The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish)

langnet wrote:
5) By abolishing the colour with text markers ("agree", "neutral", "disagree") leaving only the feature "add a peer comment" it would be mandatory for commentators to give reasons. BrowniZ earning would still remain in place (rewarding contribution), but somewhat more "difficult" as you would really have to "earn" them by giving reasons when adding a comment. No simple "agrees" only for BrowniZ grabbing and "disagrees" without justification anymore (or, at least, abusers could be identified in an easier way).

6) By abolishing the colour with text markers, askers would be "forced" to really read through ALL comments posted as they could be either agreeing or disagreeing (or neutral) ones. It also would favour real discussion and enhance the contribution rewarding system.

Only some thoughts on the topic...

Heinrich Pesch wrote:
I some answerer selects 4 or 5 with a totally wrong answer it is ok to "disagree", but when 1, 2 or 3 is selected, no such reaction is appropriate. In that case the answerer has indicated, that he does not believe totally in the answer provided, but is aware of his/her non-competence in the field.

Cilian O'Tuama wrote:
IMO we should not be able hide. Period.
Or if that is too radical a change, then how about at least showing the names of those who have hidden answers and their reasons given (which should also require approval by a moderator)? I suspect that would dissuade many of them from posting in the first place, especially if the "disagree campaign" takes off.

Ian Winick wrote:
Perhaps it could be set up in such a way that questions could only be closed by moderators? There is certainly an embarrassment factor involved in having to contact a moderator to hide a silly answer, so I don't think that this would too much of a strain on the good folks who fulfil this role.

Steffen Walter wrote:
... do you mean closing entire questions or hiding individual answers (I do see a big difference here)?
Steffen

Ian Winick wrote:

@Charlie: I can see where you're coming from, but in my experience many hit-and-run point grabbers post an answer to be get in before the crowd and then, after clocking up a few embarrassing disagrees, hide their answer.

In cases like this, I would think that people like this would think twice about posting silly answers if they weren't able to hide their answers at will.

Ian Winick wrote:
...after clocking up a few embarrassing disagrees, hide their answer. In cases like this, I would think that people like this would think twice about posting silly answers if they weren't able to hide their answers at will.

marie-christine périé wrote:

Maybe also the answerer shouln't find it as offensive if the 'neutral' possibility didn't exist.

Cilian O'Tuama wrote:

May I make a suggestion.

This "disagree campaign" wo(uld)n't be effective enough on itw own IMO. I would like to suggest an additional step which I think could work miracles in cutting down on the amount of "rubbish" floating around. My suggestion concerns the hide-my-answer function.

In a nutshell:
Make it more difficult (embarrassing) to hide answers!

(And before resident Mats comes back, it's not about superiority, but seriousness. I think serious translators would benefit.)

It often seems to be the "rubbish" (thanks Ian!) contributors who hide their answers as soon as the disagrees arrive. Others, when they see that another answer was chosen. On the other hand, some hide when they see someone else was faster with the same suggestion, or when they realise they've misread/misinterpreted the question. I've hidden answers too. I can even remember childishly doing so on a few occasions mid-question when I simply didn't want to help the uncommunicative asker any more. There are plenty of reasons for hiding and it can be useful, especially when decluttering is the objective.

However, I don't think many of the "serious" translators here would object if answers could not be hidden. (OK, there are always exceptions. So just give us a few jokers. Say, 5 or so a year). We all have limitations and make mistakes (and we overlook things in the KudoZ-heat of the moment), but wrong answers with a disagree or two also help the asker and others. And it is (or should be) also a learning process for answerers. What's wrong with admitting mistakes? A lot of the time we're only brainstorming! If someone points out a weakness in my interpretation, it wakes me up but doesn't embarrass me into hiding my suggestion.

IMO we should not be able hide. Period.
Or if that is too radical a change, then how about at least showing the names of those who have hidden answers and their reasons given (which should also require approval by a moderator)? I suspect that would dissuade many of them from posting in the first place, especially if the "disagree campaign" takes off.

Ciao,
C

Enrique wrote:

Invisible answerers Aug 5


Christel Zipfel wrote:

Regarding hidden anwers: I would propose to make impossibible anwers be hidden at least after the question has been closed. This seems to me quite obvious and doesn't make any sense. In fact, I thought it already was...


I see no advantage in making it impossible to hide answers. A hidden answer is just not visible but it is still in the database, your statistic on questions answered is not affected by it.

Regards,
Enrique

langnet wrote:

2) Being - and calling oneself - a professional translator, to me means being at least familiar with the basics and aware of how to handle information inputs given by others. Our job needs a good share of common sense that can't be taught anywhere.

gad wrote:I think it is ridiculous that any professional can actually suggest, and condone, posting to someone else calling that person "stoopid". We're not mature adults - and professionals - here? How can anyone actually promote this type of personal attack?