| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | Askers should wait 24 hours before grading or transfer the grading rights to the community Thread poster: Enrique Cavalitto
|
|---|
Greg Dickie
Canada
Local time: 21:22
English to Spanish
+ ...
| I agree with Liz | Jun 2, 2009 |
liz askew wrote:
Hi
I do think the asker should have the ultimate right and not the community so I would support Jack's idea of adding another option for the asker to click.
All these rules just confuse me.
Liz Askew
[Edited at 2009-06-02 14:35 GMT]
I agree with Liz, sometimes too many rules does not equal better. I believe that the asker should have the right to decide when to close the question if she/he feels satisfied that the question has been sufficiently answered. I do like the idea, however, of leaving time for discussion and allowing others to share their ideas or expertise on the subject.
| | | | Enrique Cavalitto 
Argentina
Local time: 00:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER | No new rule has been introduced | Jun 2, 2009 |
Gregory Dickie wrote:
I agree with Liz, sometimes too many rules does not equal better.
Hi Gregory,
Please note that no new rule has been introduced, but a different way of processing the grading of answers.
Gregory Dickie wrote:
I believe that the asker should have the right to decide when to close the question if she/he feels satisfied that the question has been sufficiently answered. I do like the idea, however, of leaving time for discussion and allowing others to share their ideas or expertise on the subject.
I believe that the new implementation is fully in line with your considerations, as it allows the asker to close his/her involvement with the question when she/he feels satisfied that the question has been sufficiently answered, and at the same time it leaves the question open for discussion and allowing others to share their ideas or expertise on the subject.
Kind regards,
Enrique
| | | | lexical
Spain
Local time: 05:22
Portuguese to English
| Sometimes further discussion isn't necessary | Jun 2, 2009 |
Let me give you an example, Enrique. Some months ago I posted a question, the answer to which turned out to be the title of a painting by Marcel Duchamps ("Ceci n'est pas une pipe"). That answer was provided within 3-4 hours and I was able to double check it on various art sites. I was happy to award the points, thank the answerer profusely and close the question immediately.
What purpose would have been served by leaving the question open for further discussion? So that someone cou... See more Let me give you an example, Enrique. Some months ago I posted a question, the answer to which turned out to be the title of a painting by Marcel Duchamps ("Ceci n'est pas une pipe"). That answer was provided within 3-4 hours and I was able to double check it on various art sites. I was happy to award the points, thank the answerer profusely and close the question immediately.
What purpose would have been served by leaving the question open for further discussion? So that someone could suggest, "No, it's Turner's 'The Fighting Temeraire'? or Botticelli's 'Venus Rising from the Waves' "? There was simply no scope for further discussion - the issue was cut and dried - although that did not stop a few people offering nonsensical answers after I'd closed the question.
As far as I'm concerned, the only person qualified to know when to close a question is the asker. (Of course there are some askers who will never be capable of selecting the correct answer whether they wait 24, 48 or 72 hours - or a week). There is much to be said for ADVISING askers to wait 24 hours to see what other answers emerge; there is nothing to be said for ENFORCING the rule, which is just another manifestation of Proz.com's increasingly bureaucratic and authoritarian attitude towards its members.
I find I have less and less to do with Proz.com these days because I find the atmosphere increasingly uncongenial. On the rare occasions when I need to ask a question in future, if I am prevented from awarding points when I am satisfied with the answer, I won't leave it to "the community" to decide; I will simply close the question without grading (until that option is closed off by the uber-controllers) but making a special effort to thank the answerer. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Jack Doughty
United Kingdom
Local time: 04:22
Russian to English
+ ...
In memoriam
Of course it's a new rule! It's a rule preventing askers from deciding for themselves at what point they can close a question and make their own award of points for it. If you want an option for involving the community, fine, but as it stands at present what you have introduced is not an option, it's a rule, and a totally unnecessary one.
[Edited at 2009-06-02 19:58 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| Conflict with ProZ cornerstones ("Guiding Principles")? | Jun 2, 2009 |
I would like to get an explanation how this new mechanism relates to the ProZ cornerstones ("Guiding Principles"), specifically this paragraph:
6. The person with the need sets the parameters. Whether it be KudoZ, the forums or the jobs system, the person who has the need is given options for setting parameters and directing the flow of an exchange. For example, KudoZ askers are given the option of making a question for-points or not, of directing the question to people who meet certain criteria, etc. The feeling is that this approach, which may be the one most likely to ensure that needs are met, is appropriate for our collaborative community and service industry.
http://www.proz.com/?sp=info/cornerstones
I feel this new mechanism effectively strips the asker of his/her ability to decide when he/she received enough help. Asking for, and then receiving help is the main flow of the exchange in KudoZ, and according to the Guiding Principle above, that is controlled by the asker.
With this new system, he/she cannot close the question within 24 hours, even if he/she already made up her mind about which answer was the most helpful.
The only choice he/she has is marking his/her choice, but then leaving it open, and therefore, accepting the possibility that the communities "agrees" would overrule his/her choice. That means the selected answer may not be the one that was most helpful to the asker. This is in conflict with the definition of the "help" KudoZ system, where the asker selects the most helpful answer (which is sometimes not the same as the one that got the most agrees). This is usually the first argument brought up by staff, whenever any suggestion/complaint pops up in public regarding "incorrect" answers being accepted.
I do not buy the repeated argument of being able to "just mark your preference and forget about it". Is this the attitude we are supporting? Is this really the type of asker we want to help (with additional features)?
Katalin
[Edited at 2009-06-02 20:15 GMT]
| | | | | How are decisions reached? | Jun 2, 2009 |
lexical wrote:
there is nothing to be said for ENFORCING the rule, which is just another manifestation of Proz.com's increasingly bureaucratic and authoritarian attitude towards its members.
I find I have less and less to do with Proz.com these days because I find the atmosphere increasingly uncongenial. .... I won't leave it to "the community" to decide; I will simply close the question without grading (until that option is closed off by the uber-controllers) but making a special effort to thank the answerer.
Yes, yes and yes, lexical, but over the years hundreds of members and users have expressed the strong desire to prevent askers from closing questions prematurely. They weren't thinking of you, Jack, Rebekka and all the others who use KudoZ responsibly and intelligently. They had in mind the nincompoops who just need a word to plug into their text as quickly as possible and will take whatever is offered; they were thinking of askers who don't understand that the due date for their translations has nothing to do with when their KudoZ questions need to be closed, etc. The anti-premature closing people expressed their dismay about spending half an hour researching an interesting and challenging question only to come back and find it closed with an inadequate solution.
I wish members and users had been given an opportunity to debate this issue once again before the current decision was reached. I would have argued that we need to distinguish between old hands and new users. I believe the main source of aggravation with premature closing is new users, who are simply overwhelmed by all the choices presented to them when they first start using KudoZ. Perhaps there should be a short training period for them.
[Edited at 2009-06-02 20:49 GMT]
| | | | Enrique Cavalitto
Argentina
Local time: 00:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER | I see no conflict with the 16 cornerstones | Jun 2, 2009 |
Katalin Horvath McClure wrote: I would like to get an explanation how this new mechanism relates to the ProZ cornerstones ("Guiding Principles"), specifically this paragraph: 6. The person with the need sets the parameters. Whether it be KudoZ, the forums or the jobs system, the person who has the need is given options for setting parameters and directing the flow of an exchange. For example, KudoZ askers are given the option of making a question for-points or not, of directing the question to people who meet certain criteria, etc. The feeling is that this approach, which may be the one most likely to ensure that needs are met, is appropriate for our collaborative community and service industry.
Hi Katalin,
I don't see any conflict between the new implementation and the 16 cornerstones.
In particular the point you quote states that the asker can decide the parameters of the question. This means that askers can select:
a normal KudoZ question, a not-for points question or a first-validated answer question
having their questions answered only by members
Address the notifications to user with certain conditions of native language, working pairs and fields of expertise.
Restrict the question to a team.
Once the question is asked, the asker can select a most helpful answer, decline all answers or close the question without grading.
The new implementation still allows askers who consider they have received enough help within the first 24 hours after asking to select the answer they consider most helpful and their recommendation for the glossary. At this point the asker hands the question over to the community.
The only difference with the former system is that the answer selected by the community could be different from the one preferred by the asker, but at this point the asker has already received the help they needed and already selected for their translation the option they considered most useful.
Enrique
| | | | | Not convinced | Jun 2, 2009 |
Enrique wrote:
In particular the point you quote states that the asker can decide the parameters of the question.
I was not talking about that part, but the few words following it:
directing the flow of an exchange
To me, this means initiating the exchange, overseeing it, and closing it.
The only difference with the former system is that the answer selected by the community could be different from the one preferred by the asker,
Yes, and that means the asker cannot give KudoZ to the person he/she thought was the most helpful.
but at this point the asker has already received the help they needed and already selected for their translation the option they considered most useful.
Yes, but he/she has not given "back" to the answerer in the form of KudoZ-points.
Accepting an answer and deciding on how many points are given and to whom is very much part of the whole KudoZ-exchange. So far, the policy or philosophy was that the asker "owned" the question until it was closed, he/she was the only "authority" and only at that point, after the glossary entry had been made, was the exchange and the resulting glossary-entry transferred to the "community".
What is the real reason/goal of this feature? What is the expected positive outcome?
Is it to prevent garbage being entered into the glossary by clueless askers who accept answers in a haste? That would not be a bad idea, in fact, I remember a fairly recent forum discussion about it, where it was suggested to have some sort of community input for the actual glossary entry in case the question is closed too quickly.
I think Kim Metzger has a point about distinguishing between old and new users (I guess he meant in terms of KudoZ activity, at least that's what I would assume).
In any case, I still see a conflict with the text of the quoted cornerstone and also with the philosophy that the asker selects and awards points for the answer he/she founds to be the most helpful.
There is one more thing what I am worried about:
There are people who ask a ton of questions in a short period of time, many of them are not members and therefore are subject to some restrictions on the number of questions they can have open at any time. If they need to close questions within 24 hours in order to be able to ask new ones, with this new mechanism in place, their only choice will be to close the question without grading, and they will do so. Is that a positive outcome?
Katalin
| | |
|
|
|
| Why so much waste of time? | Jun 3, 2009 |
If the first, second or third immediate answer is appropriate for the asker, why so much waste of time?
I can let my colleagues wait 24 or more hours, or days or weeks, to getting their point awards from me, but, why wait so long if any of those answers was good for me and my current context/translation?
Any of the rules, new and old, have no sense.
I would better like to be allowed to share out the points between two (or more) colleague translators,... See more If the first, second or third immediate answer is appropriate for the asker, why so much waste of time?
I can let my colleagues wait 24 or more hours, or days or weeks, to getting their point awards from me, but, why wait so long if any of those answers was good for me and my current context/translation?
Any of the rules, new and old, have no sense.
I would better like to be allowed to share out the points between two (or more) colleague translators, due to sometimes it feels you're being unfair for leaving out another good answer.
Just my thought. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | What about closing before any answers are given ? | Jun 3, 2009 |
What about if someone asks a question and realizes a few minutes later that:
- they in fact know the answer
- they find the answer in the archives/dictionary/whatever other source
The asker decides to close immediately without waiting for answers, reason: "errant question"/"answer found elsewhere".
What's the point to let potential answerers give an answer, then?
Stéphanie
| | | | Jack Doughty
United Kingdom
Local time: 04:22
Russian to English
+ ...
In memoriam | Second best solution | Jun 3, 2009 |
Since I am now being prevented, in this as in so much else, from using my own discretion, when I find an obviously correct answer, I shall inform the answerer that I intend to select the answer in question as soon as I am allowed to do so. This may prevent other people wasting their time during the rest of the 24 hours.
Could this perhaps be added as an option? "I provisionally select this answer and will confirm at end of 24-hour period".
[Edited at 2009-06-03 08:59 GMT]
| | | | Enrique Cavalitto
Argentina
Local time: 00:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER | Current limits are not affected by this new feature | Jun 3, 2009 |
Katalin Horvath McClure wrote:
There is one more thing what I am worried about:
There are people who ask a ton of questions in a short period of time, many of them are not members and therefore are subject to some restrictions on the number of questions they can have open at any time. If they need to close questions within 24 hours in order to be able to ask new ones, with this new mechanism in place, their only choice will be to close the question without grading, and they will do so. Is that a positive outcome?
Hi Katalin,
There are currently three limits:
a) questions asked per day (up to 15 for members, up to 5 for non-members)
b) questions asked per week (up to 60 for members, up to 20 for non-members)
c) Questions open (you can't ask a new question if you have at least 10 questions open with valid answers that are older than a week, same limit for members and non-members).
Please note that the first two limits are not affected by the status of the questions (open, just closed, closed) while the third one applies only to questions that have been open for at least a week. Therefore none of the current limits is affected by this new feature.
Regards,
Enrique
| | |
|
|
|
Enrique Cavalitto
Argentina
Local time: 00:22
Member (2006)
English to Spanish
TOPIC STARTER | "Closing without grading" was not affected by this new feature | Jun 3, 2009 |
Stéphanie Soudais wrote:
What about closing before any answers are given ?
What about if someone asks a question and realizes a few minutes later that:
- they in fact know the answer
- they find the answer in the archives/dictionary/whatever other source
The asker decides to close immediately without waiting for answers, reason: "errant question"/"answer found elsewhere".
What's the point to let potential answerers give an answer, then?
Stéphanie
Hi Stéphanie,
In this case the askers can close the question exactly the way they did before.
The "close without grading" feature has not been affected by this new implementation.
Regards,
Enrique
| | | | | Thanks for the answer to the last paragraph - what about the other issues? | Jun 3, 2009 |
Enrique wrote:
Therefore none of the current limits is affected by this new feature.
Thank you for clearing up this concern.
However, do you have any comment on the rest of my posting (the same posting of which you answered the last paragraph)?
Thanks
Katalin
[Edited at 2009-06-03 14:32 GMT]
| | | | | Why not just make it impossible to grade the questions before 24 hours after the post? | Jun 3, 2009 |
Personally, I think the guideline about waiting 24 hours before grading Kudoz answers is good to allow for as many members of the community as possible to provide their suggestions and input regarding the question or the provided answers, before the asker decides on which answer proved most helpful to him/her in the given context.
So instead of making this other implementation adding additional screens and pop-ups in the process, which I think should be avoided if possible to not ma... See more Personally, I think the guideline about waiting 24 hours before grading Kudoz answers is good to allow for as many members of the community as possible to provide their suggestions and input regarding the question or the provided answers, before the asker decides on which answer proved most helpful to him/her in the given context.
So instead of making this other implementation adding additional screens and pop-ups in the process, which I think should be avoided if possible to not make the Kudoz feature more complicated than necessary, I think it would be fine just to make it impossible to award points until 24 hours have passed, but still allow the asker to close the question without grading if an answer has been found elsewhere, the question was written wrong, etc.
And even if the asker is happy with an answer provided shortly after posting and do not need any more input, I still can't see the problem in having to wait a day before grading the question? The current reminder service will remind us by e-mail about any open questions anyway, so I can't see any problem in that waiting 24 hours just could be a basic rule for the use of the Kudoz system. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Askers should wait 24 hours before grading or transfer the grading rights to the community | 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! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
