New feature NP Thread poster: Сергей Лузан
|
|---|
Сергей Лузан
Russian Federation
Local time: 03:19
German to Russian
+ ...
Is it reasonable to allow for persons without a single Kudo to ask not-for-points questions? It seems to me that it should be some kind of privilege for asker with 1 Kudo at least. What's yor opinion? It looks like they are very passive in the case & don't pay any attention neither to answers nor to grading. What are your impressions?
| | | | | Not-for-points | Dec 15, 2005 |
Ñåðãåé Ëóçàí wrote:
It looks like they are very passive in the case & don't pay any attention neither to answers nor to grading. What are your impressions?
Hello Sergey,
I think many of the not-for-points questions are asked by people who don't know what the points are all about or anything else about KudoZ, for that matter. They just pop their heads in to ask a question and are never heard from again. They'll just click on some options and see what happens.
Kim
| | | | | It's up to them... and you. | Dec 15, 2005 |
As far as I understand the system, it is completely up to the askers to decide whether and why they pose such questions.
And it is completely up to you to decide whether and why you answer such questions.
I see no need for a change.
My two cents...
[Edited at 2005-12-15 01:09]
| | | | Сергей Лузан
Russian Federation
Local time: 03:19
German to Russian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | My suggestion | Dec 15, 2005 |
Thanx to both of you, Kim & Derek. My suggestion is as follows - to allow NP-question option only for a person with 1 Kudo at least. I see lots of advantages in such kind enforced procedure & not a single disadvantage. & peer grading probably should be also implemented in those cases. Perhaps I'm missing something in the heart of the matter but I just can't get the idea of a privilege for an unknown asker based upon his absolute irresponsibility. What's the use of it? We don't receive KOG contri... See more Thanx to both of you, Kim & Derek. My suggestion is as follows - to allow NP-question option only for a person with 1 Kudo at least. I see lots of advantages in such kind enforced procedure & not a single disadvantage. & peer grading probably should be also implemented in those cases. Perhaps I'm missing something in the heart of the matter but I just can't get the idea of a privilege for an unknown asker based upon his absolute irresponsibility. What's the use of it? We don't receive KOG contributions either (or will receive them after an indefinite period of time) if compared with the usual asking procedure. Some improvements are necessary here IMHO. That's my point.
Kim's idea just confirms my conviction. As we say in Russia "The less you know the deeper's your dream". Why give a possibility of "Qual der Wahl" for absolutely unknown one-time strangers?
[Edited at 2005-12-15 11:13]
[Edited at 2005-12-15 11:18] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Kirill Semenov 
Ukraine
Local time: 02:19
Member (2004)
English to Russian
+ ...
Derek Gill Franßen wrote:
As far as I understand the system, it is completely up to the askers to decide whether and why they pose such questions.
And it is completely up to you to decide whether and why you answer such questions.
I see no need for a change.
My two cents...
And 2 more cents added to yours.
I was among those who asked to implement the feature. Me personally, I don't pay any attention if a question is for points or not. Does it really matter?
To clear the things: I know some ProZ members who are reluctant to `play for points'. They don't feel it's OK to get any reward for their help. So, the `non-for-points' gives the members an opportunity to help without feeling they do it for `something' in exchange. I think the option is very good and should be kept at ProZ.
| | | | Özden Arıkan
Germany
Local time: 01:19
English to Turkish
+ ...
| Isn't this feature implemented in a strange way? | Dec 16, 2005 |
Why do the askers decide if someone would get points or not, in the first place? If it's for the sake of altruism, the givers (=answerers) should decide whether they want to be altruistic or not. Don't you feel that it should have been the other way around: the answerer having the choice to answer for points or not, that is? After all, theoretically, it is the answerer's directory listing being effected. But then, when we look at it from the viewpoint of directory listing, which is one of the ma... See more Why do the askers decide if someone would get points or not, in the first place? If it's for the sake of altruism, the givers (=answerers) should decide whether they want to be altruistic or not. Don't you feel that it should have been the other way around: the answerer having the choice to answer for points or not, that is? After all, theoretically, it is the answerer's directory listing being effected. But then, when we look at it from the viewpoint of directory listing, which is one of the main points of the whole system of Kudoz, what is the point then at having a NP option? (I didn't start this sentence with the intention of playing around with the word 'point', by the way.)
Hmm, sorry, Sergey, if this has been straying from the main topic ▲ Collapse
| | | | Сергей Лузан
Russian Federation
Local time: 03:19
German to Russian
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | New problems have been arisen | Dec 16, 2005 |
Thanks, Xola, for your interesting opnion. My point is - an NP-option is a privilege & it should be granted after qualifying (I dunno whether upon receiving 1 Kudo or 50). It just can't be thrown to unknown strangers. No need to delete the function yet IMO, but it should be monitored as any innovation. There's some interesting suggestion about answerer's right. There are 'not-for-grading' answers in existence (but they are sometimes graded by the asker nevertheless ... See more Thanks, Xola, for your interesting opnion. My point is - an NP-option is a privilege & it should be granted after qualifying (I dunno whether upon receiving 1 Kudo or 50). It just can't be thrown to unknown strangers. No need to delete the function yet IMO, but it should be monitored as any innovation. There's some interesting suggestion about answerer's right. There are 'not-for-grading' answers in existence (but they are sometimes graded by the asker nevertheless The problem is worth discussing. Unfortunately, I have to interprete simultaneously till Thurday evening of the coming week, but I'll try to follow up all the opinions anyway.
To Kirill: my suggestion deals with qualification standards and it's not about immediate prohibition ▲ Collapse
| | | | Özden Arıkan
Germany
Local time: 01:19
English to Turkish
+ ...
| The system contradicts itself | Dec 17, 2005 |
Hi Sergey,
I understand the main point of your suggestion, and I am not against it. But I also think that there is a more fundamental problem here: the whole directory system is based on Kudoz points, i.e., the more points you have (=the more you have contributed to the site, helped others), the higher you rank in the directory. If the system is formed this way, it is a contradiction in itself to introduce an NP option, but if it had to be introduced, then the decision should have b... See more Hi Sergey,
I understand the main point of your suggestion, and I am not against it. But I also think that there is a more fundamental problem here: the whole directory system is based on Kudoz points, i.e., the more points you have (=the more you have contributed to the site, helped others), the higher you rank in the directory. If the system is formed this way, it is a contradiction in itself to introduce an NP option, but if it had to be introduced, then the decision should have been up to the answerers, not the askers. Otherwise, the NP option would -and does- undermine the fundamental purpose of the system it is a part of. And if it doesn't present a major problem at the moment, it is only because it's not been widely used. Imagine, had it been used as high as to 50% then it would have had the consequence of effecting directory listings.
And, as you voice very appropriately in your suggestion, leaving the decision whether a question is to be NP or not to non-members, most of whom have no idea about how the Kudoz system works, deepens this contradicton still further. Therefore, I believe this is also worth considering together with the concerns you express here.
Have a nice weekend! ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| No points zone | Dec 17, 2005 |
I agree with you, Xola – I think we got it backwards. The original idea was to create a no-points zone to allow for more thoughtful KudoZ participation than we had been experiencing at the time when this concept was first proposed (by yours truly) a couple of years ago. At the time many members felt KudoZ was plagued by KudoZ points hunters who were diminishing the quality of KudoZ by providing rapid-fire, unsubstantiated nonsense instead of reliable translation proposals. It was a quality iss... See more I agree with you, Xola – I think we got it backwards. The original idea was to create a no-points zone to allow for more thoughtful KudoZ participation than we had been experiencing at the time when this concept was first proposed (by yours truly) a couple of years ago. At the time many members felt KudoZ was plagued by KudoZ points hunters who were diminishing the quality of KudoZ by providing rapid-fire, unsubstantiated nonsense instead of reliable translation proposals. It was a quality issue. At the time there was also consideration of adding a reliability ratio and complaints about using "see below" and the like in the answer box instead of submitting a translation proposal.
As for the reliability ratio, members argued that they often provide helpful information instead of a translation proposal and that they would be penalized if a reliability ratio were introduced because providing information not intended for points would have a negative impact on answers selected vs. answers provided.
And regarding the "see below" issue, some people, including me, argued that we wanted to contribute to the quality of the answer selected by simply adding a definition of the target and/or source term or providing other information in a community effort to see the best translation entered in the KOG.
Cindy Chadd wrote:
I like points as much as anyone , but I think I would both answer "no-points" questions AND post my own as "no points". It would likely keep the point-grabbers (whose answers are so often useless anyway) from answering, but others who really can help (like Nikki, who has bailed me out many times) would probably still contribute.
Kirill Semenov wrote:
Great point, Cindy. I haven't thought about it. Yes, it makes sense -- and it makes a great sense. Surely, I also prefer answers from people who care, not just spam from KudoZ hunters. Very nice point which I missed completely -- thank you!
Fuad Yahya wrote:
How about the option of not receiving points? Jun 11
Henry wrote:
we will be offering askers the option of not awarding points.
How about also offering answerers the option of not receiving points. This is helpful where an answerer agrees with a previous answer/answers and is not trying to offer a competing answer, but is merely adding some highly relevant information that has not been stated by any of the other answers. The answerer simply wants the issue under discussion to receive a thorough treatment, but does not think that the addition merits taking the points away from the previous correct answers.
In this case, the answer can still receive peer comments, but there is no need for "agree" votes.
Gianfranco Manca wrote:
I agree.
We have already many attempts to post answers marked not for points, when the small space allowed in the peer-grading field is not sufficient, or many others using the "Ask the asker" field creatively (i.e. improperly, but for a good purpose)
http://www.proz.com/post/232875#232875
[Edited at 2005-12-17 17:57]
[Edited at 2005-12-17 17:59]
[Edited at 2005-12-17 18:16] ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » New feature NP | 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 » |
| | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
