bothers to rate the answers. (Remember, it's not really about correctness as such!) Yes, sometimes it can indeed deprive you of the deserved recognition, but in my experience, if your answers make any sense, it doesn't happen that often anyway, so it's no use fretting over stuff like that. Basically, I see KudoZ as a game (and a numbers game at that)—a... See more A Disagree rating doesn't normally prevent you from getting points. Your answer can still be chosen as the most helpful—that is, if the asker bothers to rate the answers. (Remember, it's not really about correctness as such!) Yes, sometimes it can indeed deprive you of the deserved recognition, but in my experience, if your answers make any sense, it doesn't happen that often anyway, so it's no use fretting over stuff like that. Basically, I see KudoZ as a game (and a numbers game at that)—and this attitude is the one that has allowed me to return to KudoZ participation which I stopped at one point because of the atmosphere that I saw as toxic. Since the return, I hardly ever use the Disagree rating, leaving it for the situations where it's absolutely necessary.
And generally, the more I think about KudoZ as a whole, the more convinced I am that given the business model of ProZ, KudoZ cannot really be improved significantly without introducing a different set of issues for a questionable net gain.
(BTW, I wonder if I know the person who gave you that Disagree... Does he/she have a five-letter user name?) ▲ Collapse
| | | | The Misha
Local time: 11:31
Russian to English
+ ...
That people disagree with you is not the end of the world. In fact, I think everyone who willingly posts anything on a public forum implicitly assumes the risk that someone, somewhere will disagree. That's natural. That's what makes us people, for better or worse. If anything, for you personally it means someone actually noticed (hurray!!!) what you said. Brace yourself: you are suddenly popular:)
In case you didn't notice, all agreements and disagreements are "based on personal op... See more That people disagree with you is not the end of the world. In fact, I think everyone who willingly posts anything on a public forum implicitly assumes the risk that someone, somewhere will disagree. That's natural. That's what makes us people, for better or worse. If anything, for you personally it means someone actually noticed (hurray!!!) what you said. Brace yourself: you are suddenly popular:)
In case you didn't notice, all agreements and disagreements are "based on personal opinion". As long as your opponent makes his or her disagreement known in a civilized enough manner and sticks to the issue at hand rather than acts on some personal animosity, it is his or her God-given right to do that. Heck, that's what the Disagree button is for, don't you think?
And just out of curiosity, why do you feel "abused" by someone disagreeing with you? Or is it really the sign of the times - now on both sides of the Atlantic? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Andy Watkinson
Spain
Local time: 17:31
Member
Catalan to English
+ ...
| More complex.....really? | Dec 2, 2016 |
Igor Boyko wrote:
Every peer should get the possibility to Agree (place some +) or Disagree (-) with Disagree (maybe with exception of the peer who got original Disagree).
What do you think about it?
(Tom (TiL), I'm going to use "agrees/disagrees" as convenient shorthand - don't shoot
I realise what you propose comes as a reaction to a perceived misuse of the Disagree button, but I do think you fail to realise that Agrees also present exactly the same problem.
I've lost count of the number of times I've seen an answer be accepted because (popular) colleague X suggested an apparently correct, but fundamentally flawed, answer that was then verily buried underneath a mountain of agrees and unwittingly accepted.
By definition, the asker doesn't know the answer; so they're (often) clueless, pressed into choosing an answer, they see the one proposed by colleague X appears which seems to be right given the overwhelmingly number of Agrees it's harvested, Solomon Asch then puts the boot in and hey presto, another wrong glossary entry.
By that token, peers should also be able to qualify any Agree by saying that they agree/disagree with it.
That way lies madness.....
[Edited at 2016-12-02 03:46 GMT]
| | | | Igor Boyko
Russian Federation
Local time: 18:31
English to Russian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | 5-letter name | Dec 2, 2016 |
I prefer to use Neutral, unless I see that wrong answer can damage the translation and my Neutral mark is ignored.
Artem Vakhitov wrote:
(BTW, I wonder if I know the person who gave you that Disagree... Does he/she have a five-letter user name?)
Yep, but I think it's pure coincidence
| | | | Vanda Nissen
Australia
Local time: 01:31
Member (2008)
English to Russian
+ ...
| It is all about manners | Dec 2, 2016 |
It is fine to use ''disagree'' (also I preferer ''neutral'') but you need to add a reason for doing so.
It is not always the case that the asker does not know the answer. For me it is often about checking my own version, plus common sense also counts:).
| | | | ph-b (X)
France
Local time: 17:31
English to French
+ ...
Artem Vakhitov wrote:
...I see KudoZ as a game (and a numbers game at that)—and this attitude is the one that has allowed me to return to KudoZ participation which I stopped at one point because of the atmosphere that I saw as toxic. Since the return, I hardly ever use the Disagree rating, leaving it for the situations where it's absolutely necessary.
And generally, the more I think about KudoZ as a whole, the more convinced I am that given the business model of ProZ, KudoZ cannot really be improved significantly without introducing a different set of issues for a questionable net gain...
Andy Watkinson wrote:
I've lost count of the number of times I've seen an answer be accepted because (popular) colleague X suggested an apparently correct, but fundamentally flawed, answer that was then verily buried underneath a mountain of agrees and unwittingly accepted.
| | |
|
|
|
| Live with it! | Dec 2, 2016 |
Sorry to be so blunt, but after very many Kudoz questions answered and many Disagrees despite lengthy explanations and solid examples, I have learnt to live with the occasional Disagree. Other people's disagreement with our point of view about a translation is a normal thing.
What matters in Kudoz is the help you offer the asker, and not whether other people agree or disagree. In your explanation, explain your decision in detail and document your expertise, with solid examples, refe... See more Sorry to be so blunt, but after very many Kudoz questions answered and many Disagrees despite lengthy explanations and solid examples, I have learnt to live with the occasional Disagree. Other people's disagreement with our point of view about a translation is a normal thing.
What matters in Kudoz is the help you offer the asker, and not whether other people agree or disagree. In your explanation, explain your decision in detail and document your expertise, with solid examples, references to trustworthy works and authors on the same matter, etc. If you are sure of your answer, why is an unfunded Disagree a problem?
May I also add that, in translation, there is no right or wrong answer: it all depends on adequacy, acceptability, skopos, connotations, pragmatics, balancing of constraints, and a host of other factors. Based upon the premises and goals of a job (either expressed by the client or assumed by the translator), two completey different translations could be equally correct. Translation is not Math, not even in the simplest of the sentences! ▲ Collapse
| | | | Sheila Wilson
Spain
Local time: 16:31
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Not worth losing sleep over | Dec 2, 2016 |
Some people start off using Disagree wherever they don't entirely agree. Most get the message that it's considered impolite and aggressive. Some don't. That's life.
I reserve the Disagree for cases where the answer may sound plausible but would definitely be a mistranslation. For something that isn't a good translation, I use Neutral. For something entirely inappropriate in the given context, plucked from a dictionary, I usually just sigh and leave. But occasionally I put my teacher... See more Some people start off using Disagree wherever they don't entirely agree. Most get the message that it's considered impolite and aggressive. Some don't. That's life.
I reserve the Disagree for cases where the answer may sound plausible but would definitely be a mistranslation. For something that isn't a good translation, I use Neutral. For something entirely inappropriate in the given context, plucked from a dictionary, I usually just sigh and leave. But occasionally I put my teacher's hat on and get my red pen to it.
There are far worse things on this site that need fixing, so I think we'll all have to learn to live with a little harsh treatment from insensitive peers. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Premium✍️
United States
Local time: 08:31
Member (2006)
English to French
+ ...
| Abuse of the Disagree Function in En>FR Pair | Dec 3, 2016 |
Artem Vakhitov wrote:
A Disagree rating doesn't normally prevent you from getting points. Your answer can still be chosen as the most helpful—that is, if the asker bothers to rate the answers. (Remember, it's not really about correctness as such!).
Hi Artem,
I would agree but if the asker is not proficient in both the source and the target languages, s/he might not be competent enough to make the correct choice or use a sophisticated reasoning. S/he might be intimidated even by the dreaded RED alarm... I know of 1 or 2 askers who once commented privately that they felt compelled to choose another answer because the one that was the most correct and closest to her context had 1 or 2 Disagrees. In fact in the EN>FR pair, there are a couple of notorious participants (non-native mind you) who have systematically and consistently abused and perverted the 'Disagree' function even when there is NO mistranslation, NO misspellings, NO errors of any kind in an answerer's response. Our disagreeing "friend" would comment "Yes... BUT I "THINK, and based on his "thinking" alone, answerers are gratified wih his 'Disagree. One of them, a self-appointed expert in his non-native French, comes in regularly to question the text, the writer's linguistic abilities and/or knowledge, to imagine further scenarios where none is warranted, to posit remote possibilities other than what is given, invent a ton of non-applicable hypotheses to flaunt his own assumptions. Just 2 days ago, he kept coming back to a question, and he changed his ´Neutral´to ´Disagrees´just to prevail when his ´Neutral' point was not taken too seriously... AFter I agreed with another answer, he came back again to change his other ´Neutral´to a 'Disagree' this time. Then he comes back a dozen more times to lecture and hijack the Discussion thread to talk about his own feelings and his own assumptions, not germane to the case in point..
I don't think living a couple of years in France (or in any French-speaking country) gives the foreigner an automatic expertise in the numerous subtleties and intricacies of that language or a license to continually belittle and put words or thoughts that the authors have not explicitly expressed.
I have seen time and time again how these non-native intruders come to create havoc in this pair, insult native speakers and pretend to know French better than these highly educated and experienced French native professionals.
So to recap, those who abuse the ´Disagree´feature do it in the express intention to intimidate, terrorize answerers and askers alike and to preclude the former from participating in their relentless contest toward more points and their burning urges to stay highly perched in KudoZ rankings.
They use the 'Disagree' feature as a domination tool, as a deterrent and as an intimidation tactic.
[Edited at 2016-12-03 02:54 GMT]
| | | | | Disagree with Igor | Dec 5, 2016 |
Or more specifically: I disagree with Igor's idea and I explain why (and I hope Igor won't take it personnally, more on this later).
The rules have been misused, let's create other rules to avoid this?
We do hear that all too often from politics or else; however simple and straightforward rules are often useful and all what's needed.
Kudoz answers are not our pride and joy, they are not the works of our life; sometimes a few seconds of our brilliant mind, sometime... See more Or more specifically: I disagree with Igor's idea and I explain why (and I hope Igor won't take it personnally, more on this later).
The rules have been misused, let's create other rules to avoid this?
We do hear that all too often from politics or else; however simple and straightforward rules are often useful and all what's needed.
Kudoz answers are not our pride and joy, they are not the works of our life; sometimes a few seconds of our brilliant mind, sometimes a number of minutes of skillfull research, rather often just an opinion requested by a colleague in doubt.
The matter is questionable, this is precisely why the question has been raised.
Different people may have different opinions, each of them is worth what it is worth: an opinion, more or less supported, more or less expert, better or worse expressed or explained, not a dissertation, this is an answer to a question.
As explained in recent comments, Kudoz are a way for professionals to get answers from other pros; they are also a great way for pros to demonstrate to their peers or prospective customers how smart they are or how silly they can be.
We all know what a presss release is, however I work on a machine that has a "release" button, so the translation of the label "PRESS RELEASE" is not what you can expect. If I raise the question "is 'press' a noun or a verb in 'press release'" you know what I will get.
So we have a rating system for answers and it is abused, you want a rating system for the ratings.
My opinion (worth what it's worth like the one of any reader) is that the root cause of abuse is the person, not the system.
Will rating the ratings prevent anyone from abusing the first or the second level? I guess no, so I believe that it will be more complicated and won't address the root cause.
About the dual purpose of Kudoz, getting answers and shining, consider this point of view:
- did your answer enlight the asker or give valuable insights and arguments?
- did the peer's "Disagree" bring any value to the asker or to the discussion?
- you gave an answer and supported it with arguments, someone disagreed with no reason or bad reasons, who looks smart and who looks silly?
Some people understand "Disagree" as "I don"t like you" or "You stupid"; this destroys the atmosphere and keeps good answerers away from the forums; we have been provided 3 levels agree, disagree or neutral, not using all of them limits the value of the whole system.
Let's agree or disagree with the CONTENT OF THE ANSWER, not with the person.
Complicating Kudoz rules? Igor has an idea, I prefer simplicity, we discuss our points and nobody looks silly. I don't like either the idea of the holy war but I guess we will agree on that, we have jobs and better things to do.
By the way I don't think we need an other way to tell colleagues or readers how silly some answerers or commenters can be: they do the job so well by themselves! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
DZiW (X)
Ukraine
English to Russian
+ ...
Didier, you're talking--there're always abusers even of the most 'fair, comprehensive, democratic, and complex' rules. And values.
Perhaps, it makes sense to use a ratio--weight answers and replies, say, according to one's specialization: if one is working in the field, then his worth is relevant KudoZ points divided by 10 (yet in [1..100] range), if not specialized or other language pairs, then it's .5, and so on; may be 'verified' members could get +5 ratio points or something. Al... See more Didier, you're talking--there're always abusers even of the most 'fair, comprehensive, democratic, and complex' rules. And values.
Perhaps, it makes sense to use a ratio--weight answers and replies, say, according to one's specialization: if one is working in the field, then his worth is relevant KudoZ points divided by 10 (yet in [1..100] range), if not specialized or other language pairs, then it's .5, and so on; may be 'verified' members could get +5 ratio points or something. Also it's possible to enable only other answerers to 'Disagree', or require a link or an explanation, whatever.
Yet still there will be not happy or offended individuals) ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » We need to make Disagree system more complex and perhaps more unbiassed | 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! » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
