| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51] > | New at ProZ.com: Outsourcer "willingness to work again" feedback for translators Thread poster: Enrique Cavalitto
|
|---|
sarahl (X)
Local time: 00:43
English to French
+ ...
| I don't want them on the site | Jun 28, 2006 |
Henry,
I don't want anyone but me entering anything on my profile.
Besides, if my clients want to give me feedback on my work, they have my details, they don't need to use the site for that. I know for a fact that they would rather keep a low profile. Some of my clients don't even want it known that their material is being translated.
My reasons in a nutshell:
1. Control of my profile
2. Confidentiality
3. Professionalism (no inter... See more Henry,
I don't want anyone but me entering anything on my profile.
Besides, if my clients want to give me feedback on my work, they have my details, they don't need to use the site for that. I know for a fact that they would rather keep a low profile. Some of my clients don't even want it known that their material is being translated.
My reasons in a nutshell:
1. Control of my profile
2. Confidentiality
3. Professionalism (no interaction with third parties, vetted or not - my business card is not a chat room)
Sarah ▲ Collapse
| | | | Dyran Altenburg (X) 
United States
Local time: 03:43
English to Spanish
+ ...
I do not want/need Proz to be in the middle when I receive feedback from *my* clients.
--
Dyran
| | | | | It is already out of the profile, sarahl | Jun 28, 2006 |
sarahl wrote:
Henry,
I don't want anyone but me entering anything on my profile.
...
My reasons in a nutshell:
1. Control of my profile...
sarahl, again, this reason is now moot. Nothing appears in your profile anymore.
What is more, the option not to show WWA entries was available from the outset.
| | | | | Trying to get at the "whys", Dyran... | Jun 28, 2006 |
Dyran Altenburg wrote:
I do not want/need Proz to be in the middle when I receive feedback from *my* clients.
Thanks. In the absence of a specific reason, should I put you down for "in principle", then?
| | |
|
|
|
| another out/out | Jun 28, 2006 |
I absolutely do not understand why Proz should collect data on me that only I would see. My clients are perfectly capable of communicating with me directly.
| | | | | Thanks, Lesley, but... | Jun 28, 2006 |
Lesley Clarke wrote:
I absolutely do not understand why Proz should collect data on me that only I would see. My clients are perfectly capable of communicating with me directly.
Thanks, you're number 14. Can you help me out by explaining exactly why you require the ability to prevent people from entering feedback that only you would see?
Sorry to be repetitive (and probably annoying), folks, but I am trying to get a handle on this, trying to reach a solution, and it will help to know not only your request, but also your reasoning!
| | | | Uldis Liepkalns
Latvia
Local time: 10:43
Member (2003)
English to Latvian
+ ...
| To out/out fraction | Jun 28, 2006 |
(please note that I'm speaking my personal opinion, ProZ is not responsible for that).
Personal info protection question invoked here doesn't convince me- all our personal data is already available via Infobel, various directories and search engines, public taxpayers' databases, your whereabouts can be determined by government agencies interested at any moment by your mobile phone signals, cash machines you use, shops you pay in, etc., etc.
Such is the age we live in.
<... See more (please note that I'm speaking my personal opinion, ProZ is not responsible for that).
Personal info protection question invoked here doesn't convince me- all our personal data is already available via Infobel, various directories and search engines, public taxpayers' databases, your whereabouts can be determined by government agencies interested at any moment by your mobile phone signals, cash machines you use, shops you pay in, etc., etc.
Such is the age we live in.
As the saying goes, if you cannot be Googled, you don't exist at all- at least for any practical purposes.
If anybody is so much concerned about personal data protection, the only solution I see is to throw away your computer, mobile, credit cards and relocate to some warm beach, to a place where to register your presence is not required (actually I don't know any, but I guess there should be some left in the World).
Uldis ▲ Collapse
| | | | | A basic question to Henry | Jun 28, 2006 |
Dear Henry,
Maybe those who strongly oppose the new feature would like to know why ProZ insists on allowing outsourcers to enter feedback on those members who do not want it to be shown in their profiles.
If it will not be shown anywhere and it really does not serve to any purpose, only to generate potential legal trouble to ProZ, why allow it?
Personally, I do not know if I will participate in the scheme or not (you never know if you may not be forced one... See more Dear Henry,
Maybe those who strongly oppose the new feature would like to know why ProZ insists on allowing outsourcers to enter feedback on those members who do not want it to be shown in their profiles.
If it will not be shown anywhere and it really does not serve to any purpose, only to generate potential legal trouble to ProZ, why allow it?
Personally, I do not know if I will participate in the scheme or not (you never know if you may not be forced one day to jump back into the crowd of ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Susana Galilea
United States
Local time: 02:43
English to Spanish
+ ...
| another out/out | Jun 28, 2006 |
Lesley Clarke wrote:
I absolutely do not understand why Proz should collect data on me that only I would see. My clients are perfectly capable of communicating with me directly.
Neither do I. I am opposed to Proz.com taking a mediator role in this respect, no matter what shape or form. I have chosen to pay for a service with my dues, which allows me to have an online presence. This serves as a display, or business card in Sarah's words, that allows clients to contact me. All transactions from that point on should be between me and my client.
But it seems to me this has already been expressed at length, and we can only repeat ourselves at this point.
Thanks for keeping the channel open, at any rate.
Susana
| | | | Susana Galilea
United States
Local time: 02:43
English to Spanish
+ ...
Pablo Grosschmid wrote:
Maybe those who strongly oppose the new feature would like to know why ProZ insists on allowing outsourcers to enter feedback on those members who do not want it to be shown in their profiles.
Thanks for putting it so succinctly, Pablo
Susana
| | | | | Good question, Pablo! (And you answered it, in part...) But I asked first! | Jun 28, 2006 |
Pablo Grosschmid wrote:
Maybe those who strongly oppose the new feature would like to know why ProZ insists on allowing outsourcers to enter feedback on those members who do not want it to be shown in their profiles.
If it will not be shown anywhere and it really does not serve to any purpose, only to generate potential legal trouble to ProZ, why allow it?
Personally, I do not know if I will participate in the scheme or not...
Actually, you've hit one of the nails on the head with this comment. I'll explain in a bit... but I asked first.
[/quote]... but I believe that enough weighty arguments have been given to allow the out/out option for those members who want it. [/quote]
That is just the thing. When I went through the posts, many people asked for a way to opt out/out... but most didn't give any reason they require it.
| | | | Dyran Altenburg (X)
United States
Local time: 03:43
English to Spanish
+ ...
| Out/out explained | Jun 28, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
Thanks. In the absence of a specific reason, should I put you down for "in principle", then?
Ok, how about this?
I don't need/want Proz to be in the middle because I can do a much better job dealing directly with my own clients.
In other words, it is obvious to me that there is no added value whatsoever if I include a third party in the mix (quite the contrary).
So, why on earth would I consider having this "feature" when there is absolutely no upside in it for me?
--
Dyran
| | |
|
|
|
Henry,
I thought it was clear in my previous posting(s) and I was not included in your out/out list.
Let me just ask you something to see if I am understanding the point of this thread at this moment (after having read all of the postings...): Are you asking if I want this feature removed from my profile even if a client's feedback is only visible to me?
If so, my answer is YES, I want it removed.
If I understood it well, you asked then why?... See more Henry,
I thought it was clear in my previous posting(s) and I was not included in your out/out list.
Let me just ask you something to see if I am understanding the point of this thread at this moment (after having read all of the postings...): Are you asking if I want this feature removed from my profile even if a client's feedback is only visible to me?
If so, my answer is YES, I want it removed.
If I understood it well, you asked then why?
Well, I actually don't see the point of getting feedback from a client through my profile so that other outsourcers can evaluate me and ask me to work for them. There are translation tests, referees, that can show my work.
If I choose to have the feedback only visible to me, I also don't see the point of it. If a client wants to give me some feedback, he/she must adress it directly to me.
Did I answer your question or am I missing the point of the discussion now? ▲ Collapse
| | | | | A vote for reason 2? | Jun 28, 2006 |
Susana Galilea wrote:
I am opposed to Proz.com taking a mediator role in this respect, no matter what shape or form. I have chosen to pay for a service with my dues, which allows me to have an online presence. This serves as a display, or business card in Sarah's words, that allows clients to contact me. All transactions from that point on should be between me and my client.
Thanks, Susana. May I conclude that your desire to opt out of receiving WWA entries, like Marc Prior's and Dyran's, is based primarily on my prior point 2, ie. "You do not want your relationship with you clients to be affected in any way by a new ProZ.com feature"?
| | | | | Thanks, Dyran. | Jun 28, 2006 |
Dyran Altenburg wrote: Henry wrote:
Thanks. In the absence of a specific reason, should I put you down for "in principle", then? Ok, how about this? I don't need/want Proz to be in the middle because I can do a much better job dealing directly with my own clients. In other words, it is obvious to me that there is no added value whatsoever if I include a third party in the mix (quite the contrary). So, why on earth would I consider having this "feature" when there is absolutely no upside in it for me?
Got it, Dyran, very clear. Thanks!
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » New at ProZ.com: Outsourcer "willingness to work again" feedback for translators | 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 » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
