| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11] > | Blast your CV to 16000 Agencies? Has anyone tried it? Thread poster: Silvia M.
|
|---|
Tomás said: Sorry, but your emails are unsolicited, bulk, and indiscriminate... therefore spam. Karel Kosman wrote:
what concerns that argument, because of the net any agency located anywhere in the world can work for any customer and send that work to any translator.
So indeed you confirm that you send your 16,000 emails indiscriminately, which makes your email unsolicited, indiscriminate, and bulk, therefore spam.
Your argument about increased competition is very weak. When people disagree with you and with solid arguments, accusing them of being disgrunted is the easy way out, isn't it?
Any agency can already find and contact translators in any language combination in a matter of minutes today, via translator directories and portals, association directories, or by googling, but they first would have a need or wish to do so. All professional translators make sure their customers are happy, get what they need when they need it, and do not have a need to go elsewhere.
What I personally dislike of your "service" is the time you make us all lose by swamping the industry with spam. Of course you do not want to consider yourself a spammer since that would probably make you think of the moral side of things --I assume you are basically an honest person-- and would make you think of letting go of a source of income, but if you think of how your "service" works, hiding yourself from the emails, making sure they do not get classified as spam, mass-sending them automatically, etc., what you do is nothing but spam.
Karel Kosman wrote:
The fact that few are unsubscribing shows that the recipients are happy with this system.
Come on! The fact that nobody uses the unsubscribe link is because everyone knows that replying in any way to spam immediately converts you in the target for more spam.
Karel Kosman wrote:
But 85% of people speak at least two languages...
What? Oh my. Karel, please...
And if your statement was true, which is not:
- 85% of people can understand an agreement... but do now qualify as lawyers.
- 85% of people can drive a car... but do not qualify as mechanics.
- 85% of people can write... but do not qualify as writers.
- 85% of people can cook... but do not qualify as cooks.
- 85% of people can shop... but do not qualify as professional buyers.
- 85% of people can choose an OTC medicine... but do not qualify as doctors.
Maybe you should expand to new lines of business: spamming by industries, emailing all sorts of companies with information from all the 85%'s who think they are qualified for the industry at hand... when they are not.
| | | | Samuel Murray 
Netherlands
Local time: 06:52
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Let's not get too technical | May 22, 2013 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: Karel Kosman wrote: Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
Sorry, but your emails are ... indiscriminate... What concerns that argument, because of the net, any agency located anywhere in the world can work for any customer and send that work to any translator. So indeed you confirm that you send your 16,000 emails indiscriminately...
They are discriminate in the sense that they are not sent to recipients who are not interested in receiving applications from translators. They are indiscriminate in the sense that they are sent to recipients who may not have wanted to receive that particular application from that particular type of translator. All spam is indiscriminate in some sense, and some spam is discriminate in the sense that it is targeted to a specific type of recipient.
There is no smoking gun here. It is not much of an accusation to reveal that the mail drop is indiscriminate -- we all know that all mail drops have elements of indiscriminity. Nobody contests that (in particular the list owner). Even commercial mails that you opted in for are indiscriminate.
...which makes your email unsolicited
In terms of the definition used in most spam laws in EU countries, yes, the mail is unsolicited. But that would apply to any mail sent from a translator to an agency, whether the mail is bulk or not, whether it is discriminate or indiscriminate.
...and bulk
What do you mean by "bulk"? Why would "bulk" be important to the definition of spam? Why would "bulk" be a bad thing?
When people disagree with you and with solid arguments, accusing them of being disgrunted is the easy way out, isn't it?
When people who believe that they have solid arguments are so sensitive to disagreement that they read accusations into the replies to their arguments, making snide comments is the easy way out, isn't it?
Any agency can already find and contact translators in any language combination in a matter of minutes today, via translator directories and portals, association directories, or by googling...
Are you saying that translators should not e-mail agencies at all?
What I personally dislike of your "service" is the time you make us all lose by swamping the industry with spam.
If you were an agency who was on his list, you would have been "swamped" with a grand total of *two* e-mails from him this past month.
Mathematical arguments that count up the number of seconds wasted by all agencies as a whole do not fly because those agencies don't work together as a whole, and the waste is not felt by them as a whole. If an agency loses 10 seconds then it loses only 10 seconds -- not 10 times 16 000 seconds. Only if you're an Earth Mother disciple would such an argument make any sense.
The fact that few are unsubscribing shows that the recipients are happy with this system. The fact that nobody uses the unsubscribe link is because everyone knows that replying in any way to spam immediately converts you in the target for more spam.
I agree that most people who receive spam would not use the unsubscribe link, especially if the spam is a once-off. I myself use the unsubscribe link only if the spam is repetitive and only if the spam appears to be sent from someone who would actually unsubscribe me. A daily viagara or penis enlargement advert I would simply delete, but for an unwanted newsletter about some or other legitimate topic I would actually use the unsubscribe link. I would not use the unsubscribe link if a translator sent me an application, because it is quicker to delete it than to unsubscribe.
However, if we believe that the unsubscribe link is not a reliable measure of how many people prefer not to receive the e-mails, then what other method can we use to measure it?
| | | | | In bulk = in large quantities | May 22, 2013 |
Samuel Murray wrote: Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
So indeed you confirm that you send your 16,000 emails indiscriminately... They are discriminate in the sense that they are not sent to recipients who are not interested in receiving applications from translators.
How would you know they are interested? Karel never asked them. If we say that all who did not say they are not interested are always interested, then we would justify any spam. The spammers who send you the penis enlargement and viagra spam would be entitled to think that you are interested, or you would have said you are not... using their unsubscribe link.
Samuel Murray wrote: Tomas wrote:
...and bulk What do you mean by "bulk"? Why would "bulk" be important to the definition of spam? Why would "bulk" be a bad thing?
Well, 16,000 emails is bulky enough to me. Spam is necessarily linked to sending bulk email. An email from an individual translator to one agency, or to 10, or 20 agencies, is not bulk. 16,000 copies of the same message is bulk, and therefore spam.
Samuel Murray wrote: Tomás wrote:
Any agency can already find and contact translators in any language combination in a matter of minutes today, via translator directories and portals, association directories, or by googling... Are you saying that translators should not e-mail agencies at all?
Exactly. Emailing agencies is pretty useless these days, thanks to spammers. When they need someone in particular, agencies look for them online.
Samuel Murray wrote: Tomás wrote:
What I personally dislike of your "service" is the time you make us all lose by swamping the industry with spam. ... Mathematical arguments that count up the number of seconds wasted by all agencies as a whole do not fly because those agencies don't work together as a whole, and the waste is not felt by them as a whole. If an agency loses 10 seconds then it loses only 10 seconds -- not 10 times 16 000 seconds. Only if you're an Earth Mother disciple would such an argument make any sense.
OK. Then I think I will throw my used drink cans through the window when I'm driving, or leave my dogs' poop on the sidewalk, or maybe wash my teeth with the faucet fully open. After all, it's just a couple of cans a week, a couple of excrements a day, and three or four liters of water... What difference does it make in the big picture, right?
Samuel Murray wrote:
However, if we believe that the unsubscribe link is not a reliable measure of how many people prefer not to receive the e-mails, then what other method can we use to measure it?
Simple: send emails only to those who opt in, and assume that all the rest are not interested, instead of the opposite.
| | | | John Fossey
Canada
Local time: 00:52
Member (2008)
French to English
+ ...
| Spam or not spam | May 22, 2013 |
To clarify, spam is defined differently in the US and EU. In the EU marketing emails to recipients for whom the sender has no prior commercial relationship are legally "spam" if they are not "opt-in", while in the US they are "spam" if they are not "opt-out". The volume of mail makes no difference - 1 email that doesn't comply is "spam" while a 100,000 email blast which fully complies is not spam.
Interesting question: if an agency states on its website or in various listings such a... See more To clarify, spam is defined differently in the US and EU. In the EU marketing emails to recipients for whom the sender has no prior commercial relationship are legally "spam" if they are not "opt-in", while in the US they are "spam" if they are not "opt-out". The volume of mail makes no difference - 1 email that doesn't comply is "spam" while a 100,000 email blast which fully complies is not spam.
Interesting question: if an agency states on its website or in various listings such as the directories on this and other sites that it is interested in receiving applications from prospective translators (and many, possibly most, do), does that constitute "opt-in"?
[Edited at 2013-05-22 11:47 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Karel Kosman
Czech Republic
Local time: 06:52
Czech to English
+ ...
Hi Tomas, I am not hiding behind anything. At the bottom of each email is a description of the service with a link to it, next to the unsubscribe link, with an explanation of how many are sent out each month and how much the translator paid, to show that the translator is a serious applicant. The service would not make sense to send it out from my own email address and identity, and no one would want that anyway.
Your statement that no one is interested in receiving applications and "thes... See more Hi Tomas, I am not hiding behind anything. At the bottom of each email is a description of the service with a link to it, next to the unsubscribe link, with an explanation of how many are sent out each month and how much the translator paid, to show that the translator is a serious applicant. The service would not make sense to send it out from my own email address and identity, and no one would want that anyway.
Your statement that no one is interested in receiving applications and "these days" anyone can hunt down translators on the net is certainly not true. I've had the same experience and you can see from the testimonials, and write to the translators themselves, that they get about 300 applications to fill out within the first few weeks, with letters trickling in over the years. Many small agencies just store the email in a folder and could approach the translator years later (as still happens to me – since I see they are responding to my original cover letter), when they get work in a language combination they rarely get asked to do. Many translators who have used my service have gotten lots of work within days of starting the blast. Agencies are not necessarily in the practice of hunting down translators but want them to fill in their application so that they can store their details in their own database (I also run an agency and have an online application form to automate this entire process) so that they can add comments about each translator, perhaps test all of them in advance with sample translations. Sure, sometimes I'll hunt translators down if I need a specialist in a particular area, but mostly I welcome new applicants because sometimes I get big projects and need a large pool of translators to approach and test. I will approach my own and post the job on ProZ.
I did not say 85% of people in the world could become professional translators but that this is how many speak at least two languages. But most of my customers are established translators looking for more work. For those just starting out I give them an information package to teach them how to make sure they get paid and warn them that quality is very important etc., along with other tips. But you are right, when testing hundreds of translators in the past for some very large projects I was awarded, I found that only about 15% of those who submitted samples produced good quality.
Yes, you could technically label it as spam, but the recipients seem happy with it, as are the customers. It doesn't really need to concern you.
You say you don't like "all the time all of us lose". Are you one of the recipients? Two emails per month, with language combination and basic info in the subject? Is everyone on the list? But it is true that lately I have been bombarded by applicants, but most of it has ended in my spambox. I suspect that it is some robot trying to verify that the emails still exist, if agencies respond to the applications. I did respond to those which landed in my spambox for a while, but no actual person seemed to be behind it. I looked at a few attached CVs and it is quite odd. They all come from either Yahoo, Hotmail or Gmail addresses. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 06:52
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| @John, speculating | May 22, 2013 |
John Fossey wrote:
To clarify, spam is defined differently in the US and EU.
I prefer to say that spam is defined pretty much the same in the US and the EU, but the legality of it differs. Some spam is legal and some spam is illegal, and which is legal and illegal differs between the two localities. Both localities define spam pretty much as "unsolicited commercial mail", though some countries also include unsolicited activist mail as spam.
In the EU, marketing emails to recipients for whom the sender has no prior commercial relationship are legally "spam" if they are not "opt-in", while in the US they are "spam" if they are not "opt-out".
I hear what you're trying to say, but I don't quite agree with how you say it. In the US, unsolicited commercial mail is spam regardless of whether it is opt-in or opt-out. What matters is not whether it is spam but whether it is legal spam or illegal spam. If the spam message does not contain an opt-out procedure, then it is illegal spam.
The volume of mail makes no difference - 1 email that doesn't comply is "spam" while a 100,000 email blast which fully complies is not spam.
May I rephrase that? The volume of mail makes no difference: 1 e-mail that doesn't comply is illegal, while a 100 000 e-mail blast that fully complies is not illegal.
If an agency states on its website or in various listings such as the directories on this and other sites that it is interested in receiving applications from prospective translators (and many, possibly most, do), does that constitute "opt-in"?
I'm no lawyer, but my current country of residence requires very specific "knowing" opt-in. In other words, simply forgetting to uncheck a check box doesn't count as "opting in". The wording has to be fairly explicit. Also, I suspect that opting in to hear from individual prospective translators is not the same as opting in to be listed in a mailing list. Unless the web site says "please add us to your mailing list", you can't assume that they had given you permission to add them to your mailing list.
The crucial thing is that being listed in a directory only gives you automatic permission to contact them if you want to be their client, i.e. if you want to buy from them (not if you want to sell to them). If it is not stated specifically (and known to the agency) that the purpose of the directory is to enable translators to sell their services to agencies who are listed in the directory, then you can't use the agency's presence in such a directory as implied permission to contact them for the purpose of selling to them (as opposed to buying from them).
I have asked ProZ.com a number of times to include more explicit wording in their translation agency directory, so that we as translators can legally contact those agencies, but such wording is not required in the United States. Not the Blue Board nor the Company directory nor the profile pages in general contain any wording that would even imply that translators are granted the right to sell to these agencies. So unfortunately that is a decision that EU translators will have to make -- do you contact these other agencies illegally and hope that the fact that you're a small fish will keep you safe, or do you limit your marketing to agencies that have given you an explicit legal right to do so?
| | | | Haluk Levent Aka (X)
Local time: 07:52
Japanese to Turkish
+ ...
| Karel Kosman
Czech Republic
Local time: 06:52
Czech to English
+ ...
| more nonsense | May 27, 2013 |
speak for yourself instead of presuming about others. You can read the testimonials of translators who have used my service, write to them yourself, and see that they do get tons of responses and work, so many agencies ARE interested in receiving applications. One of my customers even wrote to me apologising for a lot of the nonsense written on this thread.
| | |
|
|
|
Haluk Levent Aka (X)
Local time: 07:52
Japanese to Turkish
+ ...
| I don't presume | May 28, 2013 |
Karel Kosman wrote:
speak for yourself instead of presuming about others. You can read the testimonials of translators who have used my service, write to them yourself, and see that they do get tons of responses and work, so many agencies ARE interested in receiving applications. One of my customers even wrote to me apologising for a lot of the nonsense written on this thread.
I am not presuming about others. I know for fact what you do is spam and anyone else using this service lands his/her CV in my mailbox and she will never get any assignment from my company or my friends' companies. So, bring it on!
| | | | Karel Kosman
Czech Republic
Local time: 06:52
Czech to English
+ ...
sorry, by peers I thought you meant colleagues in the industry, like everyone. Anyway, as per your request I removed your two email addresses from the list and explained in a response to your email that there has always been an unsubscribe link, with an explanation of the list, so no need to worry about these two applications a month now.
| | | |
Karel Kosman wrote:
sorry, by peers I thought you meant colleagues in the industry, like everyone. Anyway, as per your request I removed your two email addresses from the list and explained in a response to your email that there has always been an unsubscribe link, with an explanation of the list, so no need to worry about these two applications a month now.
This was unkind. Now that our colleague was all set to blacklist your "customers" to his pleasure!
[Edited at 2013-05-28 07:36 GMT]
| | | | Karel Kosman
Czech Republic
Local time: 06:52
Czech to English
+ ...
| spam protection | May 28, 2013 |
If you like I could suggest how I have managed against this recent attack. Before I used to get about 4 applications a day, from legitimate translators. Then came this onslaught and I was diligently responding to another 30 a day in my spambox. Eventually gave up on that when I found out they were not real people, and now get about 4 a day again. I use vqme.net, which was bought by gmail. This has a very good filter, and I use the vqme service to create a whitelist of allowable senders and domai... See more If you like I could suggest how I have managed against this recent attack. Before I used to get about 4 applications a day, from legitimate translators. Then came this onslaught and I was diligently responding to another 30 a day in my spambox. Eventually gave up on that when I found out they were not real people, and now get about 4 a day again. I use vqme.net, which was bought by gmail. This has a very good filter, and I use the vqme service to create a whitelist of allowable senders and domains. Their emails always get to me, plus others not on the lists according to gmail's filter. I am rather happy with the system and have no problems with these attacks now. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 06:52
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Merit in the blacklist | May 28, 2013 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
Now that our colleague was all set to blacklist your "customers" to his pleasure!
Actually I think there is merit in the idea of the blacklist (not as a "blacklist" but rather as a network of small agencies). Perhaps we will have the opportunity to discuss it later again.
[Edited at 2013-05-28 21:33 GMT]
| | | | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Blast your CV to 16000 Agencies? Has anyone tried it? | 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 » |
| | 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 
Translation news
