| 话题中的页数: < [1 2] | How are KudoZ Rules of Asking enforced? 论题张贴者: Olga Cuzmanov
|
|---|
Steffen Walter 
德国
Local time: 16:05
正式会员 (自2002)
English英语译成German德语
+ ...
| Perhaps, Jane, but ... | Sep 9, 2013 |
JaneD wrote:
The above is the only way to deal with this issue. The rules/guidelines are not about to change, and the only thing you can do as a professional when someone tries to take advantage like this is to ignore it.
There is, however, a very handy feature that means you can filter askers who do this repeatedly, so you simply aren't bothered by their questions.
... the problem won't disappear just because we do that. This "out of sight, out of mind" attitude is not the least helpful to solve the issue. See Kim's post for what would be needed instead.
| | | | neilmac
西班牙
Local time: 16:05
Spanish西班牙语译成English英语
+ ...
| Why should they be? | Sep 9, 2013 |
The very notion of "enforced" in this case makes me shiver.... Rules were made to be broken, especially arbitrary ones like these. Anyway, I reckon a seasoned translator can spot the chancers a mile away and simply refrain from helping them.
| | | | | Yup, that is how KudoZ works | Sep 9, 2013 |
Denise Stan wrote:
I recently responded to a question relating to a field of specialization in which I have much education and professional experience. The chosen response was one that I had not heard of, and was not chosen by someone with education or work experience in the field (as far as I could tell).
That is precisely the problem with KudoZ.
I have seen many times what you describe: a weird answer being chosen as the right one.
Globally, can you imagine the incredibly large percentage of wrong terms present in a glossary built in such an unorthodox way?
[Edited at 2013-09-09 15:16 GMT]
| | | | Mark Benson (X)
English英语译成Swedish瑞典语
+ ...
| I really don't see anything problematic or unorthodox. | Sep 9, 2013 |
Miguel Carmona wrote: Denise Stan wrote:
I recently responded to a question relating to a field of specialization in which I have much education and professional experience. The chosen response was one that I had not heard of, and was not chosen by someone with education or work experience in the field (as far as I could tell). That is precisely the problem with KudoZ. I have seen many times what you describe: a weird answer being chosen as the right one. Globally, can you imagine the incredibly large percentage of wrong terms present in a glossary built in such an unorthodox way? [Edited at 2013-09-09 15:16 GMT]
I really don't see anything problematic or unorthodox.
To me it's the other way around. You have access to a discussion about every term. That discussion doesn't end just because points are distributed. I know that I've posted in KudoZ entries that were years old, just to point out that something was wrong.
Don't focus on the question and the answer. The important aspects of KudoZ are communication with other translators, discussion, qualification with references, examples etc. And more.
If you don't look at it in that way, but expect a terminological database where you can just pick up and go, then maybe there are a few stops you should make on your way there, which is the topic here after all, isn't it?
| | |
|
|
|
| That is another big problem of KudoZ: | Sep 9, 2013 |
Miguel Carmona wrote:
I have seen many times what you describe: a weird answer being chosen as the right one.
Globally, can you imagine the incredibly large percentage of wrong terms present in a glossary built in such an unorthodox way?
askers that don't know anything about the field in which they are supposed to translate a text and therefore are not able to judge the correctness of the proposed term.
They select so an answer following their particular logic: the first one, the one which has most agrees, sympathy for the answerer, the answerer that has most KudoZ points, or "because they had in mind the same term" which does unfortunately not make it more correct only for this reason, and so on...
There isn't anything we can do about that. The answer "belongs" to the asker and not to the community, and we have to live with wrong terms in the glossary. But I have found in otherwise good dictionaries really questionable or even wrong translations, too, so we have to pay attention anyway, wherever we are checking. And I hope nobody will use the KudoZ glossary seriously like an infallible dictionary...
[Bearbeitet am 2013-09-09 21:21 GMT]
| | | | Kay Denney
法国
Local time: 16:05
French法语译成English英语
| The comments are of vital importance! | Sep 9, 2013 |
I don't spend much time in Kudoz, mainly because of all the rants I've read here. I just had a look the other day and there was a question that intrigued me, so I went to have a look at the answers.
There was a great answer given by Translator A (someone I happen to know to be a top-notch translator), then a couple of suggested variations on that answer, one of which was made by Translator B (whose contributions I have read and respected here), and another, much poorer translation,... See more I don't spend much time in Kudoz, mainly because of all the rants I've read here. I just had a look the other day and there was a question that intrigued me, so I went to have a look at the answers.
There was a great answer given by Translator A (someone I happen to know to be a top-notch translator), then a couple of suggested variations on that answer, one of which was made by Translator B (whose contributions I have read and respected here), and another, much poorer translation, provided by Translator C. Translator B actually explained in a comment why he preferred Translation A over Translation C and his argument held water as far as I was concerned.
The asker chose Translation C. Did they even bother to read the other suggestions I wonder. However anyone with half a brain reading the comments would realise that Translators A and B knew much more about the matter in hand, and thus the entry can be of use, you just need to look beyond the answer chosen at the discussions, which are often most enlightening. Seeing someone coming up with an answer, then others improving on it, recreates to a certain extent the in-house proofreading system I used to enjoy as an in-house translator. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | There are many reasons behind the system | Sep 10, 2013 |
Texte Style wrote:
I don't spend much time in Kudoz, mainly because of all the rants I've read here. I just had a look the other day and there was a question that intrigued me, so I went to have a look at the answers.
There was a great answer given by Translator A (someone I happen to know to be a top-notch translator), then a couple of suggested variations on that answer, one of which was made by Translator B (whose contributions I have read and respected here), and another, much poorer translation, provided by Translator C. Translator B actually explained in a comment why he preferred Translation A over Translation C and his argument held water as far as I was concerned.
The asker chose Translation C. Did they even bother to read the other suggestions I wonder. However anyone with half a brain reading the comments would realise that Translators A and B knew much more about the matter in hand, and thus the entry can be of use, you just need to look beyond the answer chosen at the discussions, which are often most enlightening. Seeing someone coming up with an answer, then others improving on it, recreates to a certain extent the in-house proofreading system I used to enjoy as an in-house translator.
The first reason is that according to the KudoZ rules, "the answer most helpful to the asker" should be chosen. So, in the above case, we could say that Translator C's answer was most helpful to the asker, regardless of the correctness of the answer provided.
The second reason is that if an asker asks say, 5 questions in a row, and 6 different translators answer each questions, and 1 translator answers two questions, the trend is that due to fairness (?), 6 different translators's answers to the 6 different questions are selected regardless of the contents.
I believe this is one reason why KudoZ glossaries becomes flawed.
| | | | Kay Denney
法国
Local time: 16:05
French法语译成English英语
| Gold stars for kiddies | Sep 10, 2013 |
Yasutomo Kanazawa wrote: Texte Style wrote:
I don't spend much time in Kudoz, mainly because of all the rants I've read here. I just had a look the other day and there was a question that intrigued me, so I went to have a look at the answers.
There was a great answer given by Translator A (someone I happen to know to be a top-notch translator), then a couple of suggested variations on that answer, one of which was made by Translator B (whose contributions I have read and respected here), and another, much poorer translation, provided by Translator C. Translator B actually explained in a comment why he preferred Translation A over Translation C and his argument held water as far as I was concerned.
The asker chose Translation C. Did they even bother to read the other suggestions I wonder. However anyone with half a brain reading the comments would realise that Translators A and B knew much more about the matter in hand, and thus the entry can be of use, you just need to look beyond the answer chosen at the discussions, which are often most enlightening. Seeing someone coming up with an answer, then others improving on it, recreates to a certain extent the in-house proofreading system I used to enjoy as an in-house translator. The first reason is that according to the KudoZ rules, "the answer most helpful to the asker" should be chosen. So, in the above case, we could say that Translator C's answer was most helpful to the asker, regardless of the correctness of the answer provided. The second reason is that if an asker asks say, 5 questions in a row, and 6 different translators answer each questions, and 1 translator answers two questions, the trend is that due to fairness (?), 6 different translators's answers to the 6 different questions are selected regardless of the contents. I believe this is one reason why KudoZ glossaries becomes flawed.
I fail to see how a poor translation can be helpful, especially when two great ones are also available from the same source...
And your (?) shows that there is absolutely no logic behind the awarding of points to different people. Surely you should award points to the person who has provided the most useful information for each term regardless of whether it is the same person or a different one? That's tantamount to giving all the children a gold star just for coming to school...
| | |
|
|
|
DS Trans
美国
Local time: 10:05
French法语译成English英语
+ ...
| I think people would respond without point system | Sep 10, 2013 |
Wordreference has a lot of activity on their forum without a specific benefit to those answering the questions. It's nice that Text Style doesn't find the points to be necessary in finding work. I worry that my profile won't be seen without them, but it's like staring up from the bottom of a mountain.
It's an unforgiving system as well. I have voted and then immediately afterwards noticed a flaw with my chosen response. The most you can do is leave a comment - you cannot chang... See more Wordreference has a lot of activity on their forum without a specific benefit to those answering the questions. It's nice that Text Style doesn't find the points to be necessary in finding work. I worry that my profile won't be seen without them, but it's like staring up from the bottom of a mountain.
It's an unforgiving system as well. I have voted and then immediately afterwards noticed a flaw with my chosen response. The most you can do is leave a comment - you cannot change your mind on Kudoz.
[Edited at 2013-09-10 12:34 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Texte Style wrote: Yasutomo Kanazawa wrote: Texte Style wrote:
I don't spend much time in Kudoz, mainly because of all the rants I've read here. I just had a look the other day and there was a question that intrigued me, so I went to have a look at the answers.
There was a great answer given by Translator A (someone I happen to know to be a top-notch translator), then a couple of suggested variations on that answer, one of which was made by Translator B (whose contributions I have read and respected here), and another, much poorer translation, provided by Translator C. Translator B actually explained in a comment why he preferred Translation A over Translation C and his argument held water as far as I was concerned.
The asker chose Translation C. Did they even bother to read the other suggestions I wonder. However anyone with half a brain reading the comments would realise that Translators A and B knew much more about the matter in hand, and thus the entry can be of use, you just need to look beyond the answer chosen at the discussions, which are often most enlightening. Seeing someone coming up with an answer, then others improving on it, recreates to a certain extent the in-house proofreading system I used to enjoy as an in-house translator. The first reason is that according to the KudoZ rules, "the answer most helpful to the asker" should be chosen. So, in the above case, we could say that Translator C's answer was most helpful to the asker, regardless of the correctness of the answer provided. The second reason is that if an asker asks say, 5 questions in a row, and 6 different translators answer each questions, and 1 translator answers two questions, the trend is that due to fairness (?), 6 different translators's answers to the 6 different questions are selected regardless of the contents. I believe this is one reason why KudoZ glossaries becomes flawed. I fail to see how a poor translation can be helpful, especially when two great ones are also available from the same source... And your (?) shows that there is absolutely no logic behind the awarding of points to different people. Surely you should award points to the person who has provided the most useful information for each term regardless of whether it is the same person or a different one? That's tantamount to giving all the children a gold star just for coming to school...
Like you do, I also fail to see how a poor translation can be helpful, but from my long time KudoZ experience, askers tend to award points to different answerers in order to avoid favoritism maybe. I don't know about other language pair, but this happens quite often in my language pair.
| | | | Olga Cuzmanov
美国
Local time: 08:05
正式会员 (自2013)
English英语译成Romanian罗马尼亚语
+ ...
主题发起人 | Poll and KudoZ Everest | Sep 11, 2013 |
Thank you all for comments, except those who's advise is to ignore the "askers" who are not playing by the rules/guidelines. It seems to me that you're missing the point so thanks, but no thanks. Maybe you should ignore posts like this one.
I hear from most of you that this points system is totally flawed. I also believe that the main beneficiaries are not our fellow translators. Here is why: I believe that we are paying a pretty hefty membership to help build large, comprehensive g... See more Thank you all for comments, except those who's advise is to ignore the "askers" who are not playing by the rules/guidelines. It seems to me that you're missing the point so thanks, but no thanks. Maybe you should ignore posts like this one.
I hear from most of you that this points system is totally flawed. I also believe that the main beneficiaries are not our fellow translators. Here is why: I believe that we are paying a pretty hefty membership to help build large, comprehensive glossaries that some day we will have to pay to access. Never mind that for most part we will have to do additional work to clean them up. Isn't that ironic? Maybe that's the reason we are "awarded" points (which determine our rankings and many translators get sucked in, me included) and rules are just guidelines, and when the rules (that are not guidelines) are broken, nothing is done about it. Even worst, those who bring up the issues get "disciplined".
Just FYI, I submitted today a proposal for a poll "Would you be in favor of abolishing the KudoZ point system?" I doubt it will be posted. If it does, KudoZ to ProZ.
In case I will be exiled and my climbing of mount KudoZ will prematurely come to an end, it was nice meeting (most of) you (happy smiley) ▲ Collapse
| | | | | @Olga: Prospective clients look for your KudoZ points in a particular field | Sep 11, 2013 |
Olga Cuzmanov wrote:
Thank you all for comments, except those who's advise is to ignore the "askers" who are not playing by the rules/guidelines. It seems to me that you're missing the point so thanks, but no thanks. Maybe you should ignore posts like this one.
I hear from most of you that this points system is totally flawed. I also believe that the main beneficiaries are not our fellow translators. Here is why: I believe that we are paying a pretty hefty membership to help build large, comprehensive glossaries that some day we will have to pay to access. Never mind that for most part we will have to do additional work to clean them up. Isn't that ironic? Maybe that's the reason we are "awarded" points (which determine our rankings and many translators get sucked in, me included) and rules are just guidelines, and when the rules (that are not guidelines) are broken, nothing is done about it. Even worst, those who bring up the issues get "disciplined".
Just FYI, I submitted today a proposal for a poll "Would you be in favor of abolishing the KudoZ point system?" I doubt it will be posted. If it does, KudoZ to ProZ.
In case I will be exiled and my climbing of mount KudoZ will prematurely come to an end, it was nice meeting (most of) you (happy smiley)
Not at your total of points. My now largest client of all times called me on the phone and hired me based on my successfully answered KudoZ questions regarding one specific kind of industrial machinery (7 years of cooperation to date). Another one hired me because of the number of successfully answered questions regarding personal documents/immigration papers (7 years of cooperation to date). Another one hired me because of the number of successfully answered questions in the field of tourism (5 years of cooperation to date). Really good outsourcers are not dumb and not easily impressed.
I just did some math:
I have answered 2583 KudoZ questions so far. Let's assume that it takes an average of 8 minutes to answer a question - which I doubt, because research and gathering example sentences and web references usually takes much longer if you do it right.
This would amount to 20,664 minutes, which is 344.4 hours, which (based on my average hourly rate of US $75.00) would result in US $25,830.
This is my investment. My ROI is that ProZ.com allows me to show on the ranking list accordingly.
I am probably the last person to be a point grabber. The ratio of answered questions and points earned is merciless and will speak volumes at all times.
There is no such thing as an unflawed system.
| | |
|
|
|
DS Trans
美国
Local time: 10:05
French法语译成English英语
+ ...
| Count me in! | Sep 12, 2013 |
Olga Cuzmanov wrote:
Just FYI, I submitted today a proposal for a poll "Would you be in favor of abolishing the KudoZ point system?" I doubt it will be posted. If it does, KudoZ to ProZ.
| | | | | 话题中的页数: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » How are KudoZ Rules of Asking enforced? | 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 » |
| | 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 
