| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16] > | KudoZ: should "rubbish" help be appreciated? Thread poster: IanW (X)
|
|---|
Glossarist (X)
English to Bengali
| Simple solution to a complex problem? | Jul 22, 2006 |
A game can't meet our need of serious discourse. The problem with Kudoz is that it promises to give a simple solution to a complex problem. Do you think a serious discourse is possible in a shopping mall, a bazar, a crowded bar? Hardly. Do you agree that a translation can be done in "part" as it is the case with Kudoz? Again many would disagree.
I love to read Paul Valéry's essay "Variations sur le Bucoliques" where he speaks of his translation of Virgil's "Eclogues" and I can't... See more A game can't meet our need of serious discourse. The problem with Kudoz is that it promises to give a simple solution to a complex problem. Do you think a serious discourse is possible in a shopping mall, a bazar, a crowded bar? Hardly. Do you agree that a translation can be done in "part" as it is the case with Kudoz? Again many would disagree.
I love to read Paul Valéry's essay "Variations sur le Bucoliques" where he speaks of his translation of Virgil's "Eclogues" and I can't resist quoting a few lines from its English translation: "After a while, as I went on with my translation -- making, unmaking, remaking, sacrificing here and there, restoring as best I could what I had first rejected -- this labour of approximation with its little successes, its regrets, its conquests, and its resignations, produced in me an interesting feeling, of which I was not immediately aware...." What follows is even more interesting but perhaps my esteemed colleagues can find it for themselves.
So, "the labour of approximation with its little successes, its regrets, its conquests and its resignations...." and I haven't found a more sublime description of the art of translation. Somehow I feel that we miss this spirit in this site. I am closely watching it for more than five years and it is moving even farther away from showing any respect to the complex art of translation and an acknowledgement of its subjective elements.
We don't need a Translators' Olympics, a race where people provide answers in seconds. We need a forum where serious discussion about the linguistic problems we encounter in our work will be possible. The form it will take can be decided by the management but Kudoz doesn't seem to be the place for it. There is too much heat there!
In the end points, traffic even revenue have nothing to do with translation, I am sorry. Doing away with the Olympic race will discourage the charlatans. At least it won't give them an additional impetus to fill the spaces with "rubbish".
[Edited at 2006-07-22 17:51] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Rosa Maria Duenas Rios (X) 
Local time: 10:06
| The nail hit right on the head | Jul 23, 2006 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
This is not a site for translators, this site is open to everybody. This is the problem.
I also believe this is the source of almost all problems in Proz.com. A time will come for us to decide if we stay with the "bunch" or look for another, truly professional site (if one exists!).
To Kim: I believe all professions have elites, not just ours. There are good and bad doctors, nurses, lawyers, mechanics, plumbers, etc. everywhere. I believe it is only natural for the good ones to try to differentiate themselves from the rest. How? There are a million ways...
To Dyran: "All you need is love"; I loved it. I am considering it to become my next "user message".
To Glossarist: The problem is that "doing away with the Olympic race" would also probably do away with revenues.
...but then again, apologies to Ian and other colleagues, as I am disgressing from the topic, and risking a call of attention!
[Edited at 2006-07-23 00:56]
| | | | | Good point Ian | Jul 23, 2006 |
Ian Winick wrote:
Before this thread is hi-jacked as a "native vs. non-native" debate, let me just point out that I see both natives and non-natives as being vital to the KudoZ process. When faced with an intelligible German sentence, my main concern is how a native German would interpret it.
What I am talking about is people with a minimal knowledge of the relevant languages dragging the general standard down by getting hopelessly out of their depth.
Very well said, Ian. When I made my point about people translating into languages not their mother tongue (this has now been hidden as part of an OT and inflammatory discussion), I did not intend to cause offence to anyone who has provided me with valuable comprehension assistance in the past. I would often have been lost without a native German speaker's help in untangling a tricky sentence, and I sincerely apologise if I have offended any of my colleagues in this respect. This type of well-intentioned, intelligent and considered help is most certainly **NOT** rubbish, and for this reason I never flag my questions as "Native speakers only". Despite my potentially offensive comments on Friday, I sincerely hope that my German (and other!) colleagues will continue to feel that their input on my questions is welcome.
| | | | | Where is the moderator in some instances? | Jul 24, 2006 |
I agree with the colleagues above: foolish answers or rubbish help are NOT helping anyone, actually they are damaging.
Recently I have noticed the presence of a fellow translator who insists on answering questions in a language that is not his mothertongue and for which he's definitely NOT knowledgeable enough. I have contacted the moderator of that site pointing out that not only is this colleague making a fool of himself with his baloneys, but also that his contributions are damag... See more I agree with the colleagues above: foolish answers or rubbish help are NOT helping anyone, actually they are damaging.
Recently I have noticed the presence of a fellow translator who insists on answering questions in a language that is not his mothertongue and for which he's definitely NOT knowledgeable enough. I have contacted the moderator of that site pointing out that not only is this colleague making a fool of himself with his baloneys, but also that his contributions are damaging. I had hoped that the moderator would have done something, maybe contacting the colleague suggesting him to refrain himself in giving answers in a language that is not his mothertongue and that he doesn't know well enough, or maybe reminding him the Kudoz/Proz rules. After all isn't the moderator supposed to mediate, assist, suggest or help the community? Four emails after, I still haven't heard anything from the moderator, nor I hope to hear from him anymore. Thus I ask myself: which is the role of the moderator after all? Isnt' she/he supposed to do anything? CAN he/she do anything for the sake of the integrity and well being of the community? I understand and respect the idea that Proz is a community open to everybody, but when some people do more harm than good, why not doing something? I don't mean to ban them immediately as if it were a soccer match, but at least have the moderator intervene either because she/he noticed the thing or because some colleague pointed out the problem and contacted her/him. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Ian M-H (X)
United States
Local time: 10:06
German to English
+ ...
| Competent vs. incompetent | Jul 24, 2006 |
As Ian Winick wrote, this isn't about native vs non-native:
Ian wrote:
What I am talking about is people with a minimal knowledge of the relevant languages dragging the general standard down by getting hopelessly out of their depth.
It's a fact that the problem is often worse when people start translating into second and third languages, but fundamentally it's about (1) being out of their depth and (2) not realising it. In other words, thinking that they're better than they are. That can mean being "rubbish" at a particular language and thinking you're good, but it can also mean being reasonably good and believing you're an expert. Either way, the condition can lead to woefully inadequate KudoZ answers that help nobody.
One recent example makes the point about this not being a question of native/non-native. A KudoZ question had received a perfectly good answer. That answer had received peer support. Only then did the 'rubbish answer' get added - an answer that was hopelessly wrong, despite high confidence, and showed that the answerer hadn't understood what was going on in the source text. The ProZ member in question claims to be able to translate from four distinct languages into German for Germany, Austria or Switzerland.
Fortunately, the earlier answer was selected and no harm was done. But what happened wasn't unusual. Should askers be grateful for this kind of answer (Ian's original question)? Of course not. Nor for the wrong answer given to a question about a medical term this weekend, a wrong answer with confidence level 5 by someone choosing to include the title "Dr" in their user name despite not being a physician.
That might be fine in that person's country of origin, and in some other countries, but in most of the English-speaking world (and, of course, this question involved translation into English) you only stick "Dr" in front of your name if you're a medical practictioner or working academic.
The problem isn't native language, it's incompetence paired with arrogance.
| | | | Kirill Semenov
Ukraine
Local time: 17:06
Member (2004)
English to Russian
+ ...
| Reliability ratio | Jul 24, 2006 |
The idea was discussed before, still I believe making the reliability ratio public and visible throughout the site, up to adding another `Leaders' board sorted according to the ratio of `Won / All' answers may help to solve the problem.
Anyone will be free to answer any question they want, but, in the long run, `rubbish' answers would lower the reliability ratio of an asker, so everyone will probably think twice before providing a rush, repetitious, silly or otherwise `rubbish' answ... See more The idea was discussed before, still I believe making the reliability ratio public and visible throughout the site, up to adding another `Leaders' board sorted according to the ratio of `Won / All' answers may help to solve the problem.
Anyone will be free to answer any question they want, but, in the long run, `rubbish' answers would lower the reliability ratio of an asker, so everyone will probably think twice before providing a rush, repetitious, silly or otherwise `rubbish' answer just to grab some occasional kudoZ points. Yes, it still will happen, but getting 4 points average per 20 answers provided will certainly tell something about the answerer.
In this way both our freedom to answer any question and the goal of being more responsible for our answers will be met, I believe. Am I right, Kim? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ian M-H (X)
United States
Local time: 10:06
German to English
+ ...
| Briefly, because it has indeed been discussed before | Jul 24, 2006 |
Kirill Semenov wrote:
I believe making the reliability ratio public and visible throughout the site, up to adding another `Leaders' board sorted according to the ratio of `Won / All' answers may help to solve the problem.
It might not be a bad idea, but it would probably stop some people answering questions - particularly common in journalism and marketing contexts - about the nicest way to phrase something.
My overall acceptance rate is only around 50%. It would be far higher if I didn't bother with "creative" questions - the ones that usually get several answers, five or six of which are often in with a chance.
Just a thought, before anyone rushes to implement changes...
| | | | Kirill Semenov
Ukraine
Local time: 17:06
Member (2004)
English to Russian
+ ...
| But we speak of `rubbish' answers ;-) | Jul 24, 2006 |
Ian Müller-Harknett wrote:
It would be far higher if I didn't bother with "creative" questions - the ones that usually get several answers, five or six of which are often in with a chance.
I see your point but I also see no harm or shame in providing a good answer along with other good answers and being not `selected' by asker.
Moreover, I would like to add another thought which might not be mentioned in the thread before: most of active kudoZers know their pairs community and perfectly see who is who. Everyone who participates in kudoZ in his/her pairs during several months usually knows both good professionals and kudoz hunters as well as takes into account so many fields of expertise. So, ultimately, good and responsible answers, even when not selected by some askers, give us something much more important than kudoZ points - respect from our colleagues which is often rewarded by job proposals/outsourcing, not mentioning friendship and pleasant socializing.
Still, the mess in the KOG makes me feel frustrated (I assume many others here feel the same), and I'm all for a campaign to clear the Augean stables - and, first of all, to prevent not-registered and non-experienced users from adding anything to the glossaries. The sooner they're prohibited to do so the better. Only moderators can edit glossary entries now, but I think that moderators of each language pair can find many volunteers who might help them to tidy up the old glossary entries and to monitor the new entries made every day.
[Edited at 2006-07-24 09:39]
| | |
|
|
|
| Why don't we just use "Disagree" more? | Jul 24, 2006 |
Making kudoz not-for-points would probably, rightly or wrongly, lead to fewer answers. I note that in my pair, the only questions which currently have no answers after being open a while are those that are marked not-for-points, including some from last week. All the for-points questions have answers.
The reliability ratio has its uses, but as has been pointed out, not being selected doesn't make an answer wrong, still less "rubbish" necessarily, and I agree it would probably stifle... See more Making kudoz not-for-points would probably, rightly or wrongly, lead to fewer answers. I note that in my pair, the only questions which currently have no answers after being open a while are those that are marked not-for-points, including some from last week. All the for-points questions have answers.
The reliability ratio has its uses, but as has been pointed out, not being selected doesn't make an answer wrong, still less "rubbish" necessarily, and I agree it would probably stifle the creativity, just-a-suggestion, aspect, which can be very useful.
I think we have the answer to eliminating the dross already available. Let us no longer be shy of hitting the disagree button. I certainly tend not to bother to disagree if someone has already done so - perhaps this attitude merely perpetuates the problem. After a while, the hopeless answerers would surely get the hint that their input is of no value. And if it didn't, then publishing the "disagree ratio" or whatever it's called, which is also available on the stats page, would surely make evident the "value" of their contributions.
(And yes, I have argued in the past that people should not be allowed to disagree without either posting an answer or agreeing with an answer first, but that was in response to a particular issue a couple of years ago, when kudoz was a better place than it is now; I now feel that eliminating the crud is more important .) ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Moderators do not act as linguistic authorities | Jul 24, 2006 |
Liliana Roman-Hamilton wrote:
Recently I have noticed the presence of a fellow translator who insists on answering questions in a language that is not his mothertongue and for which he's definitely NOT knowledgeable enough. I have contacted the moderator of that site pointing out that not only is this colleague making a fool of himself with his baloneys, but also that his contributions are damaging. I had hoped that the moderator would have done something, maybe contacting the colleague suggesting him to refrain himself in giving answers in a language that is not his mothertongue and that he doesn't know well enough, or maybe reminding him the Kudoz/Proz rules. After all isn't the moderator supposed to mediate, assist, suggest or help the community? Four emails after, I still haven't heard anything from the moderator, nor I hope to hear from him anymore. Thus I ask myself: which is the role of the moderator after all? Isnt' she/he supposed to do anything? CAN he/she do anything for the sake of the integrity and well being of the community? I understand and respect the idea that Proz is a community open to everybody, but when some people do more harm than good, why not doing something? I don't mean to ban them immediately as if it were a soccer match, but at least have the moderator intervene either because she/he noticed the thing or because some colleague pointed out the problem and contacted her/him.
Hi Liliana,
It is not part of the role of KudoZ moderators to act as linguistic authorities, and in this case there is nothing the moderator could do as such.
If you feel an answer is wrong you can use the peer-comments feature to formulate your opinion, including your linguistic reasons.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | | How about bringing back the Kudoz etiquette advice relating to this | Jul 24, 2006 |
Enrique wrote: Liliana Roman-Hamilton wrote:
Recently I have noticed the presence of a fellow translator who insists on answering questions in a language that is not his mothertongue and for which he's definitely NOT knowledgeable enough. I have contacted the moderator of that site pointing out that not only is this colleague making a fool of himself with his baloneys, but also that his contributions are damaging. I had hoped that the moderator would have done something, maybe contacting the colleague suggesting him to refrain himself in giving answers in a language that is not his mothertongue and that he doesn't know well enough, or maybe reminding him the Kudoz/Proz rules. After all isn't the moderator supposed to mediate, assist, suggest or help the community? Four emails after, I still haven't heard anything from the moderator, nor I hope to hear from him anymore. Thus I ask myself: which is the role of the moderator after all? Isnt' she/he supposed to do anything? CAN he/she do anything for the sake of the integrity and well being of the community? I understand and respect the idea that Proz is a community open to everybody, but when some people do more harm than good, why not doing something? I don't mean to ban them immediately as if it were a soccer match, but at least have the moderator intervene either because she/he noticed the thing or because some colleague pointed out the problem and contacted her/him.
Hi Liliana, It is not part of the role of KudoZ moderators to act as linguistic authorities, and in this case there is nothing the moderator could do as such. If you feel an answer is wrong you can use the peer-comments feature to formulate your opinion, including your linguistic reasons. Regards, Enrique
There used to be advice 'not to answer questions in languages and/or areas you don't know'. Or something to that effect.
Why was this taken out? Wouldn't bringing that back and placing it in a visible position do a lot to stop rubbish answers? And send a warning shot to those posting questions for translations they never should have accepted?
Fwiw-I think it's good if Moderators are called in when people end up upsetting others with non-stop unreasonable (ie rubbish) answers. Mods are in the best position explain things to people without ruffling feathers. Sometimes people just need a gentle hint from someone with a bit of authority. Otherwise, what suggestion do you have for stemming the flow of rubbish on the site? Surely just saying thank you can't be the solution?
If Mods act on requests from a good number of people, then the Mod is not acting as an independent linguistic authority at all.
[Edited at 2006-07-24 14:46]
| | | | | "Reject this answer" button? | Jul 24, 2006 |
writeaway wrote:
There used to be advice 'not to answer questions in languages and/or fields' if you don't know them well enough. Or something to that effect.
Why was this taken out? Wouldn't bringing that back and placing it in a visible position do a lot to stop rubbish answers? And send a warning shot to those posting questions for translations they never should have accepted?
[Edited at 2006-07-24 14:11]
I think this is a good idea, and I would also like to see the "reject this answer" button brought back. This would enable askers to signify clearly that a particular answer is unacceptable.
| | |
|
|
|
writeaway wrote:
There used to be advice 'not to answer questions in languages and/or fields' if you don't know them well enough. Or something to that effect.
Why was this taken out? Wouldn't bringing that back and placing it in a visible position do a lot to stop rubbish answers? And send a warning shot to those posting questions for translations they never should have accepted?
It was a rule and was taken away because moderators do not serve as linguistic authorities in the site, and therefore it is not part of their duties to evaluate the linguistic value of an asker or answerer.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | | Why not reinstate it? | Jul 24, 2006 |
No one's asking the moderators to serve as "linguistic authorities". Simply as "authorities" who uphold the rules of the site. So why not reinstate the rule?
Enrique wrote:
It was a rule and was taken away because moderators do not serve as linguistic authorities in the site, and therefore it is not part of their duties to evaluate the linguistic value of an asker or answerer.
I can't see anything wrong with a BIG FAT REMINDER in boldface, possibly font size 72, alerting people that the site DOES have rules.
Right now it seems to be a free-for-all, and it's going to hell in a handbasket (quite fast too...).
Just this weekend there was a proz-level question in the IT>EN that received an answer from a Hungarian translator who, despite the fact that he clearly did not even understand the question, gave himself a really high confidence level.
I realize there's no easy solution to this, but maybe you could at least add a way for people to readjust their confidence levels once they realize they've made a blunder. The only possibility now is to hide the answer completely, and I don't find that very productive. The debate generated by wrong answers can help the asker get on the right track. And that's supposed to be the whole point of kudoz in the first place.
Catherine
[Edited at 2006-07-24 15:18]
| | | | Kirill Semenov
Ukraine
Local time: 17:06
Member (2004)
English to Russian
+ ...
| Not about not native speakers, pls | Jul 24, 2006 |
cbolton wrote:
Just this weekend there was a proz-level question in the IT>EN that received an answer from a Hungarian translator who, despite the fact that he clearly did not even understand the question, gave himself a really high confidence level.
Common, please, let's stop about not native speakers, it has little to do with `rubbish' questions. For example, Sanskrit-English and vice versa are my pairs of interests, and I'm from Ukraine, imagine! I don't work in the pairs for money, but does it mean I can't be of any use?
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » KudoZ: should "rubbish" help be appreciated? | 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 » |
| | 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 
