| Stranica u temi: [1 2] > | KUDOZ "abusers" (askers): another suggestion Postavljač teme: Valery Kaminski
|
|---|
There have been quite a few discussions on how certain users “abuse” the KUDOZ system.
I mean those who do not answer questions of other users but exploit the collective competence here at PROZ by asking dozens and hundreds of their own.
KUDOZ is an integral part of the mechanics of this site. We all know that changing any element might endanger the operation of otherwise efficient system.
Still, there are some already existing instruments which could be modi... See more There have been quite a few discussions on how certain users “abuse” the KUDOZ system.
I mean those who do not answer questions of other users but exploit the collective competence here at PROZ by asking dozens and hundreds of their own.
KUDOZ is an integral part of the mechanics of this site. We all know that changing any element might endanger the operation of otherwise efficient system.
Still, there are some already existing instruments which could be modified in order to deal with the situation described above. To a certain extent, I agree with those who think that ignoring the questions asked by “abusers” may be a solution. But this solution is just not fair enough. I now speak as one of those who believe in the fair competition for those points. People who do not share this opinion (to ignore the abusers’ questions) will have an advantage – they are exposed to more questions, many of which are not that hard to answer.
My suggestion is the following:
I think that people with no kudoz points and over 20 (30-40-50??) questions asked should be able to ask the permitted number of questions (1 – 5 – 15), but after reaching a certain figure (30-40-50) there should be a limit to the amount of points they can give - 1 or 2, but not 4.
What do you think?
Best regards,
Valery
[Subject edited by staff or moderator 2007-10-24 16:38] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Ivana Kahle 
Njemačka
Local time: 21:51
Član (2007)
njemački na hrvatski
+ ...
| Points awarded to another answerer | Oct 24, 2007 |
This might seem a little bit off-topic, but how do you feel when you answer the question right (and get 3-4 peer agreements), but someone else gets the points?
I'm not jelaous, just curious if this happens to another answerers.
| | | | | get used to it | Oct 24, 2007 |
Sometimes askers decline your 100%-hit answer with 10 agrees and choose totally inadequate option, or one copied from yours. Not a big deal at all.
Some of them give preference to their friends, others do not know subject well enough to recognise the correct answer. Some people might just not like you personally.
It's a kudoz reality, absolutely normal situation=)
| | | |
I don't mind "mild abusers" - after all, I can choose to ignore them, and if I decide to answer, I am contributing to the building of the best glossary / dictionary / database I can think of, which I use on a daily basis. Kudos are of only secondary importance here.
About the "serious abusers" - to my mind, reaching the total of a hundred questions asked (= frequent user) should trigger a Q/A rate check. If that exceeds 5 : ... See more I don't mind "mild abusers" - after all, I can choose to ignore them, and if I decide to answer, I am contributing to the building of the best glossary / dictionary / database I can think of, which I use on a daily basis. Kudos are of only secondary importance here.
About the "serious abusers" - to my mind, reaching the total of a hundred questions asked (= frequent user) should trigger a Q/A rate check. If that exceeds 5 : 1 (or any other arbitrary - but high - threshold), the possibility of asking questions should be either limited or blocked until the notorious asker "earns his lunch", i.e. gets above the threshold. Perhaps with a warning issued beforehand. We keep trying to educate customers, why not colleagues? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Jan Sundström
Švedska
Local time: 21:51
Član (1970)
engleski na švedski
+ ...
| Suggestion: Seeder/leecher ratio | Oct 24, 2007 |
Valery Kaminski wrote:
I think that people with no kudoz points and over 20 (30-40-50??) questions asked should be able to ask the permitted number of questions (1 – 5 – 15), but after reaching a certain figure (30-40-50) there should be a limit to the amount of points they can give - 1 or 2, but not 4.
Hi Valery and all,
You're pointing out a valid problem, but we also have to consider that paid members spent money on the Proz membership, and expect to reap the benefit of this cost by asking questions.
This is one of the main selling points
That's also the reason for the two-tier allowance of questions per week.
Limiting the number of questions is pointless, it would just lead to askers registering multiple dummy Proz accounts, just to ask questions.
Limiting the points given is a good suggestion, but with a downside. Askers will still try their luck, and there are still points hunters who would want to grab even single points.
But the quality of the answers will decline, since many users won't bother answering, and will spend less time on research. Low-quality answers might then end up in the Kudoz glossary, which is a negative side effect!
My suggestion is that a "seeder/leecher ratio" was implemented into the Kudoz system, in a similar fashion to Bittorrent and other filesharing technology:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leech_(computing)
In that case, the asker's ratio would be shown when he posts a question, and other users can "judge his karma" and decide if they want to answer or not.
/Jan
[Edited at 2007-10-24 10:52]
| | | | Terry Richards
Francuska
Local time: 21:51
francuski na engleski
+ ...
| Forcing them to answer won't work | Oct 24, 2007 |
They will just answer with something wrong to a load of questions. If you force them to win points, they will just create another ID, post a bunch of dummy questions and award the points to their main ID.
Any scheme you come up with has a way around it and, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. It's plainly visible how many questions they have asked, how many they have answered and how many points they got.
If you feel they are abusing the system, don't answ... See more They will just answer with something wrong to a load of questions. If you force them to win points, they will just create another ID, post a bunch of dummy questions and award the points to their main ID.
Any scheme you come up with has a way around it and, at the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. It's plainly visible how many questions they have asked, how many they have answered and how many points they got.
If you feel they are abusing the system, don't answer their questions and move on with your life.
T. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Kudoz points are not reflecting people's willingness to help you | Oct 24, 2007 |
Valery Kaminski wrote:
My suggestion is the following:
I think that people with no kudoz points and over 20 (30-40-50??) questions asked should be able to ask the permitted number of questions (1 – 5 – 15), but after reaching a certain figure (30-40-50) there should be a limit to the amount of points they can give - 1 or 2, but not 4.
What do you think?
Best regards,
Valery
[Редактировалось 2007-10-24 08:25]
Dear Valery,
I would say oups... Few months back, I had answered one question into Turkish, with a background information and a solid source. Afterwards, the asker gave the points accidentally to someone else, and informed me about the situation all the same. I did not mind. Why would I after all? It was a help and the person awarded me his mental points.
But now, I see that I should have been cross with him as my allowance for questions could be endangered because of his mistake! Yet, I don't see it that way.
Personally, I believe Kudoz points are not always reflecting the quality of answers. I believe the forum for questions and answers could as well work without awarding points. I am sure there will be sufficient people who will assist you with your questions, as there is a mutual benefit. If you know one person as an intruder, you may still ignore his/her questions.
Almost one week ago, I asked few questions. The answers came up almost immediately and almost the same answers. Whom would you award then, in this situation? The earliest bid was my only hope even tough I have taken my time to send my gratitude to everybody in person.
Warmest regards to all,
Binnur
| | | | Anne Brackenborough (X)
Njemačka
Local time: 21:51
njemački na engleski
| "Abuse" the right word? | Oct 24, 2007 |
When you say "abuse" I assume you mean that these people could answer lots of Kudoz questions if they wanted to, but they don't as they just want to take, take, take, and not give anything back.
That might be true in some cases, but there are some other possibilities:
a) they are new to translation and have more questions than answers
b) they are afraid of making mistakes and having people sneer at them
c) they don't spend much time on Proz, or are just a bi... See more When you say "abuse" I assume you mean that these people could answer lots of Kudoz questions if they wanted to, but they don't as they just want to take, take, take, and not give anything back.
That might be true in some cases, but there are some other possibilities:
a) they are new to translation and have more questions than answers
b) they are afraid of making mistakes and having people sneer at them
c) they don't spend much time on Proz, or are just a bit slow and so, when they do look, or want to answer, someone else has always got there first.
d) they are very busy, so have lots of questions and little time to answer
If they are new, should they be punished for their current lack of knowledge?
If they are insecure, should we show them up by displaying how little they have contributed?
If they have little time, should the service they have paid for (if they have!) be restricted?
I guess you're talking about people who ask hundreds of questions before answering one themselves, but I think it will still be hard to find a system which can distinguish between the knowing abusers and the unintentionally unhelpful.
I've answered a few questions, but I'm in category c), and there seem to be some users who are permanently on Proz accumulating staggering amounts of points by answering all the questions, just leaving the hard ones to us slowcoaches. Maybe they should be restricted, to let others have a chance? ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Completely with you Anne... | Oct 24, 2007 |
Anne Koth wrote:
When you say "abuse" I assume you mean that these people could answer lots of Kudoz questions if they wanted to, but they don't as they just want to take, take, take, and not give anything back.
That might be true in some cases, but there are some other possibilities:
a) they are new to translation and have more questions than answers
b) they are afraid of making mistakes and having people sneer at them
c) they don't spend much time on Proz, or are just a bit slow and so, when they do look, or want to answer, someone else has always got there first.
d) they are very busy, so have lots of questions and little time to answer
If they are new, should they be punished for their current lack of knowledge?
If they are insecure, should we show them up by displaying how little they have contributed?
If they have little time, should the service they have paid for (if they have!) be restricted?
I guess you're talking about people who ask hundreds of questions before answering one themselves, but I think it will still be hard to find a system which can distinguish between the knowing abusers and the unintentionally unhelpful.
| | | | Yaotl Altan
Meksiko
Local time: 13:51
Član (2006)
engleski na španjolski
+ ...
Ivana Kahle wrote:
This might seem a little bit off-topic, but how do you feel when you answer the question right (and get 3-4 peer agreements), but someone else gets the points?
I'm not jelaous, just curious if this happens to another answerers.
Excatly. It happens very frequently and it has happened to me even with more than 7 or 8 agrees. I think sometimes people award Kudoz according to their friendship. Anyway, I fell happy participating, learning and teaching.
| | | | | Multiple profiles are not allowed. | Oct 24, 2007 |
Setting up multiple profiles is not allowed on the site.
It is not always easy to see whether two profiles are owned by the same person, but any suspicions should be reported to a moderator or site staff, who can try to check it out.
Direct cheating is forbidden, of course, but within the rules, it is up to each user of the site how he or she will contribute.
KudoZ is a game of 'give and take' - and some players give more points by posting more questions th... See more Setting up multiple profiles is not allowed on the site.
It is not always easy to see whether two profiles are owned by the same person, but any suspicions should be reported to a moderator or site staff, who can try to check it out.
Direct cheating is forbidden, of course, but within the rules, it is up to each user of the site how he or she will contribute.
KudoZ is a game of 'give and take' - and some players give more points by posting more questions than they answer. For some reason nobody objects half as much to those who answer a lot, but rarely post qestions
Lots of site users practically never join in KudoZ at all, for whatever reasons.
Some spend more time in the discussion forums instead - and these are often valuable contributions to the site too, with practical advice and help with problems. But there is no points system for helping in the forums, so nobody counts!
Just think of the help with CAT tools, freely given, without points. These answerers spend a lot of time helping others too. I'm glad nobody insists that I should solve a Trados problem for someone else every time I look for advice there!
Even the 'off topic' contributions are in fact an important part of the site, providing light relief and food for thought that many of us do not get from office colleagues as we work at home.
There are times when we need help, and there are times when we can help others. The best thing about this site is that the help, once given, is freely available for all of us in the forums and the glossary. In fact we can all gain far more that way than we contribute.
Happy translating!
▲ Collapse
| | | | Ivana Kahle
Njemačka
Local time: 21:51
Član (2007)
njemački na hrvatski
+ ...
"Anyway, I fell happy participating, learning and teaching."
That's the point.
| | |
|
|
|
Mónica Algazi
Urugvaj
Local time: 16:51
Član (2005)
engleski na španjolski
| Asking for help, helping, learning, teaching, still learning | Oct 24, 2007 |
Just want to say I totally agree with Binnur and Anne. If there were no points involved, I would still enjoy helping, being helped, teaching, learning and feeling part of this wonderful community of young and not-so-young, experienced and not-so experienced translators.
| | | | Roberto Rey
Kolumbija
Local time: 14:51
Član (2007)
španjolski na engleski
+ ...
| Points and agrees to fiends and compatriots | Oct 24, 2007 |
Yaotl Altan wrote:
Ivana Kahle wrote:
This might seem a little bit off-topic, but how do you feel when you answer the question right (and get 3-4 peer agreements), but someone else gets the points?
I'm not jelaous, just curious if this happens to another answerers.
Excatly. It happens very frequently and it has happened to me even with more than 7 or 8 agrees. I think sometimes people award Kudoz according to their friendship. Anyway, I fell happy participating, learning and teaching.
I recently saw a person handing out agrees only to people from her same country..how can a translator be so immature? I guess she thinks only people in her country know the language...
| | | | Fabio Descalzi
Urugvaj
Local time: 16:51
Član (2004)
njemački na španjolski
+ ...
| Language specific for a country...? | Oct 24, 2007 |
Satto (Roberto) wrote:
I recently saw a person handing out agrees only to people from her same country..how can a translator be so immature? I guess she thinks only people in her country know the language...
Hi Roberto:
Well, that would have a relative validity, if the asker needs a given sort of speech (say: Spanish for Mexico or for Cuba). Nevertheless, impartiality should be kept in general - the needed sort of speech might as well come from an emigree native speaker, to name and example.
Besides: Rules must be respected:
http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.6#3.6
http://www.proz.com/siterules/kudoz_answ/3.7#3.7
[Edited at 2007-10-24 14:26]
| | | | | Stranica u temi: [1 2] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » KUDOZ "abusers" (askers): another suggestion | 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 » |
| | LinguaCore |
|---|
AI Translation at Your Fingertips
The underlying LLM technology of LinguaCore offers AI translations of unprecedented quality. Quick and simple. Add a human linguistic review at the end for expert-level quality at a fraction of the cost and time.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
