| 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
|
|---|
| Thanks, Henry | Jul 1, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
Not everyone does, Giovanni.
Well, yes, I think I was talking from point of view...
Yes, you can.
That's all I wanted to know...
Giovanni
| | | | | No consultation? | Jul 1, 2006 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote: MarcPrior wrote:
I must also say that this issue has been handled in a way which is highly damaging to the image of ProZ.com, in several respects. I'm quite astounded by the way this issue has been dealt with. I'm astounded by the 'implementation with no consultation' approach by site administrators
This is a matter that has been worked through for years.
So far, it has been discussed at three conferences. (You know this, because, as part of a group of 80 or so people in Oxford, you were personally outspoken on the matter.)
There have been perhaps twenty public threads raised by site users, and four or five moderator threads (two of them recently.) Moderators, like members, are evaluating the system, some support it, some dislike certain aspects, some dislike the system entirely.
I have also exchanged emails on the topic, over the years, with hundreds of members and site users.
Funny thing... you agree with Marc that the process of announcing this was damaging, but whereas Marc complained that site users are "required to justify why they do not wish to use the services concerned", and others complained because I was asking before deciding/explaining, you think we have not consulted enough.
Obviously, opinions can differ. But this all sure feels like consultation to me!
| | | |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote: Henry wrote:
Not everyone does, Giovanni.
Well, yes...
Finally we find something to agree on!
| | | |
Henry wrote:
Obviously, opinions can differ. But this all sure feels like consultation to me!
I meant announcing the implementation of the feature and having a thread like this one before actually implementing the feature. I know this matter has been discussed before, but the WWA was dropped on us with no prior warning whatsoever.
Giovanni
| | |
|
|
|
| Sanity check, anyone? | Jul 1, 2006 |
JL Baker wrote:
I was waiting a bit to see if Henry added to his post, but maybe that's it?
I have more posts to make with specifics, but first I'd like to do a sanity check.
I want to make sure I have been clear in enough in what I have written so far. And what I am getting in the way of responses in this thread is not encouraging.
Many people have read this thread. I'd be interested in hearing from people who have not yet posted -- people who feel neutral on the issue of WWA -- whether or not what I have written generally about our approach to development and administration makes any sense.
Does anyone follow what I have said so far? Does it makes sense to anyone that participating in ProZ.com at times involves cooperating?
Does my KudoZ filtering example make any sense to anyone? Does anyone see how it shows that sometimes offering more choice means offering less choice it to another?
| | | | | whose sanity is in question? | Jul 1, 2006 |
Is that sanity check meant for me?
And to think that I was feeling more sane than usual today!
To answer one of your questions, you've been clear as a bell to me so far. I've tried to make my questions just as clear. No need to call out the straightjackets!
Jennifer
| | | | | What I would like are specific answers to questions raised | Jul 1, 2006 |
Can you just give us the thirty-second version, just so we can feel secure that:
1. ProZ will not be collecting, soliciting, or storing any information regarding anyone's opinion on performance as individual translators for those who choose not to use the service ("opt-outs"), either through the profile page or any other means.
2. Those who do want to use the service have a means to use it and have their data collected and stored, if they have "opted-in".
I... See more Can you just give us the thirty-second version, just so we can feel secure that:
1. ProZ will not be collecting, soliciting, or storing any information regarding anyone's opinion on performance as individual translators for those who choose not to use the service ("opt-outs"), either through the profile page or any other means.
2. Those who do want to use the service have a means to use it and have their data collected and stored, if they have "opted-in".
I personally do not feel that there is any reason, given the wide range of functionality available through Web programming these days, why the "infinite range of choice" alluded to earlier cannot be provided with regard to features like this (and if points 1 and 2 above are in fact true now, that for me means you essentially are providing "infinite choice" with regard to the WWF feature). A simple IF statement in scripts easily determines whether a given module will or will not function with regard to a given user -- whether that has to do with display, data collection, handing, or whatever.
I'd also comment that the climate control example and the KudoZ filtering do not hold here. The decision to filter KudoZ is information provided willingly by a user; the WWF opinions are not. And opening a window has nothing to do with the right to privacy (unless of course there are construction workers outside... )
(On a very side note, that was both one of the best and one of the worst things about living in Taiwan: the construction workers didn't whistle at the women. Some days that was nice; other days you felt like, "Don't I rate?" ) ▲ Collapse
| | | | Bentext 
Germany
Local time: 09:44
Member (2003)
English to German
+ ...
| Difference between community and business-oriented features | Jul 1, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
Does my KudoZ filtering example make any sense to anyone? Does anyone see how it shows that sometimes offering more choice means offering less choice it to another?
Hi Henry,
Yes it makes sense. I understand your variation of the not so inventive "Individual freedom ends where the freedom of the community begins" theme but I find the analogy not suitable. You're talking about a pure community feature concerning cost-free work for fellow translators ; it's fine that you impose any rules supported by the majority in this context. With regard to the Outsourcer WWA option which directly concerns my business and my marketing, I'm not prepared to accept any cooperation constraints – please keep in mind that many members of the community are my direct competitors. I think there should be a clear border between any community features and the business-oriented features of Proz.com. My participation on Proz.com mainly consists in using your hosting services so please let me know if I should look for another provider if it's not possible to use Proz only for that purpose.
Finally, I appreciate that you have accepted our out/out position ; thank you for that. Like many others, I'd have preferred to be consulted before the implementation of the new feature but at the end of the day, the result is the same.
Have a good weekend.
Stéphane
[Edited at 2006-07-01 13:48]
| | |
|
|
|
Fan Gao
Australia
Local time: 17:44
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Please answer... | Jul 1, 2006 |
JL Baker wrote:
I have a couple of straightforward questions-
1) What were the concrete motivations behind this new feature? Did members request it? Did outsourcers request it? Has it proven to be a useful feature of other, nameless translation sites? Was it just someone's brainchild?
2) Why was such an important feature implemented without any prior discussion among members? The new profile format was hashed over for months...
Henry,
I'm clear. As far as I'm concerned you have confirmed as per your reply to Giovanni's question "All I asked was: can we opt out/out, without the site collecting private information on the members who wish to opt out altogether?" and your answer was "yes, you can." Fine, that's all people wanted to know, well not all but the answer to the major question that has arisen over and over.
I support you, support your site and I am using and like the new feature although as I've said from the beginning, not so happy about the implementation and timing.
Could you please just answer Jennifer's questions? You seem to have picked up on her initial observation, which I agree with because it seems like I've been waiting for some huge announcement to appear and it's not going to happen, and conveniently dismissed her very key questions. Questions that myself and I'm sure many people would like answers to.
If you want that sanity check, if you want people to be clear and understand what you're saying then please just tell us in clear bullet points what the score is. Aren't you in the least bit surprised that by referring to the Kudoz filter and telling little stories about climate control that you might just be clouding the matter at hand?
Thanking you in advance for your clear succint (I think I spelt that wrong:) answers.
All the best,
Mark
| | | | Sormane Gomes
United States
Local time: 03:44
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| Let's cut to the chase, shall we? | Jul 1, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
I have more posts to make with specifics, but first I'd like to do a sanity check.
More posts? Henry, let's cut to the chase, shall we?
I’m here reading Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4…and yet there’s no conclusion to this 34-page (as of now) discussion.
Henry wrote:
Many people have read this thread. I'd be interested in hearing from people who have not yet posted.
How can they do that if the thread isn’t clearly visible anymore?
Henry wrote:
Again, if you don't want others to make entries for you, you will be able to opt out of receiving them. They can not leave entries for you now.
ot 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. But I'll get to the choices later.
[/quote]
What do you mean by “can not leave entries for you NOW”? What do you mean by "not required to *use*"?
What do you mean by "*prevent others* from making private entries that only you would have seen"? What choices?
See, again your careful choice of words, and I feel we’re going around in circles here.
Chinese Concept wrote:
If you want that sanity check, if you want people to be clear and understand what you're saying then please just tell us in clear bullet points what the score is. Aren't you in the least bit surprised that by referring to the KudoZ filter and telling little stories about climate control that you might just be clouding the matter at hand?
Exactly.
Just tell us if you are going to allow us to opt out/out? Yes or no? Why or why not?
Sormane F. Gomes
[Edited at 2006-07-01 14:22]
| | | |
Sormane Fitzgerald Gomes wrote:
Just tell us if you are going to allow us to opt out/out? Yes or no? Why or why not?
Sormane F. Gomes
Henry has already said exactly that. You will be allowed to opt out. He said it twice and then he replied to exactly that question asked by Giovanni.
Henry wrote: Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
All I asked was: can we opt out/out, without the site collecting private information on the members who wish to opt out altogether? Yes, you can.
[Edited at 2006-07-01 14:29]
| | | | | Thanks, JL Baker! | Jul 1, 2006 |
JL Baker wrote:
Is that sanity check meant for me?
And to think that I was feeling more sane than usual today!
No, me!
To answer one of your questions, you've been clear as a bell to me so far.
Thanks!
| | |
|
|
|
Sorry, folks.
I am back, I returned because i was curious what was going on and the developments here.
I read the 8-10 pages I had missed. But this still does not seem a dialogue or a forum on a new feature on a constructive criticism basis, but an impeachment on Henry.
I am not going to take part on that. I opt out this thread again. I am not interested anymore.
Good luck to ProZ.
| | | | Sormane Gomes
United States
Local time: 03:44
Portuguese to English
+ ...
Konstantin Kisin wrote: Sormane Fitzgerald Gomes wrote:
Just tell us if you are going to allow us to opt out/out? Yes or no? Why or why not?
Sormane F. Gomes
Henry has already said exactly that. You will be allowed to opt out. He said it twice and then he replied to exactly that question asked by Giovanni. Henry wrote: Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
All I asked was: can we opt out/out, without the site collecting private information on the members who wish to opt out altogether? Yes, you can. [Edited at 2006-07-01 14:25]
Indeed, by answering somebody's question. I guess I missed that one in the sea of posts, I apologize for that, but I am still waiting for that to come as a form of "official" announcement, perhaps in Part 10 or so.
Thanks for clarifying that, Konstantin.
Sormane F. Gomes
[Edited at 2006-07-01 14:29]
| | | | | It stands to reason that at some point, you have to make something public. Adjustments must follow. | Jul 1, 2006 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote: Henry wrote:
Obviously, opinions can differ. But this all sure feels like consultation to me! I meant announcing the implementation of the feature and having a thread like this one before actually implementing the feature. I know this matter has been discussed before, but the WWA was dropped on us with no prior warning whatsoever.
I made the point that while theoretically we could discuss everything in advance, it turns out that it helps for people to see things. In fact, some people even refuse to discuss until they see implementations. So there is a point at which we have to make something live to give users a chance to test, see, feel and then discuss.
At that point, we have no choice but to implement with our best guess at what will be right with the community. That means we have to do things like set defaults, guessing what is best.
This is not the point at which we are done. Philosophically, we are never done making improvements, but we are certainly not done with a new release until we have addressed the initial batch of feedback.
Again, that is what this is.
| | | | | 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 | 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! » |
| | Trados Business Manager Lite | Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio
Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
