| 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
|
|---|
| I'll be out for a few hours now... | Jun 30, 2006 |
But please feel free to comment on what I have posted so far.
| | | | Ralf Lemster 
Germany
Local time: 03:50
English to German
+ ...
| Thanks, Henry! | Jun 30, 2006 |
I really appreciate your commitment, and your willingness to listen to members' concerns.
Best,
Ralf
| | | | | Development at ProZ.com, the community and you (part 3) | Jun 30, 2006 |
What do we do when different segments of the community have different needs? That is the topic for post 3 in the series...
We strive to offer choice (before resorting to compromise)
One of the principles in our playbook is that we work to "provide choice before compromise". What that means is that we ask the question, "is there any way to arrange things such that all the needs of all the users be met completely in this case?"
Applying this approach t... See more What do we do when different segments of the community have different needs? That is the topic for post 3 in the series...
We strive to offer choice (before resorting to compromise)
One of the principles in our playbook is that we work to "provide choice before compromise". What that means is that we ask the question, "is there any way to arrange things such that all the needs of all the users be met completely in this case?"
Applying this approach to the workplace temperature example, what we would do is look for a way to provide each worker with independent climate control.
The Internet is a big help. We are really able to do a lot in terms of offering customizable experiences... more than is possible in offline workplaces. But even on the Internet, there are limits.
Let me illustrate with some examples.
There was the case of "off-topic postings". (Dyran will remember that one.) We had a group of users who wanted to post things like "happy birthday" messages in the forums. A nice enough thing in a community, to be sure. We also had a group of users who did not want to receive, or even see, such messages. This is also a legitimate position, ProZ.com being a workplace. What to do? We did not broker a compromise. Instead, we offered the possibility to opt out of receiving, and even seeing, "off-topic" posts. We did the technical work that was necessary (that is always doable), and all we had to ask from the community was that postings be labelled properly as on-topic or off. Those who don't care for off-topic postings opted out, and they don't see or receive them anymore. In other words, we found a solution that satisfied both camps virtually completely, and the irritation ceased.
It is not always that easy. (Not that "on/off-topic" was easy... in fact, there was a thread like this one, if I remember correctly, before we arrived at that solution.) Anyway, what I am saying is that in some cases, we are not able to offer complete satisfaction to diverse camps. Sometimes, there has to be give and take.
An example...
There have been, and still are, controversial askers. In one case, a sizable contingent in a given subcommunity wanted a particular asker to be kicked out, while another sizable contingent objected... in fact, that contingent was answering his questions. What to do?
Applying our rule of "choice before compromise", what we did was implement a feature that allows site users to "filter" (and conversely, to "flag") particular KudoZ askers. The result: there is far less irritation apparent (although satisfaction is not quite complete). The people who really do not want to see the offending members questions, don't. Those who are happy to answer, may. It was a reasonable solution, I hope you all would agree, and one that was largely welcomed without significant (any?) opposition.
But wait. Consider what this reasonable solution entailed. To implement it, we had to provide a way for people to indicate which askers they want to filter (or flag.) That means that everyone on the site became subject to filtering (every registered profile, without exception), and we now have in the database a set of records that indicate that certain users do not want to answer questions asked by certain other users.
Sound familiar to a degree to this discussion?
I hope common sense would make clear that in the KudoZ filtering case, there was no conspiracy, no "data collection adventure", no sinister plans from ProZ.com... it was just us doing what we do: serving members and offering choice.
Yet we wind up holding that data.
To be continued…. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Thank you, Ralf | Jun 30, 2006 |
Ralf Lemster wrote:
I really appreciate your commitment, and your willingness to listen to members' concerns.
Thanks. I appreciate your posting, Ralf.
| | |
|
|
|
| after approximately 30 pages..... | Jun 30, 2006 |
I have been reading this thread for several days without feeling the need to participate in the discussion.
I am part of the silent camp who is not against the WWA feedback options offered, nor am I particularly worried about the data collection issue.
On one hand, most of the posts have been AGAINST the implementation of the new feature, and if compared to the total number of proz.com members/users, they are not necessarily representative of the entire community.
... See more I have been reading this thread for several days without feeling the need to participate in the discussion.
I am part of the silent camp who is not against the WWA feedback options offered, nor am I particularly worried about the data collection issue.
On one hand, most of the posts have been AGAINST the implementation of the new feature, and if compared to the total number of proz.com members/users, they are not necessarily representative of the entire community.
On the other hand, what I have appreciated most, is the fact that everybody's opinions (those that have been voiced, at least) have been taken into consideration.
Have a nice evening/week-end,
ciao, D. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Development at ProZ.com, the community and you (part 4) | Jun 30, 2006 |
Continuing with the example of KudoZ filtering and the data on who filters/flags whom...
KudoZ filtering - why we do not allow people to "opt out" of being filtered
"What does ProZ.com want to do with that data, if no one is going to see it?", you might (reasonably) have asked. "What is the point?" (I say these questions are "reasonable", but you would probably ask them only if you lost track of the big picture.)
Well, here is the answer: we (the Pro... See more Continuing with the example of KudoZ filtering and the data on who filters/flags whom...
KudoZ filtering - why we do not allow people to "opt out" of being filtered
"What does ProZ.com want to do with that data, if no one is going to see it?", you might (reasonably) have asked. "What is the point?" (I say these questions are "reasonable", but you would probably ask them only if you lost track of the big picture.)
Well, here is the answer: we (the ProZ.com administration) do not do anything with that data. That data is entered by site users for their own purposes, to control their ProZ.com experiences. In other words, the data is necessary only in order that the system may offer choice to our members... the same choice that those in the out/out crowd are (legitimately) requesting.
Now, continuing with the asker filtering example, what would we do if that controversial asker demanded a way to prevent others from filtering his questions? In stating his case, he might use some of the arguments that were used here: "I don't want data entered about me without my permission...", "I don't want ProZ.com between me and my colleagues...", "What if ProZ.com's servers were cracked and someone found that data...", or "I object in principle to being evaluated." (even though he was not being "evaluated", per se.)
He might also argue that the system was suspect, it would not work, he did not need it so why do it, and so on. He might even take a hard stance (no one here has) and say, "Look, I want my questions to go to as many people as possible, and you may not stop me from doing so, as your doing so will impact my business and livelihood", etc.
Allowing that for such a minor matter it sounds a little far-fetched, some of the above concerns are legitimate and valid. I understand them. But we can't very well allow him to "opt out" of being filtered. Why? Because granting to that one user the "freedom to opt out", in this case, would mean that we must revoke everyone else's "freedom to filter" his questions. And that is not fair, and not in the best interests of our community.
So you see, these things are not merely a question of personal choice.
The current case is not the same. WWA is a much more serious thing. But I hope this example helps illustrate that giving options to one segment of the community sometimes affects the options available to another segment.
(To be continued tomorrow... reactions welcome in the meantime.) ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| No comments so far, Henry | Jun 30, 2006 |
You have wrote a lot but nothing on this thread specifically or on our concerns, although I understand you had to make this introduction.
I can imagine what is about to come, but I'll wait and see and then comment.
Have a nice evening.
Ivana
| | | | Susana Galilea
United States
Local time: 20:50
English to Spanish
+ ...
| reactions welcome... | Jul 1, 2006 |
Ivana de Sousa Santos wrote:
You have wrote a lot but nothing on this thread specifically or on our concerns, although I understand you had to make this introduction.
I can imagine what is about to come, but I'll wait and see and then comment.
Also my reaction so far.
Best,
Susana
P.S. Actually I do have a comment, and I haven't had a chance to ponder it carefully, but I'll offer it in case it is relevant: Henry, in your last posting I had a visceral reaction to the choice of words "individual freedom" and "personal choice". My view of this situation is that it has to do instead with control over our professional image and methods, and the way these proposed changes may affect that. I offer this comment not in the spirit of nitpicking, rather as a potential hint as to the impact of this difference in perspectives.
Thank you very much.
[Edited at 2006-07-01 00:20]
| | | | Gerard de Noord
France
Local time: 03:50
Member (2003)
English to Dutch
+ ...
| Friday night salami | Jul 1, 2006 |
Henry said:
I have been asked to explain why we are reluctant to offer out/out. But before I do that, let me say that we have decided, based on your feedback, to offer just that. So that there will be no misunderstanding, let me repeat: not only will you not be required to *use* the WWA system (of course, this was always the case), you will also be able to *prevent others* from making private entries that only you would have seen. It will be your choice. All site users will be informed of ... See more Henry said:
I have been asked to explain why we are reluctant to offer out/out. But before I do that, let me say that we have decided, based on your feedback, to offer just that. So that there will be no misunderstanding, let me repeat: not only will you not be required to *use* the WWA system (of course, this was always the case), you will also be able to *prevent others* from making private entries that only you would have seen. It will be your choice. All site users will be informed of their options.
Gerard says:
This is a huge improvement. My initial problem was that I didn’t want (future) clients to see the feedback option in my ProZ profile. I think you're now even willing to solve the problems I hadn’t yet thought of.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that, in my case:
• If I decide ProZ is not the place to handle feedback, ProZ will abide.
• I won’t ask anybody’s public feedback and ProZ won't either.
• I'd have to opt in to let ProZ record feedback about me (the kind of feedback we’re talking about in this topic).
• Because of my choices, no client feedback will be recorded, I won’t have to fear that my name will come up if you choose to offer a new “channel” to anybody.
This would be all I could have asked for. Google has given me a worse deal. I only hope I won’t be filtered out as a non-feedbacker in future, but it’s your site.
Henry said:
ProZ.com is not merely something used by individuals acting in a vacuum. It is an interconnected whole, a society, a community, in which the rights and actions of one, influence the rights and actions of others.
The same is true in real-world workplaces. What this means, for example, is that when I turn up the heat to suit my preference, another person might open a window.
In other words, we're all in the same boat. That means that when features are implemented, the questions we must address are not merely questions of individual freedom. We have to consider how a feature meets the needs of a diverse body. Often, there are multiple sub-communities, or camps, with diverse interests and preferences.
and Henry said:
Applying this approach to the workplace temperature example, what we would do is look for a way to provide each worker with independent climate control.
The Internet is a big help. We are really able to do a lot in terms of offering customizable experiences... more than is possible in offline workplaces. But even on the Internet, there are limits.
Gerard says:
The Internet is relatively new. I’m proud to have been part of it from the beginning. Nowadays, I consult about twenty sites on a daily basis and your site is the only site I actually pay for.
A site can be anything: I didn’t feel part of an interconnected whole when you announced the Project History feature and the Feedback feature. This alienated me from ProZ, but I just hang on. The Internet is whatever you ask your programmers to program: your climate control metaphor insults both your programmers and us. You’re offering an online venue, there are no limits.
Please make this thread visible on the home page next Monday.
Kind regards,
Gerard de Noord ▲ Collapse
| | | | | What do you have in mind, Ivana? | Jul 1, 2006 |
Ivana de Sousa Santos wrote:
I can imagine what is about to come, but I'll wait and see and then comment.
I'm curious what you think will come... please write to me offline, if you feel like it.
| | |
|
|
|
| Thanks, Susana | Jul 1, 2006 |
Susana Galilea wrote:
... Henry, in your last posting I had a visceral reaction to the choice of words "individual freedom" and "personal choice".
Maybe I have been thinking too much about this, then. My choice of words does sound a bit too "lofty" when you put it that way.
| | | | | Thanks, Gerard | Jul 1, 2006 |
Gerard de Noord wrote:
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understand that, in my case:
• If I decide ProZ is not the place to handle feedback, ProZ will abide.
• I won’t ask anybody’s public feedback and ProZ won't either.
• I'd have to opt in to let ProZ record feedback about me (the kind of feedback we’re talking about in this topic).
• Because of my choices, no client feedback will be recorded, I won’t have to fear that my name will come up if you choose to offer a new “channel” to anybody.
That is basically it, yes. I'll get to specifics.
I said:
The Internet is a big help. We are really able to do a lot in terms of offering customizable experiences... more than is possible in offline workplaces. But even on the Internet, there are limits.
Gerard said:
The Internet is whatever you ask your programmers to program: your climate control metaphor insults both your programmers and us. You’re offering an online venue, there are no limits.
Here, I must disagree. In any community, online or off, people need to cooperate. Sometimes, that means a person can not do everything s/he would like to do.
That is what my KudoZ filtering example is meant to convey: if you want the option to filter my KudoZ questions, and I want the option not to be filtered... something has to give.
Gerard said:
The Internet is relatively new. I’m proud to have been part of it from the beginning. Nowadays, I consult about twenty sites on a daily basis and your site is the only site I actually pay for.
Thank you for that.
Gerard said:
Please make this thread visible on the home page next Monday.
I imagine this discussion will continue through the weekend. By Monday--ten days after the feaure announcement--everyone will have had ample opportunity to exchange opinions on this topic. At that point, I'll want to step back from discussion for the time being, in order to focus on implementing what we have learned and decided.
That said, I can promise you that there will be plenty more chances to discuss this. In the coming weeks and months, we will let every site user know about this feature and discussion, by forum post, email and otherwise, and there will be additional posts in which members will have opportunities to let us know how WWA is working and what we need to change.
Thanks for posting!
| | | | Susana Galilea
United States
Local time: 20:50
English to Spanish
+ ...
| it's not so much about linguistics | Jul 1, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
Maybe I have been thinking too much about this, then. My choice of words does sound a bit too "lofty" when you put it that way.
Henry, it's the perspective behind the choice of words that I reacted viscerally to, same as I was surprised at your example of setting the temperature in "real-world workplaces". Not having to squabble over my environment is the main reason I eventually became a fully self-employed translator, after years of freelancing in-house at translation agencies. Thing is, being an employee puts you in a position where your options as far as self-management are restricted. Last I checked, I was not an employee of this site (I am not saying you stated this, just responding to your choice of example), but a professional who has chosen to make an investment by supporting a business that offers products and services in line with my perspective and preferences. Granted, my perspective and preferences are unique to me, and I have no creative solution to offer as regards the situation at hand--especially since we still don't have all the information needed to offer well-rounded feedback. I do know I have been a satisfied customer and participant in this community for the past 3+ years, and I can't think of any other times when a situation such as this one came to be. Which naturally leads me to believe a new set of priorities is brewing, which may clash with what I consider the value of this site to be. I may be more or less pleased with different sections in this site, and some of them are downright useless to me. That's fine, I consider that a fair compromise in order to belong to a community, as long as other sections continue to be invaluable to me. My concern, in light of what I perceive as an emerging difference in perspectives, is over whether Proz is taking a direction I no longer agree with. It is a business and it should be management's prerrogative to evolve it in any way they choose. Same as it is my prerrogative to decide I no longer care to support it. But in order for those decisions to be made, there needs to be crystal clear communication. And this is just what many of us long-standing members have been requesting--very patiently, temperament clashes notwithstanding--for the past week. I appreciate you are finally seeking to provide some answers.
Buenas noches,
Susana
[Edited at 2006-07-01 03:54]
| | | | | 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 | 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! » |
| | 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 
