| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Proposal: experimental KudoZ environment without points Thread poster: Kim Metzger
|
|---|
| There was this other suggestion | Jan 26, 2004 |
some days ago
http://www.proz.com/topic/17556
and I think it can meet this one.
I'd say that it doesn't depend on the asker or the language pair, but on the question itself.
I wouldn't use this option for all my questions, just for those in which I need more comments than one answer.
| | | | gianfranco 
Brazil
Local time: 10:30
Member (2001)
English to Italian
+ ...
| Alternative: option to 'opt-out' from the KudoZ point system | Jan 26, 2004 |
Alternatively, we could offer the option to any site member to opt-out from the competitive aspect of the KudoZ area.
Of course, anybody that dislikes KudoZ can avoid using it, but this option would allow a site member to participate, help even generously and, at the same time, notify the other users (to the asker in particular) that the contribution is "not for the points".
The choice will be visible through a special message visible on the answer page ("No points op... See more Alternatively, we could offer the option to any site member to opt-out from the competitive aspect of the KudoZ area.
Of course, anybody that dislikes KudoZ can avoid using it, but this option would allow a site member to participate, help even generously and, at the same time, notify the other users (to the asker in particular) that the contribution is "not for the points".
The choice will be visible through a special message visible on the answer page ("No points option" or something similar).
The asker would still be able to choose the answer offered as "the most useful", the results can enter the glossaries, and everything works as normal, but no points are awarded.
In general, I find this choice more apporpriate if left to the answerer, rather than given to the asker.
* * * * *
Additionally, we could have for each question the possibility to contribute, for example not providing a definite answer but extensive information, personal knowledge, etc..., with more space than a short peer-grade comment.
These comments could be made to signal that the contribution is "not an answer", and by definition cannot be rewarded with points. This is a "local" choice by the author, valid for one particular contribution only, but it would allow to participate informally, adding details and information to a discussion around a question.
NOTE: Not to be confused with the global opt-out option suggested above, which is a global choice for all questions.
Gianfranco
[Edited at 2004-01-26 23:49] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | broadening suggestion: allow asker to dictate format of KudoZ threads | Jan 26, 2004 |
Claudia wrote: There was this other suggestion some days ago http://www.proz.com/topic/17556 and I think it can meet this one. I'd say that it doesn't depend on the asker or the language pair, but on the question itself. I wouldn't use this option for all my questions, just for those in which I need more comments than one answer.
The "KudoZ surveys" suggestion sounds to me like something a little different. But the idea of allowing the asker to decide "format" of KudoZ threads is common.
| | | | Endre Both
Germany
Local time: 15:30
English to German
| Opting out of the points system on a case-by-case basis | Jan 26, 2004 |
Gianfranco Manca wrote:
Additionally, we could have for each question the possibility to contribute, for example not providing a definite answer but extensive information, personal knowledge, etc..., with more space than a short peer-grade comment.
These comments could be made to signal that the contribution is "not an answer", and by definition cannot be rewarded with points.
I would like this a lot. In fact, it has been in informal use in some subcommunities for quite some time, under the heading "Not for points". I would like to see this institutionalised.
Endre
| | |
|
|
|
Will Matter
United States
Local time: 06:30
English
+ ...
Read every post regarding this topic, thought about *everyones* response and realized that it will never be a perfect system. Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be, don't reinvent the wheel, no fancy "weighted answers" or complicated algorithms are necessary, just leave it as it is. Just like any other system, it has its flaws and good points and, over time, those who are truly professional will be shown to be so and those who aren't will fall by the wayside. Meritocracy? You betcha... See more Read every post regarding this topic, thought about *everyones* response and realized that it will never be a perfect system. Don't make it more complicated than it needs to be, don't reinvent the wheel, no fancy "weighted answers" or complicated algorithms are necessary, just leave it as it is. Just like any other system, it has its flaws and good points and, over time, those who are truly professional will be shown to be so and those who aren't will fall by the wayside. Meritocracy? You betcha. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Uldis Liepkalns
Latvia
Local time: 16:30
Member (2003)
English to Latvian
+ ...
| Points are important | Jan 26, 2004 |
for some people, and I will not deny it, in some measure to me, too- as I’m not a professional translator myself, but just an owner/manager of a small Agency, it pleases me to see, that I’m not looking bad overall in my specific language pairs.
Of course, in these pairs there’s no way to even approach the very lowest levels of points in major pairs, how can you do it on 5 questions a month, but none the less- just the day before yesterday I needed to check a translation of some chem... See more for some people, and I will not deny it, in some measure to me, too- as I’m not a professional translator myself, but just an owner/manager of a small Agency, it pleases me to see, that I’m not looking bad overall in my specific language pairs.
Of course, in these pairs there’s no way to even approach the very lowest levels of points in major pairs, how can you do it on 5 questions a month, but none the less- just the day before yesterday I needed to check a translation of some chemical substance in Latvian right away- I picked up my mobile and called a ProZ member here in Riga I know, a specialist in chemistry, he replied: Are you online? - Yes. - Then just throw it in KudoZ, I’ll answer you right away. I did it and had explicit answer in 5 minutes… and we both were compleately satisfied- he got the confirmation of his professional knowledge in a form of some points, I got the answer.
So it goes, as Vonnegut used to say
Uldis ▲ Collapse
| | | | nyamuk
United States
Local time: 07:30
Indonesian to English
+ ...
| no point questions and open ended questions (mini surveys) | Jan 26, 2004 |
The "KudoZ surveys" suggestion sounds to me like something a little different. But the idea of allowing the asker to decide "format" of KudoZ threads is common.
Henry,
I agree but I think that looking for just the right word without awarding points or asking an open ended could be accommodated by the same mechanism.
It would entail having a tick-box on the question submission form that said [no points] or [mini survey].
Another alternative would be a slider that allowed the asker to indicate the maximum number of points to be awarded in a range from 0-4 & 'Decide later'. Decide later would be the default.
I respect willmatter's sentiment that Kudoz works well enough without introducing added complexity. However adding a new feature that gives the asker more influence over answers as I am suggesting is an elective feature that does not have to be utilised by people who do not wish to, for whatever reason. I am not certain that I agree that the current system reflects a meritocracy as well as it could. I believe that competitiveness and alliance forming measure against getting the best quality answers in some cases.
| | | | Marc P (X)
Local time: 15:30
German to English
+ ...
| Points are important | Jan 26, 2004 |
Uldis Liepkalns wrote:
for some people, and I will not deny it, in some measure to me, too- as I’m not a professional translator myself, but just an owner/manager of a small Agency
Interesting. In that case, let's take this idea to its logical conclusion, and extend KudoZ to the jobs bidding system. Perhaps that's the answer to the criticisms of the jobs areas?
Bidders could submit bids for jobs, publicly indicating their qualifications, experience - and rate for the job.
Other Pros could vote on which of those bidding should get the job. (Agree/Disagree)
The outsourcers of course would not be obliged to select the Pro with the most Agrees, just as KudoZ askers are not obliged to follow the greatest number of Agrees.
Jobs offered at ridiculously low rates or with insufficient information could be... squashed.
Comments?
Marc
| | |
|
|
|
Nikki Graham
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:30
Spanish to English
| Some thoughts on points and lists and ratios | Jan 26, 2004 |
willmatter wrote:
Read every post regarding this topic, thought about *everyones* response and realized that it will never be a perfect system.
To a certain extent I agree with you. I don’t think complicating the system further with a Super pro section without points, or answers or questions that don’t get points (while others do) will help the situation. In my opinion, if people are passionate about language (and I assume most of us are), you’ll never be able to eliminate squabbling over who is right or wrong entirely, with or without points.
On the other hand, I echo lenkl’s sentiments that something needs to be done and Andy’s comments about the ridiculousness (my word) of climbing high up in the rankings by raking in 4 points for easy questions.
As I see it, the current point system is totally unfair. Bear in mind that where you are in the leaders board determines your position in the list of Pros many people use to contact us directly to offer work. So, if you are a newcomer (have only just discovered Proz, for example, despite working as a translator for years, or have recently started to translate for whatever reason, etc.) you are penalised against. There you are at the very bottom of what is sometimes an extremely long list. And the only way to climb up it is to answer KudoZ (assuming you’ve become a Platinum member). When I first started answering questions in August 2001, about 700 points would have got you in the top 10 in my section (Spanish-English). You now need about 2500, and 700 won’t even get you into the top 30. Now assuming you get an average of 1.5 points per question answered, you’d need to answer nearly 1,700 questions to get there. Is it any wonder that some people point chase? The system doesn’t really give you any other option. It is not fair to compare people’s points, when what you are really comparing is just how long they’ve been here and how much time they’ve had to spend answering questions.
Personally, I think the current point system should be radically altered as soon as possible, although I don’t have any brilliant ideas on how to do it. But here are a few thoughts:
How about eradicating points for easy questions, or giving a maximum of 1 or 2, in order to differentiate this section from the Pro section. At the same time, to stop people shifting a question into the Pro category to get more points, you could raise the number of votes necessary to do so.
As for the pro questions, I think 1-4 is an OK system and one we’re all used to. It’s how these points are reflected in the leaders board that concerns me. Why can’t we have a reliability ratio? Just reflecting the number of points gained divided by the number of questions answered (which is where I got the 1.5 from above) could give a fairer view of the situation. If it were possible to add weighting to this from no. of agrees/confidence level or whatever, then so much the better.
Otherwise, just get rid of all points, erase them from all lists, put the Pros in the freelancer list into alphabetical order and rotate the list ever hour or thereabouts so that everyone gets a chance to be at the top sometime
[Edited at 2004-01-26 20:59]
| | | | | Opposite scenario or different point of view | Jan 26, 2004 |
Hi all
Although your proposal, Kim, may be motivated by the best reasons, I am not convinced it is good to change something which is not perfect but which could be a lot worse. I will provide a contradicting view to the arguments in favor of your proposal.
I think there is a good dose of self-debasing if not insulting generalization in assuming that professional translators - that is what most of Proz members are I assume – like immature brats or Pavlovian dogs, only ... See more Hi all
Although your proposal, Kim, may be motivated by the best reasons, I am not convinced it is good to change something which is not perfect but which could be a lot worse. I will provide a contradicting view to the arguments in favor of your proposal.
I think there is a good dose of self-debasing if not insulting generalization in assuming that professional translators - that is what most of Proz members are I assume – like immature brats or Pavlovian dogs, only "respond" to the "carrot", i.e. the kudoz points – I skip on the drooling and the bell ring. What’s wrong with getting points for providing a good answer? Who cares or does it really matter what – ego, points, marketing - motivates the answer giver provided the asker gets a good answer…
The kudoz system as it is now is not perfect - and it will never be for it is "human-based" and its members are still human translators since CAT has a long way to go, but it is working pretty well in my opinion – at least in the pairs I “go” to. It is also and above all a matter of participation, concentration and availability. It depends on the questions and the way the askers “put” them. Let’s not always blame the answerers for answers that appear to be not so good or sometimes “off”. Very often, questions lack the context or basic information that could help prevent misunderstandings.
Also, I am not so sure I agree with the characterization you make of the Pro and Easy sections, even though it seems to be a FAQ. More than often, I see it as being more a difference between a highly technical question and a literary question or a question requiring finesse, humor or creativity … And even if it may not always require being a “pro”, such questions still require a pretty good understanding and grasp of language subtleties to propose a good marketing slogan or a catchy line.
Now, some people complain that sometimes answers are not worthy of a professional translators’ forum… well some of the questions, neither but that is not the point. Proz policy is basically to accept all questions – from easy or basic sometimes aggravating ones like the famous "I-loveu’s" to highly technical ones and even profane ones – yes really, but for how long? - like … well, take your “pick”….
I think the quality of the answers will not change much by merely changing the name of the category where the questions are posted. The quality depends on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer.
You can call them or they can call themselves as you or they want. Personally, I put as much importance and attention in answering a question in the “easy category” as I do in the “pro category”. I may even be more careful not to say something “dumb” in the easy category for that would not look very good… would it for a “pro” like me. A professional translator can be excused for giving a wrong answer to a highly technical question but imagine not answering well a question like: "How do you say ‘Welcome’ in….?”
So, your “Super Kudo" category will be for the real pros, the so-called true pros. May I ask: “who or what will distinguish a real pro from a plain pro?” Let’s say I am an “existing pro” and I have been answering easy and pro questions, so far indiscriminately to the best of my knowledge and capabilities…. Does that make me automatically a real pro? Would I exclude myself from the true pros? Of course not. Who else can decide if I am a true pro?
That being said, if you want to add a “Super Kudoz” category you may as well “demolish and rebuild” the whole kudoz system. Here is why. What will happen to the "easy kudoz" section, made synonymous of section for the bad (excuse me) not so good translators, aka the “amateurs” or beginners? Why bother even asking a question there and why would one “lower” him/herself by answering questions in that section…for the lower cast. Why not go play in the “cour des grands”, with the bigger great kids? So the easy section is looked down, then quickly devalued and gradually will present no interest for anyone. Everything moves one notch up – in name - and we have effectively: the Pros and the Real Pros – reminds me of the trick of the devaluation of a currency… you can change its value, the number of zeros on a banknote or even its name…but what do you get/buy with it? The same quantity of bread, maybe less, even.
So we have the same problem with a different name – and maybe a bigger “ego” element. You may actually have a reduction of quality by loss of participants. Some will be intimidated and will not dare to risk passing for “fake real pros”, others will just migrate indiscriminately and self-appointedly from plain pro to true pro. So what would be expected / required from a real pro to be entitled to answer in the true pro section?
1) Answering only those questions that are in his/her field of specialization –that will seriously limit the fields or the number of answers.
2) Answering questions based on the self-assessed idea/view that one is very good in several fields or has a great general knowledge
3) Answering just like in the good old days with a newly acquired sense of pride
Well, I feel sorry in advance for the first “real true pro” in any language pair who screws up “big time” in any field… and it will happen for nobody is perfect. Imagine yourself, Kim, in all modest honesty, answering a question and for some reason – fatigue or distraction or slight misunderstanding, you are just human after all, not a robot – giving a really bad answer to a highly technical question… maybe not in your top specialty field - granted to be nice - but in a field where you feel and “felt” pretty strong, and this other guy who is not a “labeled” true pro and who is not even answering in his native language gives a much better answer than yours…. Wow ? Would put the real pro thing back into a new perspective, if not out of the real pro class, no ?
As someone said above, after a few months, weeks even, in the kudoz section you have a pretty good idea of who is more or less good or solid in a specific field. Why not making it “proz-socially” acceptable - as some people already do in practice - for the asker to contact directly, via Proz mail or through profile info, those Proz members whom s/he knows are likely to provide a good answer. And of course the asker will still ask the question in the good old pro section for additional exposure and availability and increase the possibility to obtain the best answer… which could come - we never know -from… a newcomer.
To conclude my "scénario catastrophe", concerning the “advantages” of your proposal as you see them :
1. Higher quality of proposed solutions,
Why - Does this mean the former plain pros who are by now the real pros did not offer good quality before ? Give some credit to the askers.
2. More trust, less showing off, less hostility, competition,
Why more trust? Will be the same people; more showing off on the contrary since more ego since “bigger” pros involved; competition amongst “top pros” will be increased or more acute for it will be more difficult to distinguish the best answer from all those potentially very good answers and “critical” to become the truest pro of the real ones. And, also, I can predict that the weight of “cliques” or “affinity” factor will be heavier in the answer selection and peer grading processes.
3. More reliable glossary,
This could be true in part, but remember the choice of the answer and the glossary are still in the hands of the asker..and they can be so …as one implied in a previous thread above
4. Opportunity to develop research skills,
I do not see why this would be better than it is now. If it is, then it is not the fault of the existing system but a matter of personal choice or lack of professionalism from the current pros that we all are, here, no?
[Edited at 2004-01-26 21:26] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | We will eventually implement a | Jan 26, 2004 |
I have decided to allow people to give "no points" a try by providing it as an option to askers.
Note the following:
- KudoZ as it is now will not change. The new format represents an additional option.
- This will be an experiment, and will not necessarily be permanent.
- The right to designate a question "no points" may be restricted in some way
- The decision to give this concept a try has nothing to do with quality. Some ha... See more I have decided to allow people to give "no points" a try by providing it as an option to askers.
Note the following:
- KudoZ as it is now will not change. The new format represents an additional option.
- This will be an experiment, and will not necessarily be permanent.
- The right to designate a question "no points" may be restricted in some way
- The decision to give this concept a try has nothing to do with quality. Some have argued a "no points" format will result in higher quality... we'll find out.
- Contrary to the wording of the proposal, this will not be "super pro KudoZ"; it will simply be "no points KudoZ"
- It will be possible to select the "no points" option for both easy and pro level questions. I repeat: this is not about quality!
Implementation will not happen immediately, and when it does happen there will be oversights and I'll want to hear about them. As simple as this idea is, many areas of the site will be affected, including the asking page, the KudoZ display page, point totaling scripts, KudoZ histories, reminder programs, the grading robot, the database itself, etc. So allow a few months.
Thanks for the initiative, Kim, and thanks for the idea, nyamuk!
(The decision to undertake the "no points" experiment is made, so while additional commentary is welcome in this thread, please don't consider it a debate anymore.) ▲ Collapse
| | | | Uldis Liepkalns
Latvia
Local time: 16:30
Member (2003)
English to Latvian
+ ...
| Re: Points are important- Comments? | Jan 26, 2004 |
Dear Marc,
my only comment to this is that there is not a field of human activity which, by “taking the idea to its logical conclusion”, can not be brought to the point of absurdity. Especially if answer implies what was never said or meant by the original posting.
Anyway, Henry says the try is a go, so we'll see. My stake is on that, that with major language pairs it may work.
Regards,
Uldis.
MarcPrior wrote:
Interesting. In that case, let's take this idea to its logical conclusion, and extend KudoZ to the jobs bidding system. (snip)Marc
[Edited at 2004-01-26 23:04]
| | |
|
|
|
nyamuk
United States
Local time: 07:30
Indonesian to English
+ ...
| Kudoz to Henry | Jan 26, 2004 |
Thanks for the initiative, Kim, and thanks for the idea, nyamuk!
Henry,
Best of luck getting it to work, and I hope it is a useful feature that will be of additional benefit to those who decide to use it without hindering people who are comfortable with the current system.
My hope is that it could improve quality by reducing competitive strain, but as you say we shall see. I don't have any evangelical attachment to the idea, just an idea.
I would like to say that the web programming and database manipulation here is nothing short of phenomenal, I'd love to know what's under the hood. I hope everyone here appreciates the considerable amount of work that takes place here. So Kudoz to you!
| | | | Kim Metzger
Mexico
Local time: 07:30
German to English
TOPIC STARTER | No-points KudoZ | Jan 27, 2004 |
JDLSF said: "I think the quality of the answers will not change much by merely changing the name of the category where the questions are posted. The quality depends on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer."
Dear Jean-Luc,
The quality does indeed depend on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer. I'm glad you've had a positive experience with KudoZ. As I've said several times, so have I. I have had fun contributing and appreciate... See more JDLSF said: "I think the quality of the answers will not change much by merely changing the name of the category where the questions are posted. The quality depends on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer."
Dear Jean-Luc,
The quality does indeed depend on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer. I'm glad you've had a positive experience with KudoZ. As I've said several times, so have I. I have had fun contributing and appreciated getting help when I really needed it from a bunch of fine people. I like your point about the KudoZ system as it is now not being perfect "and (that) it will never be for it is "human-based" and its members are still human translators ... but it is working pretty well in my opinion – at least in the pairs I go to."
My proposal was motivated by a desire to see the reputation of KudoZ improved in the eyes of its critics – and there are many. I have stood up for KudoZ for three years all over the place, often using the same kinds of arguments you just presented. My thinking was that if ProZ had a section for asking translation questions that was closer to the kind of unhurried, professional atmosphere found in mailing lists visited by working translators where the only reward is the satisfaction of being able to help with difficult translation challenges, then the quality of the answers would improve because only competent, helpful translators would bother.
It's great that your experience in the French-English communities has been good. My experience with KudoZ has mainly been in the German to English community, and the quality of the answers is extremely good in KudoZ. I certainly don't count myself among the real pros. But there have also been hundreds of hair-raising answers submitted often within 1 or 2 minutes of the question being posted (sometimes involving safety issues in the medical and electrical fields, e.g.) apparently only for the sake of gaining points that have discouraged many potential participants from even bothering anymore.
Jean-Luc said: "I think the quality of the answers will not change much by merely changing the name of the category where the questions are posted. The quality depends on the skills, competence and motivation of the people who answer."
It's not about changing the category where questions are posed but about creating a different workplace where I believe the likelihood is greater that "graffiti taggers" http://www.proz.com/topic/17658 won't bother to show up because there would be nothing for them to gain. I think only competent translators would participate in a system that is not tied to KudoZ points. I think the participants would be more like those who participate in mailing lists such as FLEFO.
Best wishes, Kim ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Thanks for your answer Kim | Jan 27, 2004 |
Kim,
Thank you for your time and the tone of your answer. My "post" was meant to be a bit provocative and thought-provoking but it was like yours, meant in the commun interest.
What you say makes a lot of sense and we may not be that far apart in fact, especially on the quality we would both like to see or expect. Yes the level of questions and answers - and this is linked - is not always "professional". But, I think that in order to obtain or attain what you describe y... See more Kim,
Thank you for your time and the tone of your answer. My "post" was meant to be a bit provocative and thought-provoking but it was like yours, meant in the commun interest.
What you say makes a lot of sense and we may not be that far apart in fact, especially on the quality we would both like to see or expect. Yes the level of questions and answers - and this is linked - is not always "professional". But, I think that in order to obtain or attain what you describe you would have to come up with a system completely different from what it is now.
That is what I meant when I said "if you add a new "improved" category you may as well "recast" the whole system".
That is come up with something more exclusive. No more stupid questions for Level 1 or intermediate levels, no more high-school kids, pranksters and tourists. And that is not the site policy - wich is all inclusive and open in that aspect. That is why I think your proposal would not achieve what you would like in the existing context.
For that, you want only questions from professional translators and/or agencies with legitimate and credible profiles and not 5 of 6 of them depending on the "split-person du jour"...
You want answers with examples or references and a peer-grading system that is fair, meaningful and enforced, not based on likes or dislikes, where neutral and disagree have a real value and are accepted by answerers for what they mean and are.
I see nothing wrong with points and I do not spend sometimes 15 to 20 minutes on an answer for 4 miserable points but out of intellectual curiosity and friendly help. But since no points is the "ordre du jour", let's see where the "pointless" question reform takes us...:-)
Good evening
JL
[Edited at 2004-01-27 03:30] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | 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 » Proposal: experimental KudoZ environment without points | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
| | 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... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
