| Páginas sobre el tema: < [1 2 3] | Blueboard: Please stop misusing it! Autor de la hebra: Tomás Cano Binder, BA, CT
|
|---|
Matthias Brombach wrote:
Today I again received one of the numerous "New Blue Board Outsourcer Entry Alerts" for a German agency (based in Cologne with a name related to the river Cologne is situated at, for more details please send me a message) with which I made special experiences regarding payment in 2011. Their average rating is about 2,5 in general and 1,4 for the past 12 month. Although their series of negative entries doesn´t stop, they still find freelancers, even established ones with premium degrees and a proz membership of 10 years and more. What does this tell us? (See above)
One of the things this tells us is that the market is tough, that we sometimes accept jobs we ought not to on principle, but that when you need to pay the rent, you have to. Translators are not necessarily as good at marketing their skills as they should be - I include myself in that category. Sometimes I am not as good at that as I should be. Good degrees, years of experience, excellent references... and yet, apart from my direct clients, agencies are offering the same rates now they were 20 years ago when I started. That was why I dropped agencies 20 years ago, including the fact they pay 60 days after the invoice. I could not affod to wait. So until I build up my direct client base again, I'm working for 50% of the week at rates that work out at the legal minimum hourly rate.
I do not use the Blueboard as many of the agencies concerned pay rates that in spite of rebuilding my direct clientele at the moment, in spite of needing to work with agencies more, there is what I call a get-out-of-bed rate. Below a certain rate, I lose money. That does not make sense. Many of the blueboard agencies are at or below the get-out-of-bed rate. Sorry, but it's a fact.
So yes, Jenny good ideas.
[Edited at 2017-11-05 12:11 GMT]
| | | | | With Daniel on this | Nov 5, 2017 |
I have been translating for around fifteen years, give or take, and recently I've noticed that agencies will contact me for one job, then I might never hear from them again. I'm not sure why this is so; what I do know is that my work is the same high quality as it always was, at least it is to my knowledge!
What I don't understand is why I should be "forbidden" from posting a positive experience on the Blue Board based on one job only. If communication was good, if the job was well ... See more I have been translating for around fifteen years, give or take, and recently I've noticed that agencies will contact me for one job, then I might never hear from them again. I'm not sure why this is so; what I do know is that my work is the same high quality as it always was, at least it is to my knowledge!
What I don't understand is why I should be "forbidden" from posting a positive experience on the Blue Board based on one job only. If communication was good, if the job was well managed, if rates were fair and payment was timely, why should that agency not receive positive feedback?
I certainly agree that BB postings should reflect the number of jobs a translator has done for that particular outsourcer. But "forbidding" people from making entries based on a single experience is simply ludicrous, also because, at least in my experience, as I said at the beginning of this post, many of my jobs ARE one-off experiences. Nor do I agree that you can't judge an outsourcer based on a single job. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Daniel Frisano 
Italia
Local time: 21:12
Miembro 2008
inglés al italiano
+ ...
Fiona Grace Peterson wrote:
Nor do I agree that you can't judge an outsourcer based on a single job.
Exactly. Most of the time, you can judge outsourcers or translators based on a single email or phone call, let alone a whole project.
It's just another facet of being a successful professional: developing a "clinical eye".
| | | | | I did not suggest - | Nov 5, 2017 |
- that people should be BANNED from making BB entries concerning outsourcers for which they've done only one job.
What I did suggest was that people who want to make entries should be asked to state HOW MANY JOBS they have done for the outsourcer.
It is indeed possible to form an opinion about an outsourcer based on a single job (a book, for instance) but the translator should say that his/her entry is based on a single job.
e.g. I recently did a XX,000 word job for YYY and the... See more - that people should be BANNED from making BB entries concerning outsourcers for which they've done only one job.
What I did suggest was that people who want to make entries should be asked to state HOW MANY JOBS they have done for the outsourcer.
It is indeed possible to form an opinion about an outsourcer based on a single job (a book, for instance) but the translator should say that his/her entry is based on a single job.
e.g. I recently did a XX,000 word job for YYY and the experience was entirely ghastly/ satisfactory/ brilliant.
[Edited at 2017-11-05 17:46 GMT]
[Edited at 2017-11-05 17:48 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Quite the opposite | Nov 5, 2017 |
My opinion is that translators shouldn't ask for a WWA for a small/mid sized job.
But a LWA for one job is still useful to prove that the company is still
in business. What is relevant is the AMOUNT OF MONEY paid, not the
number of jobs. A lot of bad outsourcers don't even bother to pay small
amounts. A lot of outsourcers don't even have any recent LWA. Bad outsourcers
can be tempted not to pay for small jobs because nobody would bother to take legal
action ... See more My opinion is that translators shouldn't ask for a WWA for a small/mid sized job.
But a LWA for one job is still useful to prove that the company is still
in business. What is relevant is the AMOUNT OF MONEY paid, not the
number of jobs. A lot of bad outsourcers don't even bother to pay small
amounts. A lot of outsourcers don't even have any recent LWA. Bad outsourcers
can be tempted not to pay for small jobs because nobody would bother to take legal
action for small amounts. And it's so easy to find translators willing to work for outsourcers
which even have twenty 1 in a row!
What really matters is the profile of the person/agency who gives the LWA/WWA. A LWA/WWA
in itself is worth nothing.
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:14 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:15 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:20 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:41 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:43 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-05 17:49 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Translators must be allowed to give low ratings after a single job | Nov 5, 2017 |
It is already against the rules to post on the Blue Board if you have not actually worked for an outsourcer.
This means that you are not allowed to post a warning if you see a reason for never working for them, while you are still negotiating, and you break off the negotiations. That agency gets the benefit of the doubt, whether they deserve it or not.
If a translator actually does a job and finds out in the process that it was one job too many, then the whole point of ... See more It is already against the rules to post on the Blue Board if you have not actually worked for an outsourcer.
This means that you are not allowed to post a warning if you see a reason for never working for them, while you are still negotiating, and you break off the negotiations. That agency gets the benefit of the doubt, whether they deserve it or not.
If a translator actually does a job and finds out in the process that it was one job too many, then the whole point of the Blue Board is to warn others off.
No one is going to carry on working for an agency, just to be allowed to give them a low rating on the Blue Board. There are other sites on the Internet, where you can warn colleagues straight away. If we are not allowed to say no, I would NOT want to work for this agency again after one job, then the whole exercise is pointless. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | ProZ.com has a campaign going on, no? | Nov 6, 2017 |
I remember seeing a note recently about some raffle or something among those who enter BB ratings - a campaign to encourage more ratings - so perhaps that's why people are so eager to post those ratings after their first job with the company?
| | | | | Blueboard ratings | Nov 6, 2017 |
Hello
I simply agree on the rating even for a small job, but the translator should indicate and give information about his/her relationship with this client. Long-dated? Just one job? Fresh client? and so on. It has happened to me to be deceived by agencies I had been working for over 10 years ....
| | |
|
|
|
| Spirit of the proposal | Nov 6, 2017 |
Christine Andersen wrote:
No one is going to carry on working for an agency, just to be allowed to give them a low rating on the Blue Board. There are other sites on the Internet, where you can warn colleagues straight away. If we are not allowed to say no, I would NOT want to work for this agency again after one job, then the whole exercise is pointless.
Tomás specifically mentioned "posting positive Blueboard entries when you have only done one small job" because "high scores for tiny jobs paid quickly launder the record of companies that pay small jobs quickly, but big jobs very slowly, if at all".
I agree that would be a good practice, which obviously also includes posting negative feedback even for small projects. If you work without any issue with an outsourcer, and they pay you on time for a 50 words project, that doesn't necessarily mean they're good/reliable clients, but on the other hand, if they give you hell and/or don't pay you even for that tiny 50 words project, then there's a pretty good chance they're clients you should be wary (and warned) of.
I also agree that having an indication of the number of words translated, time worked with and/or amount paid would be useful in discerning the real "weight" of a rating (but then again, how can you verify that?). In fact, when I first registered here and saw the BB, I thought the numbers beside each translator referred to that, not to kudoz/browniz... (which IMO are not particularly relevant there).
| | | | | too few LWA entries | Nov 6, 2017 |
The real problem is that there are too few entries on the BB.
Not too many. Even one job gives a good indication. For instance,
did the outsourcer pay for a separate proofreading?
Usually a company which has a lot of BB entries is either a huge
company or a company offering (very) low rates. It's possibe to
know which is the case if you look at the profile of the translators
who give the LWA.So in my opinion any BB entry is welcome and there
is no misu... See more The real problem is that there are too few entries on the BB.
Not too many. Even one job gives a good indication. For instance,
did the outsourcer pay for a separate proofreading?
Usually a company which has a lot of BB entries is either a huge
company or a company offering (very) low rates. It's possibe to
know which is the case if you look at the profile of the translators
who give the LWA.So in my opinion any BB entry is welcome and there
is no misuse of the blueboard (which is not the case for WWAs!) as such or
there's only a misuse by people who read it.
You need to analyze the data that are available. The BB only provides
raw data that need to be analyzed..
[Modifié le 2017-11-06 10:34 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-06 10:36 GMT]
[Modifié le 2017-11-06 10:49 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
Christine Andersen wrote:
If a translator actually does a job and finds out in the process that it was one job too many, then the whole point of the Blue Board is to warn others off.
But of course! The main purpose of the Blueboard is to help keeping away from unsafe outsourcers, so indeed any misbehaviour should be made known to others.
What I am against is high scores to outsourcers when one has done one single job for them, as to not vice up the score of people who are bad outsourcers in a global scale.
| | | | Daniel Frisano
Italia
Local time: 21:12
Miembro 2008
inglés al italiano
+ ...
Read the thread from beginning to end and you almost get the idea that agencies are "out to get us". Does it really work that way? Most important, are you sure that the quality of your work is unaffected by such a translator-as-victim attitude?
| | |
|
|
|
| I am a trusting soul... | Nov 6, 2017 |
Daniel Frisano wrote:
Read the thread from beginning to end and you almost get the idea that agencies are "out to get us". Does it really work that way? Most important, are you sure that the quality of your work is unaffected by such a translator-as-victim attitude?
Apparently Danes trust each other more than most nations, and after 40 years here, I fit in perfectly with that approach. I always try to think the best of people. But I have been caught out, even in Denmark, where everyone can be traced and chased up, so most behave themselves just to save trouble...
The great majority of my BB ratings are in fact 5s - I give them especially to clients who deserve them. However, I have given some lower ratings and comments. Not everyone is perfect! I prefer to mail someone at the agency directly when I give feedback. It goes both ways. I tell agencies when they are doing well from a translator's point of view, and that I appreciate them, and I certainly let them know when I 'fire' them and why!
It is a bit like the notice in the baker's shop:
"If you like our cakes, please tell your neighbours.
If you don't like our cakes, please tell us!"
But sometimes with agencies, I feel I should warn colleagues about the ones I don't like as well.
| | | | Tom in London
Reino Unido
Local time: 20:12
Miembro 2008
italiano al inglés
Christine Andersen wrote:
... I have been caught out, even in Denmark...
I certainly have - when changing planes at Billund Airport, where I bought something and was asked for my boarding pass. This is a scam to pocket an extra % on every purchase, since airport shops are allowed to claim back the VAT.
I prefer the Italian saying "It's good to trust people. It's even better not to trust them". That includes Danish people.
As for the BlueBoard, from previous personal experience, I know that more than any other feature of Proz, good BB scores are crucially important for outsourcers and consistently poor scores can lead to them being banned. In other words there is a very strong incentive for outsourcers to do whatever they can to ensure that they always get good BB ratings.
In fact I happen to know (because more than one Proz user has told me they've done it) that some translators are willing to give a bad rating (because they have not been paid) and then, by agreement with the outsourcer, change it to a good one in exchange for being paid. A couple of outsourcers have also tried that trick with me, in the past (unsucccessfully).
That's why I'm always suspicious when I see an outsourcer with nothing but 5s - although I still find the BB useful because when I see that a rating has been given by someone I "know", I can contact them privately for further information.
IMHO the BB is a tool with lots of potential, but needs to be made more robust.
[Edited at 2017-11-07 13:21 GMT]
| | | | | Páginas sobre el tema: < [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 » Blueboard: Please stop misusing it! | 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! » |
| | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
