| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] | Voters for removal of useless reclassification as PRO / non-PRO. Thread poster: Michael Beijer
|
|---|
Lilia Ignatova (X) 
Bulgaria
Local time: 19:41
English to Bulgarian
+ ...
| Completely agree | Aug 25, 2009 |
I support the removal of both 'pro/non-pro' and 'not for points' options.
| | | | Lianne Wilson
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:41
Japanese to English
+ ...
| I totally agree... | Aug 26, 2009 |
...with everything you said in the post I'm quoting from below, writeaway.
writeaway wrote:
Since the rewritten rule actually links non-pro questions to non-pro translators only (!), I suggest changing the classifications to Difficult and Easy. That way it is CLEAR that it refers to the question only and doesn't relate to the Asker at all.
| | | | Gina W
United States
Local time: 12:41
Member (2003)
French to English
| Don't get rid of Pro / Non-Pro, just make sure the classifications are used correctly | Aug 26, 2009 |
I don't necessarily think that the site should get rid of this, but I am against mis-use of the classifications. I agree with others that some questions will result in many answers with arguments between answerers and others commenting, but are considered non-Pro? I can see the point of classifying "I love you" as non-Pro, but I do think this classifications is sometimes overused and often mis-used. It then can seem to defeat the actual purpose of the classification.
As for the "... See more I don't necessarily think that the site should get rid of this, but I am against mis-use of the classifications. I agree with others that some questions will result in many answers with arguments between answerers and others commenting, but are considered non-Pro? I can see the point of classifying "I love you" as non-Pro, but I do think this classifications is sometimes overused and often mis-used. It then can seem to defeat the actual purpose of the classification.
As for the "Not for points" option, I kind of like the idea of awarding points. However, if there are some on this site that find it useful, keeping this function is fine. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | who is the judge here | Sep 7, 2009 |
Katalin Horvath McClure wrote:
It is about the level of language or specialist knowledge one needs to possess in order to provide an answer.
Katalin
[Edited at 2009-07-18 00:32 GMT]
Who, please, is to decide about that? Certainly not a lone translator, even if he/she is a moderator, especially if other people did not think so.
I did feel offended when one of my questions was recently re-classified as Non-Pro. No matter what you think "non-Pro" means. But it classifies me as having asked a stupid question that any bilingual person without a dictionary can answer (probably because they weren't thinking much about it, as, on the other hand. I was). And I will comment on it in the discussion field.
Three people are supposed to vote in favor of re-classifying a question as non-Pro or as Pro before it gets changed. But one moderator or one editor (and I am an editor) can change it whenever they want, and some are doing it, especially from Pro to non-Pro. I would not do that, not in that direction. I have changed it in the past, but only from non-Pro to Pro.
Among the professional members, this feature is often misused to show non-native speakers how "stupid" they are (IMO).
The feature should certainly be discussed and improved.
Bernhard
| | |
|
|
|
| re-classification and visible versus invisible to professional translators | Sep 7, 2009 |
Andrew Stucken wrote:
.....
Do we in knee-jerk fashion, like hounds rooting for truffles, automatically vote for a non-PRO classification? Perhaps wilfully overlooking the context?
I agree with you, Andrew. Seems to happen quite often, and not only with simple words but entire context-specific phrases. And how is the asker supposed to feel about that? Next time he/she will probably not even ask any more.
Why would a professional translator want one of his questions to be re-classified as basically that of a simpleton (I am exaggerating) and then answered by non-Pros? I hope that the reclassification does not send the question back to the level that is invisible to translators who decided to look at Pro questions only. Does it? I guess it does.
I feel that often native speakers will vote for non-Pro because the question was asked by a non-native speaker.
Greetings,
Bernhard
[Edited at 2009-09-07 04:28 GMT]
| | | | | the more honorable task | Sep 7, 2009 |
Michael J.W. Beijer wrote:
The classification system, either the old one, and/or the rewritten new one (which, links non-pro questions to non-pro translators only, which is obviously ridiculous!!!) is simply not practicable or useful. It was a valiant attempt to force things into nice neat logical categories, which will quite simply never result in more than either
(at best) wasting our time, or,
(at worst) making it impossible to use the system for what it is actually for...
....Even if the question is Professional/non-Professional - or - Easy/Difficult, I still believe that this distinction doesn't really mean much, as a so-called Easy question can be answered in a Difficult way, and a Difficult question can be answered in an Easy way, etc, etc, etc.
We should spend our valuable time answering these questions, not classifying them.
Hello, Michael.
I feel the same. The problem is especially apparent when a Pro question (and maybe that is any question at first) gets changed by an editor or moderator to non-Pro.
I have no problem with an editor or moderator who changes a non-Pro to a Pro question.
I believe the newly categorized non-Pro question will be seen by less people and ignored by many because it is non-Pro. The asker himself/herself feels stupid having thought about the question, having researched it, having posted it and then having been told pretty much that it will take any bilingual person without a dictionary to answer it.
The current setup of this change option leaves much room for misuse. It also seems to be used by native speakers to tell non-natives that they are not on a par with them/not on the same professional level.
I also believe that a question should never be changed to non-Pro just by one editor or one moderator without having received at least two or the three necessary votes in favor of it.
And I believe anybody who is voting but especially editors (and I am one of them) and moderators should carefully consider their vote and even more the actual switch (editors, moderators) from Pro to non-Pro - many askers will feel embarrassed or insulted and this is not in the interest of this site.
Categorization of words and phrases in general and as "non-Pro" in particular is certainly not an easy task. Neither is seriously concentrating on answering questions but it seems to be a more honorable one.
Greetings,
Bernhard
[Edited at 2009-09-07 04:08 GMT]
| | | | Polangmar
Poland
Local time: 18:41
English to Polish
+ ...
| Concurrent voting would be a great improvement | Sep 7, 2009 |
It happens very often that the third (decisive) vote is given after several hours since the first one was. After such a long time the question is visited by a relatively small number of people (and it needs four votes to reclassify it), so it's virtually impossible to change back its status. It would be much more reasonable/fair if the voting for the other option could start simultaneously with the first vote.
Another thing is arithmetic. If three people think the status should be changed ... See more It happens very often that the third (decisive) vote is given after several hours since the first one was. After such a long time the question is visited by a relatively small number of people (and it needs four votes to reclassify it), so it's virtually impossible to change back its status. It would be much more reasonable/fair if the voting for the other option could start simultaneously with the first vote.
Another thing is arithmetic. If three people think the status should be changed and another three people think it shouldn't, the supporters of the change will always get the upper hand (as I said before, four votes are needed for the second change). Interestingly, there usually is a fourth advocate of the second change (which means maintaining/restoring the initial status) - the asker - but s/he cannot vote. As a result, three people change the status despite the fact that four people (including the asker) think otherwise. If the voting for the other (meaning initial) option could start simultaneously with the first vote, in such a situation there would be a draw and (which in my opinion is perfectly logical) the initial status would be maintained. Moreover, it would also be maintained if there were three votes for the change and two against the change (which still seems extremely logical) - under the present solution the status is changed in such a situation (in practice it means that one person reclassifies the question).
Best regards
Polangmar ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Definitions modified | Oct 21, 2009 |
Katalin Horvath McClure wrote:
When you ask a question, on the input form it is worded like this:
PRO - question for professional translators or specialists
Non-PRO - a question for language learners
(Side note to Enrique: this definition is not the same as the one it the FAQ, wouldn't it be a good idea to make them consistent?)
Thanks Katalin!
The definitions in the corresponding FAQ has been modified to:
PRO questions are those that are suitable for professional translators.
Non-PRO questions are those that can be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
Regards,
Enrique
| | |
|
|
|
| Definitions are still not consistent | Nov 19, 2009 |
Enrique,
Sorry for coming back late to the thread, but there is still a discrepancy about the definition of Non-PRO questions.
So, here it is again:
When you ask a question, this is what shows up:
PRO - question for professional translators or specialists
Non-PRO - a question for language learners
This is what shows up in the FAQ, under 1.14:
http://www.proz.com/faq/2905#2905
Non-PRO questions are those that can be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary while PRO questions are those that are suitable for professional translators. "Glossary-building" KudoZ questions are always PRO and can't be voted into non-PRO.
This is what shows up in the FAQ, under 2.7:
http://www.proz.com/faq/2764#2764
PRO questions are those that are suitable for professional translators.
Non-PRO questions are those that can be answered by any bilingual person without the aid of a dictionary.
So, the two definitions in the FAQ are the same, but this is not what shows up on the Asking form, when askers pick the category of their questions.
Please modify the KudoZ asking form to match the definitions in the FAQ.
Thanks
Katalin
| | | | | Thanks for bringing this to my attention | Nov 23, 2009 |
Hello Katalin,
Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I have requested site developers to update the definition on the KudoZ asking form. I will let you know here when it has been updated.
Please let me know if you need anything else in the meantime.
Regards,
Alejandro
| | | | | The definitions have been updated in the asking form | Dec 24, 2009 |
Katalin Horvath McClure wrote:
So, the two definitions in the FAQ are the same, but this is not what shows up on the Asking form, when askers pick the category of their questions.
Please modify the KudoZ asking form to match the definitions in the FAQ.
Thanks
Katalin
Hi Katalin,
The definitions have been updated in the asking form, thanks a lot for your feedback!
Kind regards,
Enrique
| | | | | in favour of maintaining the distinction | Dec 29, 2009 |
Just a comment:
It is in fact occasionally possible for native speakers of the target language not only to answer a PRO question without using a dictionary and without even being professional translators, but even to earn points with their answer.
However, irrespective of this, the definitions which are now, I'm glad to hear, the same throughout KudoZ are the best possible way to express what is meant by "easy" and "difficult" and I am definitely in favour of maintaini... See more Just a comment:
It is in fact occasionally possible for native speakers of the target language not only to answer a PRO question without using a dictionary and without even being professional translators, but even to earn points with their answer.
However, irrespective of this, the definitions which are now, I'm glad to hear, the same throughout KudoZ are the best possible way to express what is meant by "easy" and "difficult" and I am definitely in favour of maintaining the distinction. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
sarax999
Local time: 19:41
English to Arabic
+ ...
| Agree to remove | Jan 5, 2010 |
I AGREE TO REMOVE THIS AND ALSO THE Q'S WITHOUT KUDOZ POINTS EHICH IS THE MUST USELESS ONES
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Voters for removal of useless reclassification as PRO / non-PRO. | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
