| Stranica u temi: < [1 2 3] | KudoZ averages Postavljač teme: James Calder
|
|---|
Kirill Semenov 
Ukrajina
Local time: 01:02
Član (2004)
engleski na ruski
+ ...
| Statistics Inside | Feb 10, 2005 |
writeaway wrote:
After almost 3 years on Proz, I know which of my colleagues are reliable pros and which are not.
But how specifically have you come to these subjective conclusions? Think about it. It was your "internal statistics". I bet that you didn't make it basing on only one their answer. You observed many answers (the same thing what statistics does!) and then, after these many observations, you decided that this person is worth (or isn't) something when it comes to this or that field. Askers are like you -- and they have their own observations. Mostly, they select those answerers who are helpful and good in this or that field, that's the point.
This is exactly what the reliability ratio would show. I see no contradiction. The statistics is inside everyone of us, especially those who monitor their pairs or specialization fields carefully.
| | | | | By seeing the kind of answers they provide, whether answers are chosen or not | Feb 10, 2005 |
Kirill Semenov wrote:
writeaway wrote:
After almost 3 years on Proz, I know which of my colleagues are reliable pros and which are not.
But how specifically have you come to these subjective conclusions? Think about it. It was your "internal statistics". I bet that you didn't make it basing on only one their answer. You observed many answers (the same thing what statistics does!) and then, after these many observations, you decided that this person is worth (or isn't) something when it comes to this or that field. Askers are like you -- and they have their own observations. Mostly, they select those answerers who are helpful and good in this or that field, that's the point.
This is exactly what the reliability ratio would show. I see no contradiction. The statistics is inside everyone of us, especially those who monitor their pairs or specialization fields carefully.
I judge the quality of the answers, and points never enter into it. Many excellent answers are passed over simply because Asker has no clue at all and selects the person with the most Kudoz points, whether reliable or not, hoping the statistics will save the day. Anyone who blindly relies on the number of Kudoz points to determine reliability is taking a huge chance for the quality of the doc. As I said, anyone can ask anything, anyone can answer and any answer can be chosen. Good basis for statistics, no?
| | | | Kirill Semenov
Ukrajina
Local time: 01:02
Član (2004)
engleski na ruski
+ ...
writeaway wrote:
I judge the quality of the answers, and points never enter into it.
Most of askers do the same. In general askers are not more or less qualified than you are.
Many excellent answers are passed over simply because Asker has no clue at all and selects the person with the most Kudoz points, whether reliable or not, hoping the statistics will save the day.
Nice point. We propose askers yet another basis to judge with: not only the raw points score which you pointed out, but also a reliability ratio. In this way, askers may see not only the points accumulated but also how good/experienced the answerer is in the corresponding field. I see no contradiction to what you say.
Anyone who blindly relies on the number of Kudoz points to determine reliability is taking a huge chance for the quality of the doc. As I said, anyone can ask anything, anyone can answer and any answer can be chosen. Good basis for statistics, no?
Exactly, that's why we ( I hope there is a lot of people who are in favour of the idea so that I'm allowed to say "we"] propose yet another indicator for askers to judge the answers they recieve. My position is _not_ to substitute the reliability instead of the current raw kudoZ points score. Let's both co-exist.
| | | | James Calder
Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo
Local time: 23:02
španjolski na engleski
+ ...
POKRETAČ TEME | Some kind of change is needed | Feb 10, 2005 |
writeaway wrote:
anyone can ask anything, anyone can answer and any answer can be chosen
I agree entirely, and I think we're all agreed that the present system is flawed and needs an overhaul (which probably explains why it's debated so often).
There are two options, therefore:
1. Do away with KudoZ points altogether, as Marijke suggests, and operate a non-competitive, non-points-based question and answer system.
2. Make the points system that little bit more accurate (not foolproof, by any means) by introducing a points/question rating.
I'm favour of either option, but against the unsatisfactory system we're lumbered with at the moment.
The aim has to be for quality, and I don't think the current system delivers as much quality as it could.
Regards
James
| | |
|
|
|
lien
Nizozemska
Local time: 00:02
engleski na francuski
+ ...
James Calder wrote:
I agree entirely, and I think we're all agreed that the present system is flawed and needs an overhaul (which probably explains why it's debated so often).
My opinion is to leave the system alone, if there is no statistics or whatever to judge the skill of a translator is because it does fail the purpose.
I said it before, if a statistic is applied to the ratio number of answers/good answers, it will discourage people to answer, afraid that not chosen answers will make their statistics go down. Which is the exact contrary what proz is about.
*If* all your reasoning were to the point. Which is not, because prozz is NOT ABOUT a COMPETITION but about helping people.
For the agencies which would prefers a statistics in order to better choose a translator, just tell them it is impossible to establish, for the very reason that translating is not an exact science, and the "criterium" is utmost subjectif, because it only depends on the choosing of the good answer by someone who didn't have any clue about it at the first place and that many answers to a question are equally good but only one can be chosen.
Some "good" answers are good because some others previous answers helped on the way, anyway the comments are the most valuable most of the time.
Also statistics will lead to fraud, one way or another.
Now I hope you will put the subject to rest, as you tried already several time to implant your sytem and it wasn't done.
You can go look elsewhere too, if the system is soooooo wrong.
| | | | Gina W
Sjedinjene Američke Države
Local time: 18:02
Član (2003)
francuski na engleski
| Regarding people who acquire thousands of points | Mar 3, 2005 |
Moreover, the fact that people can acquire thousands of points (with all due respect) is no guarantee that they are good translators - it probably means they are good at research and that they are extremely generous in wanting to help others, as well as enjoying the challenge offered by the KudoZ part of the site.
To be honest, when I see that someone has thousands of points, and in several language combinations, I wonder how that person has the time to be a professional translator and still answer all those question - and quickly enough to get the points. Do you know how many times I have quicked the link to a KudoZ question AS SOON AS I received the email notification, and still missed posting the correct response, because by the time I got there, it was already posted? So I 'agree' with the question, but I haven't responded so I don't get the points - yet the person who was apparently sitting on the Proz.com website, waiting for a question to answer, gets the points. I am thinking of one individual who is extremely quick to respond, and I have always wondered, how is this possible?
Anyway, I don't particularly see it as generous, necessarily. I do agree they probably enjoy the challenge offered, but I have to wonder if their motives go beyond accumulating points.
| | | | | If points are the only reason for answering then there's not much...... point | Mar 3, 2005 |
gad wrote:
Moreover, the fact that people can acquire thousands of points (with all due respect) is no guarantee that they are good translators - it probably means they are good at research and that they are extremely generous in wanting to help others, as well as enjoying the challenge offered by the KudoZ part of the site.
To be honest, when I see that someone has thousands of points, and in several language combinations, I wonder how that person has the time to be a professional translator and still answer all those question - and quickly enough to get the points. Do you know how many times I have quicked the link to a KudoZ question AS SOON AS I received the email notification, and still missed posting the correct response, because by the time I got there, it was already posted? So I 'agree' with the question, but I haven't responded so I don't get the points - yet the person who was apparently sitting on the Proz.com website, waiting for a question to answer, gets the points. I am thinking of one individual who is extremely quick to respond, and I have always wondered, how is this possible?
Anyway, I don't particularly see it as generous, necessarily. I do agree they probably enjoy the challenge offered, but I have to wonder if their motives go beyond accumulating points.
A question that is really a question and not just an exercise in dictionary opening rarely has a single 'good' or 'right' answer. Only the few who fall victim to Kudozmania ever manage to answer 'first' all the time and most of us are not discouraged by the appearance of other answers. If the question is pure dico, then indeed the choice won't be enormous. but if it is a real question, one with a term that needs interpreting to find out how to deal with it in the particular doc, then all the input that is given will be helpful to Asker. Of course only one answer can be 'chosen' for points so other perfectly good answers will 'lose out'. (so much for reliability statistics). but for translators researching (ie those who do look in the glossaries) later on, all answers will be useful. And peer comments from those who know the field are always helpful too.
People who are active on the site tend to answer questions and those who aren't, don't. I think it's as simple as that.
If one can't smile at the results of Asker's choice, whether that choice means points or not, then answering questions will never be any fun. This has to stay fun even when it isn't very rewarding. The other week I accidentally answered a question from someone I normally don't reply to, since time and time again, this person has shown that my answers will never be what they are looking for. It was legal, my answer was correct (for sure) and peers who know the field had agreed. there was only 1 other answer (completely wrong). I was intrigued to see how this person would avoid giving me points. Instead of letting the automatic grading do its thing, the person closed the question without grading. Declined my answer saying: it doesn't fit into my sentence. (of course it did, but....). Well that's what others will see in the future and that's my consolation prize.
Whether won or lost, points must be taken with a grain of salt and cannot be the only reason for answering. They can be given for great answers and they can be given for pure nonsense-it's completely up to Asker.
| | | | Gina W
Sjedinjene Američke Države
Local time: 18:02
Član (2003)
francuski na engleski
A question that is really a question and not just an exercise in dictionary opening rarely has a single 'good' or 'right' answer. Only the few who fall victim to Kudozmania ever manage to answer 'first' all the time and most of us are not discouraged by the appearance of other answers. If the question is pure dico, then indeed the choice won't be enormous. but if it is a real question, one with a term that needs interpreting to find out how to deal with it in the particular doc, then all the input that is given will be helpful to Asker. Of course only one answer can be 'chosen' for points so other perfectly good answers will 'lose out'. (so much for reliability statistics). but for translators researching (ie those who do look in the glossaries) later on, all answers will be useful. And peer comments from those who know the field are always helpful too.
I guess we might have to agree to disagree on this topic of people who monitor the incoming questions and pounce on them. See, the general unofficial "rule" is that if you have all good responses, you should pick the first one. So if you get someone wanting to rack up KudoZ points (I'm thinking of one individual who was doing this for awhile), who is experienced and knowledgeable enough to post decent responses before anyone else, decent enough to get the points, then that is really discouraging for others who are not sitting there waiting for questions to appear. This is what happened to me awhile ago and I got very discouraged answering, so I shyed away from KudoZ for quite awhile.
People who are active on the site tend to answer questions and those who aren't, don't. I think it's as simple as that.
It's true that those who are more active tend to answer more questions, but again, because of what I've experienced I don't think it's 'as simple as that', but I know you do so we'll have to agree to disagree here. I'll say that is true, but to a point only, for the reasons I've mentioned already.
If one can't smile at the results of Asker's choice, whether that choice means points or not, then answering questions will never be any fun. This has to stay fun even when it isn't very rewarding.
I think that's the thing that I find incredible - this virtual obsession with points. Isn't the motivation for answering supposed to also be to contribute to the site, not to mention to help someone else out? I'm not saying get rid of the points system and I do understand and agree with the concept, but I doubt that those who created and enforce it were thinking that it should be a thing where people would think it's ok to argue about how someone closes a question, for example.
Anyway, I agree with you that a person should accept someone's response. And apparently I found out that it's actually in the KudoZ rules (3.4, I think) that an answerer should absolutely NOT be commenting to an asker about his/her choice of repsonse, or awarding of points. I wish I'd known that before, but live and learn.
Regarding what you said about someone closing a question without grading, I have done that, but found out that the practice is discouraged so I've recently modified some of the questions on which I did this and will keep in mind if I post any future questions that my goal is to choose a "winner" who will get those oh so coveted points. But like I said, live and learn, and even if I disagree with this supposed necessity to choose one response, if that's the rules then so be it.;)
| | |
|
|
|
[quote]gad wrote:
Regarding what you said about someone closing a question without grading, I have done that, but found out that the practice is discouraged so I've recently modified some of the questions on which I did this and will keep in mind if I post any future questions that my goal is to choose a "winner" who will get those oh so coveted points. But like I said, live and learn, and even if I disagree with this supposed necessity to choose one response, if that's the rules then so be it.;)
That was a very unique experience and afaik was done to avoid giving points. Otherwise that is also completely up to asker.
Fwiw: The person who gets the "points" is the one who was most helpful to Asker: there are no winners or losers.
[Edited at 2005-03-03 21:42]
| | | | Gina W
Sjedinjene Američke Države
Local time: 18:02
Član (2003)
francuski na engleski
| I like the way you put this | Mar 4, 2005 |
That was a very unique experience and afaik was done to avoid giving points. Otherwise that is also completely up to asker. Fwiw: The person who gets the "points" is the one who was most helpful to Asker: there are no winners or losers.
[Edited at 2005-03-03 21:42]
Yeah, it sounds like your situation was perhaps as you described here, to avoid giving points.
Apparently although you state that is is completely up to the asker, there are quite a few who strongly disagree.
And I really like what you said about there being no winners or losers. I don't know if others would agree but I do and I like the way you put this.
| | | | | Stranica u temi: < [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 » KudoZ averages | 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 Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
