| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) Thread poster: Catherine Bolton
|
|---|
Mats Wiman 
Sweden
Local time: 16:55
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | To encourage Disagrees (presumably for quality) you have to stifle unnecessary aggressive responses | Aug 5, 2006 |
Ian Winick wrote:Ian's comment:
Yes, a "buy a dictionary (stoopid)" option would be top of my wish-list ...
This is exctly what is objectionable: Contempt instead of help.
I don't agree with Mats that the option of replying to disagrees should be removed - disagrees are not always right, especially those of the tit-for-tat variety.
My idea is to stop knee-jerk reactions to a disagree. I would suggest that a Disagree should be marked with a tick in a box and if there is no explanation in the adjacent box, the Disagree would not be posted, enforcing a rule by neat, ProZ.com style programming.
If a Disagree is "right" or "wrong" is nobody's business but the asker's. (An addition to the 'Mind your own business' series )
KudoZ is a suggustions meeting place, not a battle ground for superior translators.
And, for the record, a disagree to the effect of "not something a native speaker would say" is certainly valid, and, in my view, extremely important. In fact, if this disagree drive is to work, that is one of the main areas that should be targeted.
Except for besserwissers (I never said you were one ), it is of lesser value to the asker. S/he wants to know what a native would say, not THAT it is non-native.
| | | | IanW (X)
Local time: 16:55
German to English
+ ...
Mats Wiman wrote: Ian Winick wrote:Ian's comment:
Yes, a "buy a dictionary (stoopid)" option would be top of my wish-list ... This is exctly what is objectionable: Contempt instead of help.
If you have a close look at the several explanations I have given of this - i.e. read the words - then you will see that there is no contempt here. There really are none so blind as those that will not see.
And ask any of my colleagues on the D-E site if "contempt" is a word that they would associate with me. I don't suffer fools gladly, certainly, but I have never stooped to the kind of rudeness that you, dear Mats, are known for.
(And I wonder if Mats will be asked to remove this, as I have been asked before, as a "personal attack".)
My idea is to stop knee-jerk reactions to a disagree. I would suggest that a Disagree should be marked with a tick in a box and if there is no explanation in the adjacent box, the Disagree would not be posted, enforcing a rule by neat, ProZ.com style programming.
If you do a search on the phrase "knee-jerk reaction", you will find that most of them are descriptions of you! A "knee-jerk" reaction is an automatic, thought-free reaction to something. I've never seen anyone do this with the disagree function - at least not without getting hammered by everyone else.
Except for besserwissers (I never said you were one )
Smiley or no smiley, that is simply not true. Yes, you have since deleted the word "other", but I have the original text on file.
Look at the following forum: http://www.proz.com/post/377768#377768
Keep your thoughts to yourselves Jul 6
does not mean that you are not entitked to your opinion or that you are not entitled to air them, just as little as "Mind you own business" was.
What I am referring to is this incessant criticism of questions, answers and answerers to no avail. KudoZ was created not to have questions, answers and answerers judged by ***you or other besserwissers*** but to offer an opportunity for translators and others to get help or help.
Your elitist discussions about what is chaff or not is uninteresting and pathetic.
Answer questions or do not, but don't whine when others (in your view not enough qualified persons) dare to ask or answer questions.
KudoZ is a service - not a club.
| | | | | Disagreeing with the process as well as the answer | Aug 5, 2006 |
First of all to Ian - sorry if I hadn't made it clear that you were just joking. I and everyone else in your language pairs have always considered you a model of decorum and respect for others in KudoZ.
Now my new point:
Is criticism of "how" the answer was arrived at in addition to a purely linguistic comment on the answer itself a linguistic comment?
When someone asks a complex technical, medical or linguistic question (for example) and an answerer (who ... See more First of all to Ian - sorry if I hadn't made it clear that you were just joking. I and everyone else in your language pairs have always considered you a model of decorum and respect for others in KudoZ.
Now my new point:
Is criticism of "how" the answer was arrived at in addition to a purely linguistic comment on the answer itself a linguistic comment?
When someone asks a complex technical, medical or linguistic question (for example) and an answerer (who has no record of expertise in the subject matter) submits a high confidence word-for-word translation or a machine translation followed by a smiley or "have a nice day" or "my take" or "supported by 1 million Google hits", it is not only the answer itself that needs to be disagreed with linguistically, but the process used to arrive at the answer.
Certainly, some questions, especially those of the non-pro variety, require no extensive explanations or references. Just the dictionary answer will often suffice in such cases. But most pro-level questions asked by professional translators will require some explanation and reliable references so that the asker can justify his translation to the client if necessary.
In a strong and healthy subcommunity, i.e. one in which the tone is set by conscientious professionals, it is not only the answer that is the subject of disapproval but the process as well. When an answerer pulls an answer out of his you-know-what and offers no evidence that it is an acceptable translation other than that the word proposed actually exists in the target language as proven by 1 million Google hits, not only should the answer receive disagrees supported by linguistic reasons, but the answerer's process should be criticized as well. In professional, healthy subcommunities this goes without saying. Members are there to help not only the asker but their colleagues too. I have learned much about decent research and translation techniques from my colleagues in the German / English subcommunities.
We need to be able to communicate with each other as translators in KudoZ as well as with the asker. As an educator and woodworker, I learned long ago that it's very difficult to unlearn bad habits. We have to learn how to do something properly from the start.
[Edited at 2006-08-05 20:43] ▲ Collapse
| | | | df49f (X)
France
Local time: 16:55
| very much everybody's business... | Aug 5, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote: ..."buy a dictionary ... This is exctly what is objectionable: Contempt instead of help.
1) saying "buy a dictionary" is NOT contempt, just good advice.
2) this quote is used OUT OF CONTEXT: petty nitpicking and unfair to twist things like this... plus it is insulting...
3) the point is precisely how to find a way of saying it without being offensive or a proz-outlaw.
If a Disagree is "right" or "wrong" is nobody's business but the asker's. (An addition to the 'Mind your own business' series )
I beg to differ, it is most certainly EVERYBODY's business if a disagree is right or wrong, including the Asker's and including mine if I got a "wrong" disagree and including yours if that "right" answer ends up being discarded in favor of a "wrong" one later entered in the KOG. ->the possibility of responding to a disagree is therefore essential
This is however not the main focus of Catherine's thread - just an incidental aspect - and it would be nice not to stray too much and remain focussed on the main issue).
..."not something a native speaker would say" is certainly valid... (said Ian)
...it is of lesser value to the asker. S/he wants to know what a native would say, not THAT it is non-native.
It is of UTMOST value to Asker (and to readers & future gloss. searchers)
KudoZ is a suggustions meeting place, not a battle ground for superior translators.
Nobody is thinking is terms of "superior" (seems to be a recurring pet obsession of yours to try and put words like this into our minds and mouths!)
We're thinking in terms of "genuine translators", i.e. you know, things like: conscientious, professionally-minded, eager-to-learn, curious, searching for perfection, knowing our limits, recognizing our ignorance, enhancing our skills, transcending our flaws, not lazy, self-researchers, ethical and the likes...
stay well - dominique
[Edited at 2006-08-05 17:58]
[Edited at 2006-08-05 17:59]
| | |
|
|
|
| Civil discussions | Aug 5, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote: Ian Winick wrote:Ian's comment:
Yes, a "buy a dictionary (stoopid)" option would be top of my wish-list ... This is exctly what is objectionable: Contempt instead of help.
Mats, here's something Ian wrote a long time ago that will give you some idea of the respect he enjoys among colleagues and how he feels about civil behavior.
http://www.proz.com/post/111111#111111
Please bury your hatchet and help us improve KudoZ. Ian's been trying to do that for many years.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 16:55
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | No wonder Disagree is controversial | Aug 5, 2006 |
[quote]Ian Winick wrote:
Mats Wiman wrote: Ian Winick wrote:Ian's comment:
Yes, a "buy a dictionary (stoopid)" option would be top of my wish-list ... This is exctly what is objectionable: Contempt instead of help.
If you have a close look at the several explanations I have given of this - i.e. read the words - then you will see that there is no contempt here. There really are none so blind as those that will not see.
And ask any of my colleagues on the D-E site if "contempt" is a word that they would associate with me.
I do not know anything about you behavior in the D-E SC, I simply say that "buy a dictionary (stoopid)" is not what one should say or even think, but you tell us that it is at the top of your wish-list. What is ambiguous? I don't suffer fools gladly, certainly, but I have never stooped to the kind of rudeness that you, dear Mats, are known for. Am I rude? My idea is to stop knee-jerk reactions to a disagree. I would suggest that a Disagree should be marked with a tick in a box and if there is no explanation in the adjacent box, the Disagree would not be posted, enforcing a rule by neat, ProZ.com style programming. If you do a search on the phrase "knee-jerk reaction", you will find that most of them are descriptions of you! A "knee-jerk" reaction is an automatic, thought-free reaction to something. I've never seen anyone do this with the disagree function - at least not without getting hammered by everyone else. Am I rude? Except for besserwissers (I never said you were one ) Smiley or no smiley, that is simply not true. Yes, you have since deleted the word "other", but I have the original text on file. Look at the following forum: http://www.proz.com/post/377768#377768
Keep your thoughts to yourselves Jul 6
does not mean that you are not entitked to your opinion or that you are not entitled to air them, just as little as "Mind you own business" was.
What I am referring to is this incessant criticism of questions, answers and answerers to no avail. KudoZ was created not to have questions, answers and answerers judged by ***you or other besserwissers*** but to offer an opportunity for translators and others to get help or help.
Your elitist discussions about what is chaff or not is uninteresting and pathetic.
Answer questions or do not, but don't whine when others (in your view not enough qualified persons) dare to ask or answer questions.
KudoZ is a service - not a club.
Yes I deleted 'other' becuase that was a word too much.
I should have asked you to accept my apology. Sorry I did not do that. I hereby do just that.
The reason for the sharp criticism was simply that so many of your comments breed contempt for the less knowledgeable that seem to harass you and your colleagues by simply being "stoopid".
[Edited at 2006-08-05 17:53]
[Edited at 2006-08-05 17:57]
| | | | | it's getting repetitive | Aug 5, 2006 |
Why ..oh why do KudoZ forum threads often go astray???
Peace, guys, please. I'm finding it rather difficult to follow threads with so much cross-fire.
Have a nice week-end
[Edited at 2006-08-05 18:07]
[Edited at 2006-08-05 18:07]
| | | | df49f (X)
France
Local time: 16:55
| could we please refocus on the real issue?? | Aug 5, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
The reason for ...
could you please just let go of your personal peeves that are hijacking Catherine's thread, so we can focus on the real issue?
thanks in advance...
df
| | |
|
|
|
df49f (X)
France
Local time: 16:55
| justifying disagrees: process | Aug 5, 2006 |
Kim Metzger wrote:
When someone asks a complex technical, medical or linguistic question (for example) and an answerer (who has no record of expertise in the subject matter) submits a high confidence word-for-word translation or a machine translation followed by a smiley or "have a nice day" or "my take" or "supported by 1 million Google hits", it is not only the answer itself that needs to be disagreed with linguistically, but the process used to arrive at the answer.
In a strong and healthy subcommunity, i.e. one in which the tone is set by concientious professionals, it is not only the answer that is the subject of disapproval but the process as well. When an answerer pulls an answer out of his you-know-what and offers no evidence that it is an acceptable translation other than that the word proposed actually exists in the target language as proven by 1 million Google hits, not only should the answer receive disagrees supported by linguistic reasons, but the answerer's process should be criticized as well. In professional, healthy subcommunities this goes without saying. Members are there to help not only the asker but their colleagues too. I have learned much about decent research and translation techniques from my colleagues in the German / English subcommunities.
We need to be able to communicate with each other as translators in KudoZ as well as with the asker. As an educator and woodworker, I learned long ago that it's very difficult to unlearn bad habits. We have to learn how to do something properly from the start.
(I'm reproducing virtually the entire post by Kim because it really deserves to be read at least twice)
"the answerer's process should be criticized as well": yes yes and yes! because it is almost always the very root cause for the inadequacy of the answer. And we need a way to do so without being censored for somehow supposedly being a "personal comment".
"In professional, healthy subcommunities this goes without saying. Members are there to help not only the asker but their colleagues too": (sigh) could this EVER become the case here?? or will we have to go look for it elsewhere???
"it's very difficult to unlearn bad habits. We have to learn how to do something properly from the start": this is one way that "old-timers" can help "(conscientious) newbies", but we can't do it if we're constantly getting our wrists slapped... it is also another way of making our disagrees more constructive for the benefit of all.
df
| | | | TonyTK
German to English
+ ...
Kim Metzger wrote:
I and everyone else in your language pairs have always considered you a model of decorum and respect for others in KudoZ.
... I'm not too sure about that. I'd say he needs a haircut.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 16:55
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | How to increase the use of Disagree | Aug 5, 2006 |
df49f wrote: Mats Wiman wrote:
The reason for ... could you please just let go of your personal peeves that are hijacking Catherine's thread, so we can focus on the real issue? thanks in advance... df
I totally agree.
I tried to introduce a measure (making a Disagree impossible to comment on) instead of proposing wishful thinking (we should.., they should..., he should... she should...).
Such a measure would also be neutral, i.e. hit everybody alike.
I still think it would be a good thing.
Nobody seing the advantage?
| | | | Catherine Bolton
Local time: 16:55
Italian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam
Mats Wiman wrote:
I tried to introduce a measure (making a Disagree impossible to comment on) instead of proposing wishful thinking (we should.., they should..., he should... she should...).
I still think it would be a good thing.
Nobody seing the advantage?
No, I really don't. I think the upshot would be that everyone who couldn't respond to a disagree would do so by hijacking the "ask the asker" box. It's become a discussion venue already (at least in my SC).
So, we're back to square one. At that point, leave the option, no? And it does seem to foster freedom of speech
Catherine
| | |
|
|
|
Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 16:55
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam
cbolton wrote:
No, I really don't. I think the upshot would be that everyone who couldn't respond to a disagree would do so by hijacking the "ask the asker" box.
Possible but then it would at least be possible to correct (as a break of rules) which it is not if comments on a Disagree are allowed.
[Edited at 2006-08-05 20:32]
| | | | df49f (X)
France
Local time: 16:55
| no - next issue, please... | Aug 5, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
I tried to introduce a measure (making a Disagree impossible to comment on) instead of proposing wishful thinking (we should.., they should..., he should... she should...).
Such a measure would also be neutral, i.e. hit everybody alike. I still think it would be a good thing.
Nobody seing the advantage?
No, I see none and in fact I believe it would be detrimental and defeat the purpose - for the reasons exposed previously by me and several others.
Both Answerers and Disagreers need to take responsibility for their stance but we also need to be given a chance to respond to disagrees we feel are unjustified and defend our answers if necessary.
Furthermore, discussions in that box of often very productive and instructive.
In addition, such a measure would not be "neutral" because there are both "unenlightened disagreers" plus "retaliatory disagreers" targeting specific answerers out of personal vindictiveness (I realize this "should" not be the case but it's a fact of kudoz life), both of whom require responses.
Could we now move on to other issues? none of which are "wishful thinking" but sincere and pragmatic attempts at improving the quality of this/our site, among which the subject of being able to criticize the "answering process" in an acceptable manner, as suggested by Kim, which is VERY important.
df
[Edited at 2006-08-05 20:35]
| | | | Catherine Bolton
Local time: 16:55
Italian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam | Can you explain? | Aug 5, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Possible but then it would at least be possible to correct (as a break of rules) which it is not if comments on a Disagree are allowed.
Why can't that be done anyway? And who does the correcting? I'm not sure I follow you.
Catherine
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) | 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 » |
| | 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 
