| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Asker directing questions specifically to ProZ.com members. Thread poster: Sormane Gomes
|
|---|
| Being a paying member does not mean you're a better translator | Jul 15, 2006 |
Having discovered PROZ in April 2005, I decided to "join" as a paying member in December - for all the reasons stated by Jerzy above. No need to repeat them here. Henry et al. do a great job that we all benefit from in one way or other, and I think it's only fair to pay for what you get.
I also agree with writeaway, however, that some of the best answers come from peers who are NOT paying members. The equation "paying member = better translator" simply doesn't work.
In ... See more Having discovered PROZ in April 2005, I decided to "join" as a paying member in December - for all the reasons stated by Jerzy above. No need to repeat them here. Henry et al. do a great job that we all benefit from in one way or other, and I think it's only fair to pay for what you get.
I also agree with writeaway, however, that some of the best answers come from peers who are NOT paying members. The equation "paying member = better translator" simply doesn't work.
In my view, this is just a marketing gimmick, and if askers fall for it, it's their own fault if they don't get the help (or the answers) they asked for.
Have a nice weekend...
LB ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Not a 'reason' Jerzy-a requirement | Jul 15, 2006 |
Jerzy Czopik wrote:
After all, apart from money, there is no other requirement for being a "member" of the site.[/b]
What I mean is that anyone who pays becomes a 'member'. The only 'requirement' is money, no professional qualifications. That is what makes some of us wonder why selecting 'answers from members only' is one of the choices now offered to Askers.
It has nothing to do with the reason(s) why people decide to go Plat.
And this is just a discussion where people can express their own opinions. So now one should be offended by another colleague's opinion.
[Edited at 2006-07-15 12:34]
| | | | Dyran Altenburg (X) 
United States
Local time: 07:46
English to Spanish
+ ...
| The user abuser fallacy | Jul 15, 2006 |
Jerzy Czopik wrote:
In my opinion ProZ could not exist anymore without the members.
Neither could it exist without the users. Even more so, I would say.
Going back to the KudoZ issue, it is clear that there are users (i.e. non-paying, obviously established translators) who decide to use their spare time answering many terminology questions, and are Kudoz leaders.
Not surprisingly, it seems that only members can choose to have their question answered by members. The option is greyed-out for users.
Food for thought.
--
Dyran
[Edited at 2006-07-15 16:07]
| | | | Jerzy Czopik
Germany
Local time: 13:46
Member (2003)
Polish to German
+ ...
| I have not stated something different | Jul 15, 2006 |
Dyran Altenburg wrote:
Neither could it exist without the users. Even more so, I would say.
Going back to the KudoZ issue, it is clear that there are users (i.e. non-paying, obviously established translators) who decide to use their spare time answering many terminology questions, and are Kudoz leaders.
Not surprisingly, it seems that only members can choose to have their question answered by members. The option is greyed-out for users.
Food for thought.
--
Dyran
This is as clear as the other statement. Now we could start arguing if really "even more". Nonetheless you cannot run and maintane servers without money.
When a car manufacturer calls me and offers a car, it is also clear, that when I accept I have to pay for it. This is marketing. And usually we do not claim that this is so. Why then do we claim so much about ProZ doing marketing? Do you feel bad supporting this community more than only morally? I doubt.
And I did also not state that user abuse someone. As a member I do not feel abused in any way, if you chose to remain a user. You have your reasons and I accept them. But as elswhere too if you do not pay for some services you simply don´t get them. Therefore I do not see anything wrong, if some features are limited just only for paying members.
Best regards
Jerzy
PS
I do represent here only my own point of view. My statements do not represent the opinion of either ProZ or any other fellow Moderator.
| | |
|
|
|
Eva T
English to Albanian
+ ...
| what's the fuss about | Jul 15, 2006 |
If members (who pay) want to have some extra service or features, let them have them. I do not get offended at all if I am not included, because I do not pay for anything. I don't understand the fuss about it from some of hte nonmembers here. You are saying: I like you to do this or not to do that, adn you have to listen to me, but sorry, I am not paying anything for whatever I want you to do or not to do. I think some of you are going far with your requests.
You can't go to somebo... See more If members (who pay) want to have some extra service or features, let them have them. I do not get offended at all if I am not included, because I do not pay for anything. I don't understand the fuss about it from some of hte nonmembers here. You are saying: I like you to do this or not to do that, adn you have to listen to me, but sorry, I am not paying anything for whatever I want you to do or not to do. I think some of you are going far with your requests.
You can't go to somebody else's house as a visitor and demand things there. I am happy to visit them and enjoy what they have to offer me during my visit there.
Goodbye,
Eva
Dyran Altenburg wrote:
Not surprisingly, it seems that only members can choose to have their question answered by members. The option is greyed-out for users.
Food for thought.
--
Dyran
[Edited at 2006-07-15 16:07]
[Edited at 2006-07-15 17:17] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Simple answer to a simple question | Jul 15, 2006 |
Sormane Fitzgerald Gomes wrote:
I fail to understand why an asker is given the option to choose help from paying members only. It makes sense to me to request someone who works in the pair and has experience in the field, but what is a paying member going to offer that a non-paying member can’t in that particular situation?
Could someone enlighten me on this?
Hi Sormane
This option was implemented because some users or members requested it.
Why did they request for it? I don't know, I suppose that because they think that this means something about the person who answers (better translator? more serious translator? richer translator?)... As I don't use it, I don't mind.
There also exist other options that I don't use: I filter nobody's questions, I flag nobody either, I receive all forum postings, even those that are off topic... But there are users/ members who requested: not to receive that kind of questions, not to receive answers coming from that kind of translators, or not to see postings that are not serious enough, as Off topic postings are considered...
So what? This only shows that proZ.com does as much as it can to please everybody. Henry explained it very well in a recent thread about the WWA.
The answer is: it exists because somebody requested it.
Claudia
[Editado a las 2006-07-15 17:41]
| | | | Sormane Gomes
United States
Local time: 07:46
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | What's the purpose of it? | Jul 15, 2006 |
I want to thank everybody for their posts. I just hope we do not stray too far off topic here. As I said, I do not want to start an argument.
Hi Sormane
This option was implemented because some users or members requested it.
Claudia
Claudia,
Thank you for your post letting me know that it was requested by some users or members. But the other part of my question still remains open - what was the reasoning behind it?
I could well request (or even suggest that ProZ offers an option) that only cat lovers would answer my questions. But the point is, what's the purpose of it? And that is my question. I am not questioning the right to choose that. I just want to understand why that suggestion was accepted and implemented by ProZ. That's all.
Thank you.
Sormane F. Gomes
[Edited at 2006-07-15 17:56]
| | | | | What can I say to that? | Jul 15, 2006 |
Sormane Fitzgerald Gomes wrote:
Thank you for your post letting me know that it was requested by some users or members. But the other part of my question still remains open - what was the reasoning behind it?
just want to understand why that suggestion was accepted and implemented by ProZ. That's all. [/quote]
I can't talk about the reasonning for requesting it as I find it useless. I guessed three possible reasons, written between brackets in my previous posting, none of them with more weight than any other.
I can't say why it was accepted and implemented by ProZ.com except that it was to please those who requested it.
You could suggest to have the option for having only cat lovers answering to your questions in the Suggestions forum, and if you have enough support you might get it, who knows?
You and I don't see the point of this option, but if some askers do chose it, it is because some people do see its interest. Such is the world, with all kind of people and all kind of opinions.
Claudia
| | |
|
|
|
| What was the reasoning behind it? | Jul 15, 2006 |
Hi Sormane - thank you for raising a good point. I do agree with Claudia that it was implemented because it was requested, and I think it was part of a general overhaul in which many good improvements were implemented with the intention of giving members/users more choice and generally helping each translator to customize his/her workplace to suit them individually.
I think the concept is to provide "soft" solutions, i.e. rather than creating more rules and restrictions, to give peo... See more Hi Sormane - thank you for raising a good point. I do agree with Claudia that it was implemented because it was requested, and I think it was part of a general overhaul in which many good improvements were implemented with the intention of giving members/users more choice and generally helping each translator to customize his/her workplace to suit them individually.
I think the concept is to provide "soft" solutions, i.e. rather than creating more rules and restrictions, to give people options.
That said, there doesn't seem to be much value in this option and there's no point in creating options that don't make sense. We also have the First Validated Answer option that a lot of folks don't like, but Henry explained that it's an experiment and will be reconsidered if it doesn't appear to be useful.
I think the option to direct questions only to members is pointless and should be added to the list of features that should be reconsidered. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | One possible (devious) reason? | Jul 15, 2006 |
I can only think that this was asked for with the ultimate objective of pushing "users" lower down the kudoz rankings and at the same time pushing "members" higher up. Members get the chance to answer all questions; users can only answer a subset. Therefore, over the course of time, members will get more points than users, appear higher in the rankings and thus get contacted more often for proposed jobs (personally, I have been contacted for work purely on the basis of my points score, I know th... See more I can only think that this was asked for with the ultimate objective of pushing "users" lower down the kudoz rankings and at the same time pushing "members" higher up. Members get the chance to answer all questions; users can only answer a subset. Therefore, over the course of time, members will get more points than users, appear higher in the rankings and thus get contacted more often for proposed jobs (personally, I have been contacted for work purely on the basis of my points score, I know this because those emailing me have stated as much sometimes, so having points can be considered to have some "commercial value", IMHO). Presumably, then, this was asked for by members with a view to boosting their rankings to increase their chances of getting work, which presumably (again) they feel is "fair" since they pay for the site and users don't.
Of course, this would only work if the feature was extensively used, which it does not appear to be, in my pair at least.
And equally obviously, when viewed in terms of individual questions and the chances of getting a decent answer, it doesn't seem to be particularly sensible (which is probably why it isn't used much).
I don't subscribe to this point of view, but no-one seems to have thought of it, so I thought I'd suggest it as a possibility. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Gina W
United States
Local time: 07:46
Member (2003)
French to English
| Just wanted to say | Jul 15, 2006 |
...that when I ask questions, I do not choose this option. As long as someone is a registered user, I might as well welcome whatever answer and/or comment they would like to post.
When these options were first implemented, I think I choose the "native speaker" option once or twice, then after that didn't really see the need for it. I don't want to exclude anyone, as there are plenty of reasons that a person might be a user but not a member, not having anything to do with ability o... See more ...that when I ask questions, I do not choose this option. As long as someone is a registered user, I might as well welcome whatever answer and/or comment they would like to post.
When these options were first implemented, I think I choose the "native speaker" option once or twice, then after that didn't really see the need for it. I don't want to exclude anyone, as there are plenty of reasons that a person might be a user but not a member, not having anything to do with ability or expertise.
I would say, though, that if this feature was requested, then that is fine to leave it the way it is I guess. Instead of specifiying native speaker, member, etc, I would prefer to actually block certain users/members from answering my questions - or, better yet, send the questions to only certain individuals who I know will answer nicely, politely, without condescending to me and/or scolding me for asking the question. ▲ Collapse
| | | | sarahl (X)
Local time: 04:46
English to French
+ ...
| Possible answer | Jul 15, 2006 |
gad wrote:
...or, better yet, send the questions to only certain individuals who I know will answer nicely, politely, without condescending to me and/or scolding me for asking the question.
Hi Gad,
Creating your own team then sending your questions to your team only may be the solution to your quandary. With the obvious drawback of limiting your answers to a small group of people, of course.
| | |
|
|
|
Gina W
United States
Local time: 07:46
Member (2003)
French to English
| My understanding is that teams are not just for KudoZ purposes | Jul 15, 2006 |
sarahl wrote: gad wrote:
...or, better yet, send the questions to only certain individuals who I know will answer nicely, politely, without condescending to me and/or scolding me for asking the question. Hi Gad, Creating your own team then sending your questions to your team only may be the solution to your quandary. With the obvious drawback of limiting your answers to a small group of people, of course.
Hi, thanks! I thought that a moderator had told me awhile ago that the teams are primarily for bidding on jobs and such, and that a side benefit of that is being able to post private questions to your team. But if I can post private questions to a team otherwise, then that'd be great.
I still do think that we should be able to block certain users/members, though, too. If someone is rude to me and condescends to me, I don't care how expert that person thinks s/he is, I don't necessarily want any further input.
| | | | | Two solutions | Jul 16, 2006 |
1. Get someone to create a project (ficticious, of course, but proz don't need to know that ), and then build your team You'll have to explain, I guess, that there's not really any genuine project at all, and you just want to them to answer your questions...
2. Decline all answers from the condescending and rude. After you've done this 3 or 4 times, I very much doubt your mailbox will be cluttered with response notifi... See more
| | | | Fan Gao
Australia
Local time: 21:46
English to Chinese
+ ...
| Fact of life..... | Jul 16, 2006 |
Patricia Lane wrote:
Hi Mark,
I've been very much in agreement with a number of your other postings that illustrated your values and business ethics.
Thank you for that:)
Does the fact that I have not "gone platinum" make me a less committed or serious translator?
Hi Patricia,
Please forgive me for insinuating that you were anything less than a true professional in this business. I have no doubt that you and many, many non paying members are equally as committed, serious and very professional and probably even more so than some paying members.
I just think that it's human nature that people (in general) place greater value (rightly or wrongly) on members who have paid money to the site. It's not just in this instance either it could be the difference between having a "hotmail" as an example, free email address or having your own, paid for, domain email address. If you were to receive an unsolicited email from someone with a "free" email address, chances are you would delete it in an instant but if you received it from someone with a "non free" email address then you might just be inclined to read it because psychologically you may feel a certain value or committment is already behind it.
Charlie previously brought up the conspiracy theory that the original issue was a way to move non members down the directory search list but the fact is paying members get listed seperately and above non paying members anyway. Which list will outsourcers look at first? It's human nature.
I'm not saying it's right and I'm not saying it's fair, I just think it's a fact of life.
Best wishes,
Mark
| | | | | 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 » Asker directing questions specifically to ProZ.com members. | 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 » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
