| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | What to do if you believe the wrong alternative is selected in KudoZ? Thread poster: ATIL KAYHAN
|
|---|
| Could you contact the moderator for that language pair? | Apr 12, 2011 |
In my main language pair, I sometimes see (correct) answers entered in the glossary, i.e., the correct term comes up when I do a search, even though when I access the KudoZ discussion, I can see that the asker had actually chosen and awarded the points to a different answer. I assume the moderator does this?
| | | | B D Finch 
France
Local time: 18:27
French to English
+ ...
| Ask yourself why it matters | Apr 12, 2011 |
If it is because it was your own answer that wasn't selected, then it could well be hubris. Let other people sort it out. I find fairly often that, when looking things up in KudoZ, the discussion and other answers are far more useful than the answer selected. The points really are not that important, though some sad people seem to think that they are. There are definitely some askers who don't have a clue and others whom I respectfully disagree with. In the end, the discussion and ideas thrown u... See more If it is because it was your own answer that wasn't selected, then it could well be hubris. Let other people sort it out. I find fairly often that, when looking things up in KudoZ, the discussion and other answers are far more useful than the answer selected. The points really are not that important, though some sad people seem to think that they are. There are definitely some askers who don't have a clue and others whom I respectfully disagree with. In the end, the discussion and ideas thrown up can be useful - even wrong ones.
 ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Why it matters | Apr 13, 2011 |
Well, first, I don't think discussions about incorrect terminology are useful unless they point out the error. The other reason it matters is because people use KudoZ as a resource in actual jobs. Yes, ultimately, each translator is responsible for his/her work. I have done a lot of DE>EN financial translation, and it does not help raise the profile of this segment of our market to allow bad terminology to keep floating out there. If I see something problematic, I would prefer to say something a... See more Well, first, I don't think discussions about incorrect terminology are useful unless they point out the error. The other reason it matters is because people use KudoZ as a resource in actual jobs. Yes, ultimately, each translator is responsible for his/her work. I have done a lot of DE>EN financial translation, and it does not help raise the profile of this segment of our market to allow bad terminology to keep floating out there. If I see something problematic, I would prefer to say something about it. Let's raise the bar, not lower it. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Neil Coffey
United Kingdom
Local time: 17:27
French to English
+ ...
| Why it matters... | Apr 13, 2011 |
If you can explainly succinctly and convincingly why the chosen answer is wrong, I would post a quick discussion entry. As others have mentioned, there's a chance this KudoZ entry will be used as a reference for future translations. Of course, it is the repsonsibility of anybody reference KudoZ (or any matter at all) to use their judgement in assessing the likely veracity/appropriateness of what they are reading.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that we have to live with in what is effec... See more If you can explainly succinctly and convincingly why the chosen answer is wrong, I would post a quick discussion entry. As others have mentioned, there's a chance this KudoZ entry will be used as a reference for future translations. Of course, it is the repsonsibility of anybody reference KudoZ (or any matter at all) to use their judgement in assessing the likely veracity/appropriateness of what they are reading.
Unfortunately, it is a fact that we have to live with in what is effectively a form of "crowdsourcing": it isn't necessarily true that the majority of people know the "correct" answer to something. Scientists don't answer questions like "How was the universe created" by polling the population and then assuming the majority view to be correct... ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Point it out | Apr 14, 2011 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote:
Just ignore it. It probably won't be the last time it happens, but it's the asker's prerogative to choose the answer he or she considers most helpful (note that right or wrong doesn't come into it as far as the Kudoz system is concerned!)
Just forget about it, there's nothing else you can do.
That's not necessarily so. You can still make comments after a question has been closed, so it is perfectly possible to mention your disagreement and/or justify your point. I've had this happen to me in the past.
At the end of the day, however, it is a take it or leave it situation. You offer your answer, possibly alongside various others, and the asker is free to decide.
| | | | | Discussion entries | Apr 14, 2011 |
I have been wondering about these ever since I signed up on this site and became aware of the KudoZ system.
Isn’t discussion of answers not allowed according to the official rules? But if discussion is not allowed then what’s the point of the discussion area? I have always found this KudoZ rule to be illogical, pointless, and even worse counterproductive and harmful…
[Edited at 2011-04-14 08:08 GMT]
| | | | | About the rules | Apr 14, 2011 |
Neil Coffey wrote:
If you can explainly succinctly and convincingly why the chosen answer is wrong, I would post a quick discussion entry.
According to rule 3.7 you can't:
Comments or insinuations concerning an answerer's or asker's experience or profile, his/her decision to post a certain question or answer, grade or close a question in a certain way, make a certain glossary entry, etc., are strictly prohibited
http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.7#3.7
Ambrose LI wrote:
Isn’t discussion of answers not allowed according to the official rules?
Discussion of answers IS allowed, providing that you use the peer comment feature, as per the following rule:
The only acceptable means of commenting on another's answer is by using the peer comment feature. Using the discussion area, the answer posting form or the answer explanation box to comment on another's suggestions is not allowed.
http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.4#3.4
Ambrose LI wrote:
what’s the point of the discussion area?
The "Discussion entries" box provides a place to post additional exchanges of information and linguistic discussions on the question. In GBK it also allows participation of users who do not meet the criteria to answer.
http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_general/1.3#1.3
Stéphanie
| | | | | In other words, you really can't say a thing that is to the point | Apr 14, 2011 |
Stéphanie Soudais wrote: Neil Coffey wrote:
If you can explainly succinctly and convincingly why the chosen answer is wrong, I would post a quick discussion entry. According to rule 3.7 you can't: Comments or insinuations concerning an answerer's or asker's experience or profile, his/her decision to post a certain question or answer, grade or close a question in a certain way, make a certain glossary entry, etc., are strictly prohibited http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.7#3.7 Ambrose LI wrote:
Isn’t discussion of answers not allowed according to the official rules? Discussion of answers IS allowed, providing that you use the peer comment feature, as per the following rule: The only acceptable means of commenting on another's answer is by using the peer comment feature. Using the discussion area, the answer posting form or the answer explanation box to comment on another's suggestions is not allowed. http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.4#3.4 Ambrose LI wrote:
what’s the point of the discussion area? The "Discussion entries" box provides a place to post additional exchanges of information and linguistic discussions on the question. In GBK it also allows participation of users who do not meet the criteria to answer. http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_general/1.3#1.3 Stéphanie
The ruleZ are now so much in favour of Askers and all their rights that any serious, sincere, straightforward attempt to warn other of blunders is now considered a 'personal and non-linguistic comment' under the all-purpose Rule 3.7. And because the criteria for Moderatorship now has nothing to do with being a 'linguistic authority', not even Mods can change the glossary (which used to happen with out and out blunders after discussions with other members who were specialists in the given field). All the Mods can do now is remove comments warning that the answer is completely wrong. Which is why I said forget it and move on.
| | |
|
|
|
IPtranslate (X)
Brazil
English to Dutch
+ ...
writeaway wrote:
The ruleZ are now so much in favour of Askers and all their rights that any serious, sincere, straightforward attempt to warn other of blunders is now considered a 'personal and non-linguistic comment' under the all-purpose Rule 3.7. And because the criteria for Moderatorship now has nothing to do with being a 'linguistic authority', not even Mods can change the glossary (which used to happen with out and out blunders after discussions with other members who were specialists in the given field). All the Mods can do now is remove comments warning that the answer is completely wrong. Which is why I said forget it and move on.
and this unfortunately and sadly not only applies to answered questions...
Use it for what it's worth and draw your conclusions, i.e. that glossaries and answered questions, here, should not always be taken as the gospel.
| | | | | Remove warnings? | Apr 14, 2011 |
writeaway wrote:
All the Mods can do now is remove comments warning that the answer is completely wrong.
Just HOW crazy and counterproductive is that???
Are you sure about that? Surely the opposite should be done, with such warnings being highlighted (and possibly repeated above and below) the questionable answer to avoid mistakes perpetuating themselves. It is nothing personal or non-linguistic, but essential to ensure the quality of Kudoz as a serious and useful reference.
| | | | | Notorious wrong/unhelpful answerers | Apr 14, 2011 |
I believe it should also be possible to filter notorious wrong/unhelpful answerers to avoid being affected by them in future, or allowing them to tarnish your reputation due to their unhelpful input on your questions.
I really cannot understand why it is only possible to track answerers but not to filter them in the same way as it is possible to filter askers if you become convinced that they are not likely to ask questions that are of interest to you.
There are severa... See more I believe it should also be possible to filter notorious wrong/unhelpful answerers to avoid being affected by them in future, or allowing them to tarnish your reputation due to their unhelpful input on your questions.
I really cannot understand why it is only possible to track answerers but not to filter them in the same way as it is possible to filter askers if you become convinced that they are not likely to ask questions that are of interest to you.
There are several answerers who I have become convinced are not likely to provide answers that are of use or interest to me or the rest of the world, but there seems to be no way of stopping them. And no, this is by no means a personal thing, but purely about the quality and usefulness of ProZ and KudoZ. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Which doesn’t really answer my question | Apr 14, 2011 |
Stéphanie Soudais wrote: Neil Coffey wrote:
If you can explainly succinctly and convincingly why the chosen answer is wrong, I would post a quick discussion entry. According to rule 3.7 you can't: [stuff deleted] Ambrose LI wrote:
Isn’t discussion of answers not allowed according to the official rules? Discussion of answers IS allowed, providing that you use the peer comment feature, as per the following rule: [stuff deleted] Ambrose LI wrote:
what’s the point of the discussion area? The "Discussion entries" box provides a place to post additional exchanges of information and linguistic discussions on the question. In GBK it also allows participation of users who do not meet the criteria to answer. http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_general/1.3#1.3 Stéphanie
This is precisely why I feel this KudoZ rule is illogical, counterproductive, and harmful. If we cannot comment on why an answer is wrong (on linguistic reasons no less — some explanations require elaborate justifications), and cannot comment on why an answerer’s own answer is right (as a response to a linguistic discussion in the discussion area — where it would make no sense to add an explanation using the peer comment feature), then the discussion area is useless.
Seriously, how can any meaningful discussion be carried out using just the peer comment feature? I have tried it. It’s plainly not possible.
Or, if the above is not what the KudoZ rule in question actually says, then a rewrite of the concerned rules would seriously be in order.
[Edited at 2011-04-14 10:00 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| KudoZ forces our hand | Apr 14, 2011 |
I agree wholeheartedly, Ambrose!
The other problem here is the way KudoZ forces our hand to select an answer and close questions. If we are not yet certain, for example because we are still hoping for feedback from the customer, why are we nevertheless forced to close questions, either after a given time or because we have too many questions open and are thus prevented from asking new questions (even this is, admittedly, rarely the case)?
Surely we should be allowed to ... See more I agree wholeheartedly, Ambrose!
The other problem here is the way KudoZ forces our hand to select an answer and close questions. If we are not yet certain, for example because we are still hoping for feedback from the customer, why are we nevertheless forced to close questions, either after a given time or because we have too many questions open and are thus prevented from asking new questions (even this is, admittedly, rarely the case)?
Surely we should be allowed to leave the questions open until we are confident about closing them? What difference does it really make (to other questions or to the world) how long a question is open or how many questions any given asker has open? Well-founded decisions would be more helpful to all those concerned.
[Edited at 2011-04-14 12:19 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Options: Contribute to this entry | Apr 14, 2011 |
It is, however, also possible to contribute to entries in the KudoZ glossary. If you click on the "Contribute to this entry" option, you can:
Submit a Peer Review (agree/disagree/neutral)
Comment on the entry (up to 255 characters)
Submit a definition (optional)
or
Submit an example sentence (optional)
| | | | | Contribute to this entry | Apr 14, 2011 |
David Williams wrote:
It is, however, also possible to contribute to entries in the KudoZ glossary. If you click on the "Contribute to this entry" option
Yes, it was already mentioned earlier in this thread.
Stéphanie
[Edited at 2011-04-14 12:01 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » What to do if you believe the wrong alternative is selected in KudoZ? | 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 » |
| | 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 
