| 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
|
|---|
Michele Fauble 
United States
Local time: 01:27
Member (2006)
Norwegian to English
+ ...
| The marketing impact of the feature | Jul 4, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
This is not to filter the good from the bad, but to provide a powerful marketing tool to those who wish to use it.
I, for one, take Henry at his word on this. I think others should give him the benefit of the doubt.
Henry wrote:
The easier it is to opt out of *receiving* WWA entries, the less marketing impact the system will have.
This is a claim, and like any claim can be challenged. But even assuming it is correct, the effect on the marketing impact may be insignificant.
Now the challenge.
Imagine you have just moved to a new community and need to find a dentist. You're lucky and have a couple of friends who have been living in the community for a while. You tell them you're looking for a good dentist and each strongly recommends his/her respective dentist. Now you know of two dentists who come with strong recommendations, and you know nothing about the other dentists in town except that they claim to be good dentists. I think the two dentists with the recommendations have a strong edge up on the competition.
To be more specific, If I'm an outsourcer who is looking for a translator, and who factors in WWA feedback in my selection criteria, and there are some translators with strong WWA scores/testimonials, and other translators who display no WWA feedback, then those other translators are irrelevant and have no effect on the marketing impact of the WWA entries of those who do participate. I would even say that the marketing impact of WWA entries is increased as a result of there being fewer translators who provide this information!
[Edited at 2006-07-04 02:28]
| | | | | Development at ProZ.com and WWA (part 9) | Jul 4, 2006 |
All options to be offered - but opting out/out will come with concessions
For the reasons outlined in my previous eight "series" posts, our initial plan was to not allow out/out at all. However, given the importance of the out/out option to a sizable segment of our community, we brainstormed for a way that we could in fact offer it, without diluting the potential of the WWA system.
We think we have something that might work. We have decided to start with it. (If ... See more All options to be offered - but opting out/out will come with concessions
For the reasons outlined in my previous eight "series" posts, our initial plan was to not allow out/out at all. However, given the importance of the out/out option to a sizable segment of our community, we brainstormed for a way that we could in fact offer it, without diluting the potential of the WWA system.
We think we have something that might work. We have decided to start with it. (If it does not work, we'll change it... but we'll have to see it in practice to determine whether or not it is viable.)
What we decided, in a nutshell, is to give everyone all logical choices. That is, all three options discussed are available: in/in, out/in and out/out.
We have already covered the problems inherent in offering out/out... so here is the means we came up with to try to meet everyone's needs: The out/out option is structured a way that encourages its use only by those who really need it.
If you really need to opt out/out, the choice is there. But to discourage site users from making this choice lightly, in light of the fact that your choice has an impact on others, the choice to opt out/out comes with concessions. This is for the integrity of the system, for one thing, and also for the sake of fairness.
Also, because of the risk of "gaming", choosing to opt out/out will be considered more or less a “permanent” decision. If you are sure you will never want to use the WWA system, you may confidently opt out/out now. However, if you think you might consider using the system in the future (when there may be benefits to the system that have not yet been conceived), you should bear in mind the following: once you opt out, opting back in will require you to submit a support ticket explaining your reasons. This is our way of ensuring that gaming--which would render all WWA records suspect--does not occur.
I'll outline the choices in detail in my next post... ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Development at ProZ.com, the community and WWA (part 10) | Jul 4, 2006 |
The three choices for site users regarding WWA
Three options for the WWA system will be offered to all ProZ.com site users. Those three options are:
1. Opt in to both showing and receiving WWA entries. ("in/in")
2. Opt out of showing WWA entries, but be willing to accept them privately (should they be entered.) ("out/in")
3. Opt out of showing, and furthermore, prevent others from making entries ("out/out")
Before the end of... See more The three choices for site users regarding WWA
Three options for the WWA system will be offered to all ProZ.com site users. Those three options are:
1. Opt in to both showing and receiving WWA entries. ("in/in")
2. Opt out of showing WWA entries, but be willing to accept them privately (should they be entered.) ("out/in")
3. Opt out of showing, and furthermore, prevent others from making entries ("out/out")
Before the end of the current one-month trial period, each site user will be asked to choose one of these three options.
The decision should be made carefully, because it will impact your experience and your options as a site user. Details of each option:
Option 1: in/in (= participation)
By choosing option 1, a site user indicates his/her willingness to participate with colleagues in the WWA network.
If you select this option, a "willingness to work again" ("WWA") box appears in your profile. Those who have outsourced work to you in the past will be able to make entries concerning their willingness to do so again, in "yes", "no" and "maybe" terms. Those entries will appear, as long as you so choose, along with a line of response that you may optionally enter, to those visiting your profile. This could potentially enhance your profile.
Note that when you select this option, you are opening yourself up to the possibility of receiving not only "yes" but also "no" and "maybe" entries which would be visible to others, as long as your profile is configured to show WWA entries. If you are not prepared for this to occur, you should not select this option.
Not that the following protections are in place for those who choose this option:
* Outsourcers with low average LWA's will not be permitted to make entries in the first place.
* If an entry made for you expresses a WWA of "maybe" or "no", you will have a week to respond before that entry becomes visible to others.
* Site staff members will be vetting entries, ensuring to reasonable extent that the system will be used in the intended way.
* A review process will be made available in cases of dispute.
If you ever decide that you no longer wish to use the WWA system, you may change your preference to option 2 or option 3. You may switch between option 1 and 2 as frequently as you like. In other words, you can show your WWA entries in your profile whenever you want, as long as you leave open the door for others to make entries for you.
Option 2: out/in (do not display entries, but also do not refuse to receive them privately)
With this option 2, a site user opts out of using the WWA system in his/her profile, but remains willing to accept entries on a private basis. Entries received do not appear to others, but remain at the site user's disposal, should s/he decide to use them in the future.
To be clear, if you choose option 2:
* A WWA box will *not* appear in your profile.
* Those who have outsourced work to you in the past *will* be able to make entries concerning their willingness to work with you again--this they would do via a special page provided for that purpose. (This page has not yet been developed.)
* You may request entries and view them, but they will be visible only to you.
* If at any time you decide you would like to show your entries in your profile, you are free to do so (by switching to option 1).
You may switch between option 1 and 2 at will, as frequently as you like. In other words, you can show your WWA entries in your profile whenever you want, as long as you leave open the door for others to make entries for you (which, if you are not showing entries, only you will see.)
If you wish to switch from option 2 to option 3, that is also possible.
Those who have not yet made their mind up about the WWA system and would like to evaluate it in practice are recommended to select option 2.
Option 3: out/out (full out; do not accept even entries that only you would see)
Option 3 is intended for those who are certain that they will never use the WWA system and, furthermore, require a means of refusing to accept even private entries from those who might otherwise leave them.
If you choose option 3:
* A WWA box will *not* appear in your profile
* No one will be permitted to make WWA entries that concern you (via your profile page, or any other page.)
Important notes about this option:
* Because of the "gaming" problem mentioned above, those who select this option will not be able to unselect it without assistance. Undoing this selection requires that a support ticket be entered.
* The choice not to allow others to make unsolicited entries (even those that only the recipient would see), will be regarded as a decision to opt out of the ProZ.com WWA network entirely. Under this condition, those who choose option 3 will not be permitted to make unsolicited WWA entries either for service providers (via profiles, etc.) or for outsourcers (via the Blue Board). In other words, those who choose this option will be permitted to make entries when honoring requests from others, but otherwise will not be permitted to make entries.
* The decision not to make oneself available for feedback may mean that one will not benefit from future features--features not yet conceived--that may emerge as WWA goes into use in the community.
Every site user will soon be asked to decide on one of the above
An interface is not yet available for entering your preference. When it becoes available, notice will be sent to each and every site user.
For now, during the trial period, the WWA feature is being offered on a strictly opt-in basis. Those who wish to use it may begin to do so now in earnest, and any entries collected will not be removed at the end of the trial perod. To active the WWA option, click on the toggle link beside the word "Feedback" in the new profile format. (Go to http://www.proz.com/profile while logged in.)
Those who do not wish to show feedback do not need to do anything. By default, for now, all those who do not opt in explicitly will not show and--for the trial period--will not receive entries.
Before the end of the trial period, notification will be sent out of the new feature, and an invitation will be extended to select an option.
If after several reminders a site user has not chosen an option, option 2 will be set. This is regarded as the most appropriate default, since it offers the user the protection of entries being kept private, while not subjecting the member to the limitations of option 3.
............. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Development at ProZ.com, the community and WWA (part 11) | Jul 4, 2006 |
Not the end
This is the last post of my series, but I do not consider this a closed issue. We will begin to implement the above, and will try it in practice before accepting or discarding it. In the meantime, we want to continue to hear from you.
I know not everyone will be pleased with this. I ask only that everyone here bear in mind that we will continue to listen to your feedback, and that we remain committed to improving your online workplace and ensuring tha... See more Not the end
This is the last post of my series, but I do not consider this a closed issue. We will begin to implement the above, and will try it in practice before accepting or discarding it. In the meantime, we want to continue to hear from you.
I know not everyone will be pleased with this. I ask only that everyone here bear in mind that we will continue to listen to your feedback, and that we remain committed to improving your online workplace and ensuring that it is what you need to "network, expand your business, do better work and have more fun".
..............................
This thread is long already and I would like to round it out as a group. I would ask that if you would like to ask questions or respond, that you submit just one or two more posts and then wait until the next thread appears on the matter. We will open a new one with a summary after we have done some improvements (thanks for all the requests) and the trial has progressed a bit.
Finally, sorry for the length of this series of posts, and thank you for hanging in there and participating and posting. Here we have addressed some initial issues, but there will be many more to address going forward. I invite you all to continue to be part of developing this important feature. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Susana Galilea
United States
Local time: 03:27
English to Spanish
+ ...
| did I understand this? | Jul 4, 2006 |
Henry wrote:
those who choose option 3 will not be permitted to make unsolicited WWA entries either for service providers (via profiles, etc.) or for outsourcers (via the Blue Board).
In other words, if I were to choose option 3, I would be relinquishing my privilege to make unsolicited entries in the Blue Board, i.e. losing one of my current privileges as a member. Is this accurate?
Henry wrote:
The decision not to make oneself available for feedback may have additional or unexpected repercussions in the future, as the site evolves or new features are developed.
I am being asked to make a decision with the knowledge it may have additional or unexpected repercussions in the future, but without a hint as to which those may be. Is this accurate?
Thanks for clarifying this for me.
Susana
[Edited at 2006-07-04 07:36]
| | | | | Clarifications in response to Susana | Jul 4, 2006 |
Susana Galilea wrote: Henry wrote:
those who choose option 3 will not be permitted to make unsolicited WWA entries either for service providers (via profiles, etc.) or for outsourcers (via the Blue Board). In other words, if I were to choose option 3, I would be relinquishing my privilege to make unsolicited entries in the Blue Board, i.e. losing one of my current privileges as a member. Is this accurate?
That is correct, more or less. By selecting this option, you would be choosing to give up one of your rights as a site user (all site users can make Blue Board entries, not just members).
The idea, simply, is that if you are leaving unsolicited entries for others, you would in turn be willing to receive the same. (Bear in mind that unlike Blue Board outsourcers, you have the option of keeping your record of entries private.)
Henry wrote:
The decision not to make oneself available for feedback may have additional or unexpected repercussions in the future, as the site evolves or new features are developed. In other words, I am being asked to make a decision with the knowledge it may have additional or unexpected repercussions in the future, but without a hint as to which those may be. Is this accurate?
Not really. This is more of a disclaimer, because we don't/can't know what will grow out of this new feature. I'll clarify that by editing my post.
It seems to me that one would not want to rush to making the decision that s/e will never have a use WWA or any derivative feature. But for those who are certain (some posting here are), we are putting the option forward.
| | | | Ana Cuesta
Spain
Local time: 10:27
Member
English to Spanish
Fine with me, thanks Henry, the so called concessions seem fair enough (I've always had the same reserves about the BB -only I felt it was not for me to complain about it- so I've never contributed to it and have no problem not being allowed to do so) and I hope everybody will now be able to find an option suited to them (which is not a small acomplishment, thanks for your willingness to do the juggling up, although I still think that certain rights should be regarded above "choices"). I just wo... See more Fine with me, thanks Henry, the so called concessions seem fair enough (I've always had the same reserves about the BB -only I felt it was not for me to complain about it- so I've never contributed to it and have no problem not being allowed to do so) and I hope everybody will now be able to find an option suited to them (which is not a small acomplishment, thanks for your willingness to do the juggling up, although I still think that certain rights should be regarded above "choices"). I just wonder if all that suspense you "inflicted" upon us was really necessary but I guess all is well which ends well so I'm happy we can finally put this to rest.
Until next major feature being introduced "through the backdoor"? Hopefully not, although I'll surely keep a closer eye on what goes in/out of my profile from now on!
Thanks again and all the best, ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Susana Galilea wrote: Henry wrote:
those who choose option 3 will not be permitted to make unsolicited WWA entries either for service providers (via profiles, etc.) or for outsourcers (via the Blue Board). In other words, if I were to choose option 3, I would be relinquishing my privilege to make unsolicited entries in the Blue Board, i.e. losing one of my current privileges as a member. Is this accurate?
That is correct, more or less. By selecting this option, you would be choosing to give up one of your rights as a site user (all site users can make Blue Board entries, not just members).
The idea, simply, is that if you are leaving unsolicited entries for others, you would in turn be willing to receive the same. (Bear in mind that unlike Blue Board outsourcers, you have the option of keeping your record of entries private.)
So, you are forcing on us a feature we don't want, as paying members, and in return, for not wanting this feature, we lose one of our important - I would say maybe the most important - previleges. We didn't ask for this new feature, it was your idea. We don't like it and so we are punished for it. Sorry, but I won't be renewing my membership. And to be frank, I've had just about enough of this interfering with our professional rights. This is the way I see it.
Giovanni
[Edited at 2006-07-04 09:43]
| | |
|
|
|
Fan Gao
Australia
Local time: 18:27
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Quite right too... | Jul 4, 2006 |
Susana Galilea wrote: Henry wrote:
those who choose option 3 will not be permitted to make unsolicited WWA entries either for service providers (via profiles, etc.) or for outsourcers (via the Blue Board). In other words, if I were to choose option 3, I would be relinquishing my privilege to make unsolicited entries in the Blue Board, i.e. losing one of my current privileges as a member. Is this accurate?
That is correct, more or less. By selecting this option, you would be choosing to give up one of your rights as a site user (all site users can make Blue Board entries, not just members).
Thank you Henry and well done:) I think you options are spot on.
There will be a huge backlash against losing the right to leave feedback on the BB but, come on people, fair's fair, you can't have it both ways.
People will threaten not to renew their memberships but I think you know as well as I do that they will.
I welcome option number one with the aim of continuing to work hard and building up good feedback and in an ironic kind of way it'd be great for me if more people opt out because then it will give me and others, who opt in, an even greater edge:)
Keep up the good work and I look forward to seeing how this feature progresses in the future.
Best wishes,
Mark
| | | | gianfranco
Brazil
Local time: 05:27
Member (2001)
English to Italian
+ ...
| I don't see any interference | Jul 4, 2006 |
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
So, you are forcing on us a feature we don't want, as paying members, and in return, for not wanting this feature, we lose one of our important - I would say maybe the most important - previleges. We didn't ask for this new feature, it was your idea. We don't like it and so we are punished for it. Sorry, but I won't be renewing my membership. And to be frank, I've had just about enough of this interfering with our professional rights. This is the way I see it.
Dear Giovanni,
it seems to me that you didn't ask for any other feature either, mainly KudoZ, the forums, the blueboard, all the networking (virtual or in person), the glossaries, the information circulating, the discounts on software, the on-line marketing, and the site itself.
And yet you have used it, paid a membership fee and, I desume, you have benefited from it for a number of years...
As this feature is shaping up, or as it may evolve in the near future, I don't see any major cause of concern, or "interference in my professional right", as you put it.
Gianfranco
| | | |
Chinese Concept wrote:
There will be a huge backlash against losing the right to leave feedback on the BB but, come on people, fair's fair, you can't have it both ways.
Best wishes,
Mark
We didn't ask for this. It comes down to taking one privilige away for not complying. I call it a dictatorial approach. The out/out option is not an option anymore.
Anyway, the BB will suffer as result of this. Have you thought about that, Henry?
People will threaten not to renew their memberships but I think you know as well as I do that they will.
Just wait and see...
Giovanni
| | | | | No, with due respect, you are wrong... | Jul 4, 2006 |
Gianfranco Manca wrote: As this feature is shaping up, or as it may evolve in the near future, I don't see any major cause of concern, or "interference in my professional right", as you put it. Gianfranco
Well, and you are wrong, because Proz wanted to collect confidential information on its members, even if some of the members were completely against it. I call this interfering with my professional right of conducting my business the way I want. And since I'm paying Henry for using all the features, I believe I have the right not to opt in. If I weren't paying, then fine. Take it or leave it. Now we managed to convince Henry that we do have the right to opt out/out and not to have our information collected. And what do we get? We are banned from commenting on the outsourcers on the BB! So, before it was ok, and now it's not, just because we don't want one feature. I call this a kindergarten attitude.
Giovanni
| | |
|
|
|
Kirill Semenov
Ukraine
Local time: 11:27
Member (2004)
English to Russian
+ ...
Giovanni Guarnieri MITI, MIL wrote:
We are banned from commenting on the outsourcers on the BB!
If you don't want any confidential information about YOU being published or even `hiddenly' stored without your consent, then why you insist on your right to enter any confidential information about OTHERS without their consent? Please, do be logical and consistent. And please note that ProZ staff do not restrict your right to read and use the BB entries (which I would certainly do for `out/out'-ers if I were Henry ).
[Edited at 2006-07-04 10:35]
| | | | | Inconsistency | Jul 4, 2006 |
Kirill Semenov wrote:
If you don't want any confidential information about YOU being published or even `hiddenly' stored without your consent, then why you insist on your right to enter any confidential information about OTHERS without their consent? Please, do be logical and consistent.
And why was it ok before? Just answer this question. We are just being punished. Whos' being inconsistent?
Giovanni
[Edited at 2006-07-04 10:41]
| | | | Larissa Dinsley
United Kingdom
Local time: 09:27
Member (2003)
English to Russian
+ ...
Kirill Semenov wrote: And please note that ProZ staff do not restrict your right to read and use the BB entries (which I would certainly do for `out/out'-ers if I were Henry ). [Edited at 2006-07-04 10:35]
And what a releif that you are not!
It has been quite difficult to follow all these philosophical debates for a very practical person I am. However, it looks to me that the feature is being implemented as it has been initially intended with the only exception of allowing us to opt out and not allowing translators that are prefer to opt out to make entries to the BB. It's fine by me. Although a bit puzzling as the reason for me to make such entires has always been to help colleagues rather than anything else.
Cheers,
Larissa
| | | | | 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 » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
