| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Limiting agreement of people Thread poster: Cristina Heraud-van Tol
|
|---|
| Suggestion: Allow multiple agrees votes, but limit the browniz | Nov 13, 2005 |
First, thank you, Cristina, for the example you provided, which helps focus the discussion.
People who agree with multiple answers swear they are interested in helping the askers, not in collecting points. I blieve most such claims. Those who agree to "on" and "off" as correct answers to the same question are probably a small minority, albeit an irritating minority - one that acts to reduce KudoZ to a stupid race for points.
As has been explained and illustrated by many... See more First, thank you, Cristina, for the example you provided, which helps focus the discussion.
People who agree with multiple answers swear they are interested in helping the askers, not in collecting points. I blieve most such claims. Those who agree to "on" and "off" as correct answers to the same question are probably a small minority, albeit an irritating minority - one that acts to reduce KudoZ to a stupid race for points.
As has been explained and illustrated by many examples above, it would not do to ban multiple agrees, as such agrees are often justified, well-intended, and helpful.
But it would make sense to remove the incentive for multiple agrees. I therefore suggest giving BrowniZ points for the first agree vote. All subsequent agree votes for other answers to the same question should earn 0 BrowniZ. If the object is to help askers, not collect points, multiple agree voters would welcome this measure.
Another approach that would contribute to saner participation is to separate votes from comments. Currently, there is no way to comment on an answer except to vote. Since most people find the "neutral" vote disagreeable, they generally vote "agree" whenever they just want to add a comment, unless it is a bashing comment. By separating votes from comments, one would be able to comment on multiple answers while agreeing only to the answers that deserve the vote.
[Edited at 2005-11-13 19:49] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Gina W
United States
Local time: 08:18
Member (2003)
French to English
Fuad Yahya wrote:
But it would make sense to remove the incentive for multiple agrees. I therefore suggest giving BrowniZ points for the first agree vote. All subsequent agree votes for other answers to the same question should earn 0 BrowniZ. If the object is to help askers, not collect points, multiple agree voters would welcome this measure.
Another approach that would contribute to saner participation is to separate votes from comments. Currently, there is no way to comment on an answer except to vote. Since most people find the "neutral" vote disagreeable, they generally vote "agree" whenever they just want to add a comment, unless it is a bashing comment. By separating votes from comments, one would be able to comment on multiple answers while agreeing only to the answers that deserve the vote.
[Edited at 2005-11-13 19:49]
I think that'd be a lot of work for the site staff, who have just spent the better part of 2005 working on major upgrades to this site to begin with, to set up. I don't see the purpose in asking the site staff to implement something like this. I don't believe it would be worth it for the work that would be involved on their part - if we want to keep this site affordable to users, then I think people should stop nitpicking and asking for things like this, which are unnecessary and don't serve any major purpose to improve the site anyway. I don't have a problem with the way things are currently.
| | | | | I think Fuad's suggestion is the ideal solution | Nov 14, 2005 |
Gad's point that the 6th, 7th... umpteenth "agreer" might have some additional valid comment to make is perfectly reasonable - even if in my experience a huge list of "agrees" with no comments at all is far more common!
So Fuad's solution is ideal - unlimited "agrees" to an answer, but only the first few (I'd suggest 3 or 4 rather than just 1, as a net agreement of 2 is needed for automatic robot grading) get Brownies... See more Gad's point that the 6th, 7th... umpteenth "agreer" might have some additional valid comment to make is perfectly reasonable - even if in my experience a huge list of "agrees" with no comments at all is far more common!
So Fuad's solution is ideal - unlimited "agrees" to an answer, but only the first few (I'd suggest 3 or 4 rather than just 1, as a net agreement of 2 is needed for automatic robot grading) get Brownies. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | The robot needs two votes for the same answer, not multiple answers | Nov 14, 2005 |
Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:
I'd suggest 3 or 4 rather than just 1, as a net agreement of 2 is needed for automatic robot grading.
Voting for multiple answers will not help the robot function. The two votes that the robot needs must be from two different voters to the same answer, not from one voter to different answers.
In any case, those who vote for multiple answers claim they do not care about BrowniZ, but only about helping the asker. I think their word should be taken at face value.
[Edited at 2005-11-16 22:11]
| | |
|
|
|
Özden Arıkan 
Germany
Local time: 14:18
Member
English to Turkish
+ ...
| And how about a compulsory comment with agrees, too? | Nov 14, 2005 |
I know, this might as well be bypassed by entering "I agree", "right", "yes", "hi, there", etc., but still would have the effect of slowing down automatic batch-agreeing by some fellows. And, albeit, I myself, too, sometimes just hit the agree button and leave, I find it unjustified that a comment is required for neutral and disagree, but you are not asked to explain your reasons to agree with an answer given. Why should that be so?
| | | | Dina Abdo
Palestine
Local time: 15:18
Member (2005)
Arabic
+ ...
| That's the simple side of the problem | Nov 14, 2005 |
Because sometimes one may post an "agree" peer response to several answers that they all seem correct. In Arabic for example, so many different words can be translating an English term with all of the words being perfectly correct. It happens with rich languages as Arabic to have so many synonyms for the same word. Nothing's wrong with that. It doesn't apply to all types of questions of course, but it happens ... and it happens a lot actually.
You're considering it a problem, but ho... See more Because sometimes one may post an "agree" peer response to several answers that they all seem correct. In Arabic for example, so many different words can be translating an English term with all of the words being perfectly correct. It happens with rich languages as Arabic to have so many synonyms for the same word. Nothing's wrong with that. It doesn't apply to all types of questions of course, but it happens ... and it happens a lot actually.
You're considering it a problem, but how about those submitting peer responses to ALL answers after the correct answer is graded; means AFTER THE QUESTION IS CLOSED.That's what I may consider an attempt to collect Browniz.
The second case I believe is the one that should be restricted with an exact number of responses (I'm talking responses although I think that one only should be enough after the question is closed.). Similar limitation should prevent those posting responses from attempting similar actions in order to collect Browniz only. ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Fuad Yahya wrote: Marie-Helene Hayles wrote:
I'd suggest 3 or 4 rather than just 1, as a net agreement of 2 is needed for automatic robot grading. Voting for multiple answers will not help the robot function. The two votes that the robot needs must be from two different voters to the same answer, not from one voter to different answers. In any case, those who vote for multiple answers claim they do not care about BrowniZ, but only about helping the asker. I think their word should be taken at face value.
No extra comment needed!
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [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 » Limiting agreement of people | 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 » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
