Assigning kudos points to more than one answerer. Thread poster: JP Bigorda
|
|---|
JP Bigorda
Paraguay
Local time: 07:31
English to Spanish
+ ...
A few weeks ago I asked a question that sparked a very interesting and productive discussion. The conclusion was that the best alternative for that particular case was a translator's note. This was pointed out in the discussion by everyone who proposed an answer, and everyone's answer proposal became a part of my footnote, which was a rather long explanation.
So, in my humble opinion, it would be only fair to assign at least one point to each answerer, and even to one or two discuss... See more A few weeks ago I asked a question that sparked a very interesting and productive discussion. The conclusion was that the best alternative for that particular case was a translator's note. This was pointed out in the discussion by everyone who proposed an answer, and everyone's answer proposal became a part of my footnote, which was a rather long explanation.
So, in my humble opinion, it would be only fair to assign at least one point to each answerer, and even to one or two discussants. Is this possible?
I'm almost sure it's not, so my next questions would be: Has this issue been raised before? Is there a possibility for this to be implemented at some point in the future?
I think this would encourage people to join the discussions, although I do also see how this could be a bit troublesome because maybe the system could lend itself to some abusive practices, too. Nevertheless, I think it would be worth discussing it.
[Edited at 2017-12-14 04:32 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | neilmac
Spain
Local time: 13:31
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Best in show | Dec 14, 2017 |
As it stands at the moment, we can't spread the kudoz points around. However, I agree that often the "most helpful" input is often simply the references or comments from colleagues who don't take the final step of posting an answer.
| | | | Daniel Frisano 
Italy
Local time: 13:31
Member (2008)
English to Italian
+ ...
There have been occasions on which I would have loved to split 2+2 points between participants, or even 2+1+1. Has anyone at ProZ ever considered this?
By the way, the system already lends itself to abusive practices, e.g. (blatant) collusion.
| | | |
This would be a good idea
| | |
|
|
|
Silke Walter
Germany
Local time: 13:31
Member (2014)
English to German
| It was possible | Dec 14, 2017 |
Maybe the support had or has to be asked to split the points. I have received 2 and 3 points, other colleagues the other points.
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 07:31
Spanish to English
+ ...
While I sympathize with the spirit of these remarks, I really think it best not to “split points.” In something like 95% of cases, it is clear which answer is better (i.e., on the basis of content and/or having been posted first). In the remaining 5% of cases, I think the person who has offered helpful input without being awarded points should be able to not feel offended or lose sleep.
I see a problem with the opposite tendency on Kudoz: those who consistently agree with more ... See more While I sympathize with the spirit of these remarks, I really think it best not to “split points.” In something like 95% of cases, it is clear which answer is better (i.e., on the basis of content and/or having been posted first). In the remaining 5% of cases, I think the person who has offered helpful input without being awarded points should be able to not feel offended or lose sleep.
I see a problem with the opposite tendency on Kudoz: those who consistently agree with more than one answer (sometimes with three or more). Once again, it typically should be possible to determine the *best* answer (and accordingly post “agrees”) on the basis of a combination of time posted and content).
Professional translation is (or should be) about making fine distinctions (i.e., not merely distinguishing between “good” from “bad” but “okay” or “good” from “better” or “excellent”). Both the promiscuous “agrees” and the point-splitting suggested here serve to detrimentally blur rather than productively refine such distinctions.
[Edited at 2017-12-14 16:49 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kevin Fulton
United States
Local time: 07:31
German to English
| Sometimes desirable | Dec 15, 2017 |
A few years ago I was confronted with a university course description that involved various made-up and fanciful terminology such as "bewegungskulturell". Several contributors offered imaginative and usable translations, some of which would apply in different contexts in my document. It would have been desirable to split the points among a couple of the contributions.
In some texts there are frequently no binary terminology choices, that is, there is no single clearly "correct" term... See more A few years ago I was confronted with a university course description that involved various made-up and fanciful terminology such as "bewegungskulturell". Several contributors offered imaginative and usable translations, some of which would apply in different contexts in my document. It would have been desirable to split the points among a couple of the contributions.
In some texts there are frequently no binary terminology choices, that is, there is no single clearly "correct" term applicable to a situation. In such cases, when awarding points, sometimes the race is to the swiftest. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | I have been in the same position several times | Dec 16, 2017 |
I have on several occasions posted a question because I had an idea about how to translate a term or expression, but was not entirely happy with it, or I deliberately wanted to start a discussion.
Like you, I received a number of good answers, and interesting points of view were recorded for anyone who looks up the term later. I felt everyone deserved points... and yes, this has been raised several times. It is not possible to divide the points, so they all have to go to one person.
... See more I have on several occasions posted a question because I had an idea about how to translate a term or expression, but was not entirely happy with it, or I deliberately wanted to start a discussion.
Like you, I received a number of good answers, and interesting points of view were recorded for anyone who looks up the term later. I felt everyone deserved points... and yes, this has been raised several times. It is not possible to divide the points, so they all have to go to one person.
I always looked at the answers and tried to select one that had led me (and perhaps others) on the right track, or summed up the issue neatly, or in some way deserved the points more than the others.
If still in doubt, I awarded the points to the answerer who had fewest, to encourage someone who was perhaps more of a newcomer to KudoZ. In my language pairs there are often a few hard-core answerers, and they don't 'need' the points, or I knew they would be content with my thanks. I could award points to them another time...
A couple of times I simply drew lots among the answerers! ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Assigning kudos points to more than one answerer. | 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! » |
| | 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 
