Mobile menu

What happened to restrictions on Askers?
Thread poster: writeaway

writeaway  Identity Verified

Local time: 15:04
Partial member (2003)
French to English
+ ...
Aug 20, 2005

I see that all the 'updates' deal exclusively with people answering questions, but what about all the discussions about filtering out people who ask questions without context, or ask dictionary-esque questions they can't be bothered to look up themselves etc. That has been a major factor in lowering the professional allure of the site. Ridiculous questions, lazy questions etc. I know that some number restrictions have been imposed and that has certainly helped, but that's all afaik. More has to be done to only allow genuine problems to be asked and not just terms found through simple research.
We are still be used to carry people through translations they never should have taken on to begin with.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Henry Dotterer
Local time: 09:04
SITE FOUNDER
The update provides tools focused on both askers and answerers Aug 20, 2005

writeaway wrote:

I see that all the 'updates' deal exclusively with people answering questions...


That's not true. In addition to the per-day question limits, which are significant, it is now possible to "filter" askers. So if you decide that you don't like a particular asker's questions, you may simply filter that person and not receive, or for that matter see, his/her questions again.

There are also options not to receive/see non-PRO questions, as well as questions from non-logged in visitors, non-platinum members, etc. You might also experiment with these.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

writeaway  Identity Verified

Local time: 15:04
Partial member (2003)
French to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Simply filtering out people won't solve the prob Aug 20, 2005

Henry wrote:

writeaway wrote:

I see that all the 'updates' deal exclusively with people answering questions...


That's not true. In addition to the per-day question limits, which are significant, it is now possible to "filter" askers. So if you decide that you don't like a particular asker's questions, you may simply filter that person and not receive, or for that matter see, his/her questions again.

There are also options not to receive/see non-PRO questions, as well as questions from non-logged in visitors, non-platinum members, etc. You might also experiment with these.


Hi Henry. I understand what you're saying but my point is that some demands should be put on Askers so the probs won't be there to begin with. Filtering out people isn't really a solution because imho, each question should be judged as it comes in. For instance I do ignore most questions from non-native speakers, but not all of them because sometimes there is a genuine prob that does not stem from simply not knowing and/or being able to write in English. Can't askers be forced to provide context and show they have made an effort to find they term before they post? People should be encouraged to stop using the pros on the site as two-legged dictionaries. After all, no one can be a translator without research skills.


Direct link Reply with quote
 
Karin Adamczyk  Identity Verified
Canada
Local time: 09:04
Member
French to English
Filtering is the right way Aug 20, 2005

writeaway wrote:

Filtering out people isn't really a solution because imho, each question should be judged as it comes in.



Since so much about translation is subjective, you cannot automate this. Every situation/problem is different. Filtering is the right way because you can then filter out requests from people if you feel they are abusing the system.

Also, not everybody feels this way and different people help out for different reasons. For some people, it's just in their nature to help others and they don't feel put upon to help.

Nobody forces you to help when you feel your toes have been stepped on. Only you can determine what makes you feel this way.

I do agree that there are plenty of people who take on work they should never consider, but there are also legitimate situations when non-native speakers have questions, such as when a longer text contains a tiny section in a completely different language or in a field they are completely unfamiliar with.

Take care,
Karin Adamczyk


Direct link Reply with quote
 
Jane Lamb-Ruiz  Identity Verified
French to English
+ ...
"self-regulation" of Answerers to Askers Aug 20, 2005

Here is what I suggest: Let's say I am an Asker. Rather than allowing me to filter out people, which I believe is dicriminatory, I would suggest a system where people self-filter, as it were, as I describe below.

Answerers state their Native Language and Level of Expertise (overall). Level of expertise can be: Expert, Senior, Junior, Intermediate and Beginner. Two icons are then attributed to the Answerer. One for the Native Language and One for the Level of Expertise.

Then when the answers are posted,the Asker can choose to only consider what he or she wants to consider. For example, the Answerer might just want to consider the answers where there is Native Language and Expert Icons next to the name and disregard the others. Or, they might consider and Expert Icon with Non-Native over a Beginner who is Native.

This system has many advantages.
First, it allows Proz Members to self-rate themselves. And is therefore consistent with the very popular idea in business today of self-regulation i.e. taking responsiblity for what one does. Obviously, someone might say he or she is an expert and is not, but I don't think that would happen much as these people would be quickly flushed out.

Second, it takes the emphasis off judging others. In my idea, people judge themselves, state who they are prepared to say about themselves to the community and the community can decide whether that person is or isn't who he or she says he or she is.

Third, it is less programming for Proz. And finally, it is less judgmental. In other words, the Kudoz structure is thus based on what people represent about themselves rather than what some people think of other people...it's more democratic and in keeping with the "agora" function of a site like Proz. Allowing people (askers) to screen out answerers, rather than just ignore them are two different things. If I go to a street fair in my town and there are people I don't like, I avoid them. But I would really not like the town officials to say, Jane has said she doesn't like Joe Blow so Joe Blow has to stay out of her line of sight. It is up to me to disregard and avoid Joe Blow and not up to Joe Blow to be prohibited from going to the street fair....


That's my view on this subject.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Henry Dotterer
Local time: 09:04
SITE FOUNDER
That is about what we have done, Jane Aug 21, 2005

Jane Lamb-Ruiz wrote:

Allowing people (askers) to screen out answerers, rather than just ignore them are two different things. If I go to a street fair in my town and there are people I don't like, I avoid them. But I would really not like the town officials to say, Jane has said she doesn't like Joe Blow so Joe Blow has to stay out of her line of sight. It is up to me to disregard and avoid Joe Blow and not up to Joe Blow to be prohibited from going to the street fair....


It sounds like you have misunderstood how the new filtering feature works. Filtering is comparable to "disregarding" and "avoiding" in your example. If you filter someone, they can still ask, and others can still answer. You just won't be notified yourself.

By the way, we implemented your suggestion of allowing askers to represent themselves as not being professional translators (and for others to aceept, or filter, questions from such people.) In short, I think we have done just about what you say we should have.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Henry Dotterer
Local time: 09:04
SITE FOUNDER
In this release, I think we have done what we can in terms of question qualification Aug 21, 2005

writeaway wrote:
Can't askers be forced to provide context and show they have made an effort to find they term before they post?


Searching is now part of the asking process, and context has always been required. Like Karin, I think that doing anything further, in terms of qualifying questions, would be difficult to automate.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

Chinoise  Identity Verified
Local time: 10:04
English to Chinese
+ ...
Well said! Aug 21, 2005

I second your opinion!

Karin Adamczyk wrote:

Since so much about translation is subjective, you cannot automate this. Every situation/problem is different. Filtering is the right way because you can then filter out requests from people if you feel they are abusing the system.

Also, not everybody feels this way and different people help out for different reasons. For some people, it's just in their nature to help others and they don't feel put upon to help.

Nobody forces you to help when you feel your toes have been stepped on. Only you can determine what makes you feel this way.

I do agree that there are plenty of people who take on work they should never consider, but there are also legitimate situations when non-native speakers have questions, such as when a longer text contains a tiny section in a completely different language or in a field they are completely unfamiliar with.

Take care,
Karin Adamczyk


Direct link Reply with quote
 
gad
United States
Local time: 09:04
Member
French to English
I agree with Karin Aug 21, 2005

Karin Adamczyk wrote:

...not everybody feels this way and different people help out for different reasons. For some people, it's just in their nature to help others and they don't feel put upon to help.

Nobody forces you to help when you feel your toes have been stepped on. Only you can determine what makes you feel this way.

I do agree that there are plenty of people who take on work they should never consider, but there are also legitimate situations when non-native speakers have questions, such as when a longer text contains a tiny section in a completely different language or in a field they are completely unfamiliar with.


I completely agree, Karin - no one is forcing anyone to answer, and you are correct to point out that sometimes there is text in yet another language than the original source language. I recently posted a German to English question and of course I know no German, but then again the text was not in German, it was in French (and French to English IS my language pair).

I also thank you for pointing out that different people help out for different reasons. Some people do it for fun, believe it or not. And you are right, some people like to help and don't feel like people have nerve asking questions.

So thanks for posting these points, Karin.


Direct link Reply with quote
 

writeaway  Identity Verified

Local time: 15:04
Partial member (2003)
French to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
help people yes, but do the job for them, no Aug 22, 2005

Karin Adamczyk wrote:

writeaway wrote:

Filtering out people isn't really a solution because imho, each question should be judged as it comes in.



Since so much about translation is subjective, you cannot automate this. Every situation/problem is different. Filtering is the right way because you can then filter out requests from people if you feel they are abusing the system.

Also, not everybody feels this way and different people help out for different reasons. For some people, it's just in their nature to help others and they don't feel put upon to help.

Nobody forces you to help when you feel your toes have been stepped on. Only you can determine what makes you feel this way.

I do agree that there are plenty of people who take on work they should never consider, but there are also legitimate situations when non-native speakers have questions, such as when a longer text contains a tiny section in a completely different language or in a field they are completely unfamiliar with.

Take care,
Karin Adamczyk


it's not a question of feeling like helping or not. I help colleagues on or off the site and have always helped out where I could long before I joined Proz. The point is that some people have taken the idea of getting 'help' to extremes and have decided Proz is a wonderful way to have others do the research they don't feel like doing. consequently many now post questions they never would have had to post IF they had bothered to open their dicos, search the web and do the job they've accepted. Instead, they post 'questions' that can be found by opening any dico, clicking on Google etc. So if people had a printed reminder BEFORE they posted that they should look and make sure the term is unfindable, that might slow down a few of them. Capping the number of questions has already had a great effect, including make some people suddenly turn up as new Plats. But please insist more on people doing their own research before they post. If the simple, basic terms really are causing such probs then maybe they should consider not taking jobs in the field and/or language.
And the number of people 'suddenly' finding themselves with a different language in the middle of a text is extremely limited and I can't imagine anyone at all objecting to helping out in such rare cases.


Direct link Reply with quote
 


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

What happened to restrictions on Askers?

Advanced search






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 »
Across v6.3
Translation Toolkit and Sales Potential under One Roof

Apart from features that enable you to translate more efficiently, the new Across Translator Edition v6.3 comprises your crossMarket membership. The new online network for Across users assists you in exploring new sales potential and generating revenue.

More info »



All of ProZ.com
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs