| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Remove inclusive format (Staff: we'll rename it to "concise") Thread poster: ibz
|
|---|
| Right, Lingua 5B. (And Samuel) | Oct 17, 2023 |
Lingua 5B has understood the intention. Samuel, too, from a different angle. (Hi guys. Long time no speak.)
Sometimes people tell us they don't post because of the fear (or fact) of getting shouted down. The inclusive format limits that, asking those participating to make their point in a limited "space" (so to speak), leaving space for others to enter.
Of course, it works. (People who have to have the last word hate it, though.:))
| | | | Zea_Mays 
Italy
Local time: 20:42
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
There are better ways to achieve this. In addition, naming this format "inclusive" is really deceiving.
| | | | | The intention – and how it is used | Oct 17, 2023 |
Henry Dotterer wrote:
Lingua 5B has understood the intention. Samuel, too, from a different angle. (Hi guys. Long time no speak.)
Sometimes people tell us they don't post because of the fear (or fact) of getting shouted down. The inclusive format limits that, asking those participating to make their point in a limited "space" (so to speak), leaving space for others to enter.
Of course, it works. (People who have to have the last word hate it, though.:))
It can have its justification if used as intended, but it is also being abused, as it happened here: proz.com/forum/prozcom_translator_coop/363577-prozcom_continuing_professional_development_cpd_points_system_now_available.html. Instead of addressing the criticism, staff just changed it to restrictive and ignored the comments. I.e.: ‘shut up.’ There was no risk of anyone being shouted down. Are staff such snowflakes that they melt down if something about Proz is criticised?
Yes, some of us are more critical than others. Do you expect participants to praise everything Proz does automatically, as if it were a linguistic Disneyland? Nothing is ever improved that way. Some people are more prone to pointing out flaws than others, and in doing so, they often help making things better (but not always).
George Bernard Shaw: ‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.’
Can you show us examples of the restrictive format actually making more people participate? Your recent AI topic only has two pages, which is not impressive. It doesn't seem making it restrictive has attracted more posters. It seems to me that using that format for a subject like AI, which we are only just scrambling to find out how to use, could be counterproductive, as we cannot react if others post angles we hadn’t thought about initially. And so, since I know I won’t be able to comment later in the topic, I simply don’t engage with it from the beginning.
| | | | ibz
Local time: 20:42
Member (2007)
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
The problem remains that you (ProZ) are not answering our questions and in your posts, you tend to pick out opinions that go down rather well with you. Concerning the other thread (Are you managing to use AI in your work, to your benefit and the benefit of your clients?), we're still waiting for an answer to some quite simple questions, such as (quoting myself):
[...] You're saying "... Introducing ChatGPT into the KudoZ help network (and paying the bill for that)..."
Are you ... See more The problem remains that you (ProZ) are not answering our questions and in your posts, you tend to pick out opinions that go down rather well with you. Concerning the other thread (Are you managing to use AI in your work, to your benefit and the benefit of your clients?), we're still waiting for an answer to some quite simple questions, such as (quoting myself):
[...] You're saying "... Introducing ChatGPT into the KudoZ help network (and paying the bill for that)..."
Are you implying that ProZ - and if so me as a paying member as well! - is paying for this? [...]
But as this thread is inclusive, I can't remind you to answer it.
And I'm still waiting for answers from Lucia to my questions regarding ChatGPT on KudoZ.
[Edited at 2023-10-17 12:17 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| You're right, Thomas! | Oct 17, 2023 |
Yes, some of us are more critical than others. Do you expect participants to praise everything Proz does automatically, as if it were a linguistic Disneyland? Nothing is ever improved that way. Some people are more prone to pointing out flaws than others, and in doing so, they often help making things better (but not always).
That is true. That our forums have come to be frequented by the critical types has a tremendous upside. The discussions here definitely help us to make things better.
| | | | | Any other ideas? | Oct 17, 2023 |
naming this format "inclusive" is really deceiving.
It is true that it confuses people. Can you suggest a better name?
| | | | | Thanks, ibz, but it is just work | Oct 17, 2023 |
ibz wrote:
The problem remains that you (ProZ) are not answering our questions and in your posts, you tend to pick out opinions that go down rather well with you.
You've read me wrong. I don't care about conflicting opinions, in fact on a personal level I rather like them. But what you are seeing is me (us) at work. We have an objective. In that other thread, for example, I'm essentially sampling sentiment on the question of translators using AI to their benefit. So that, informed, we can better take steps to serve our members.
If I had infinite time and energy, I would engage you in an aside concerning *your* topic of interest. But I'm just trying to get my work done in the time I have. (As you perhaps do in your work.)
| | | | ibz
Local time: 20:42
Member (2007)
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Not just *my* topic of interest | Oct 17, 2023 |
Henry Dotterer wrote: ibz wrote:
The problem remains that you (ProZ) are not answering our questions and in your posts, you tend to pick out opinions that go down rather well with you. You've read me wrong. I don't care about conflicting opinions, in fact on a personal level I rather like them. But what you are seeing is me (us) at work. We have an objective. In that other thread, for example, I'm essentially sampling sentiment on the question of translators using AI to their benefit. So that, informed, we can better take steps to serve our members. If I had infinite time and energy, I would engage you in an aside concerning *your* topic of interest. But I'm just trying to get my work done in the time I have. (As you perhaps do in your work.)
Please read Ice Scream's latest post on your thread about AI and our work as translators.
| | |
|
|
|
Henry Dotterer wrote: ibz wrote:
The problem remains that you (ProZ) are not answering our questions and in your posts, you tend to pick out opinions that go down rather well with you. You've read me wrong. I don't care about conflicting opinions, in fact on a personal level I rather like them. But what you are seeing is me (us) at work. We have an objective. In that other thread, for example, I'm essentially sampling sentiment on the question of translators using AI to their benefit. So that, informed, we can better take steps to serve our members. If I had infinite time and energy, I would engage you in an aside concerning *your* topic of interest. But I'm just trying to get my work done in the time I have. (As you perhaps do in your work.)
'Concise' expresses the intention better than 'inclusive' in my opinion.
But I think staff should consider a bit more carefully when it is appropriate to use it and when not. If it's a simple question soliciting brief answers, it may be appropriate.
It does not seem appropriate to flip a topic into concise/restrictive/inclusive just because a couple of critical comments are posted and there is no problem with an excessive number of repeat posters or any 'tit-for-tat' discussion.
Nor does it seem to be the best format for a complex topic such as AI. The low number of posts in that topic seems to confirm it. You ask about how members use AI but then you throttle the topic with the restrictive format. So why ask if you don't want to hear our experiences in more than superficial words? Perhaps our thoughts and experiences are not yet settled on such a disruptive topic, so one user's comment may trigger something another user may want to add.
| | | | Zea_Mays
Italy
Local time: 20:42
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
| non-conversational format | Oct 17, 2023 |
Henry Dotterer wrote: naming this format "inclusive" is really deceiving. It is true that it confuses people. Can you suggest a better name?
or "informational", or "concise" as proposed by Thomas T. Frost.
| | | | | Thanks, Thomas | Oct 17, 2023 |
'Concise' expresses the intention better than 'inclusive' in my opinion.
Maybe we'll go with that to prevent the confusion. (Even if it fails to convey the intent.) Thank you.
| | | | Zea_Mays
Italy
Local time: 20:42
Member (2009)
English to German
+ ...
Did Proz's forum mods quit the job, and you are going to reply to all the open questions?
So could you please also tell us why we are not seeing points and rankings
in the winning language combinations of the last contest?
| | |
|
|
|
| Why not just scrap it? | Oct 17, 2023 |
Henry Dotterer wrote: 'Concise' expresses the intention better than 'inclusive' in my opinion. Maybe we'll go with that to prevent the confusion. (Even if it fails to convey the intent.) Thank you.
If you see the intention more as shutting up garrulous posters, you could call it the garrulous-preventive format.
But I think it would be better just to scrap it, as it doesn't seem to achieve the intended results, and it even seems counterproductive. I asked for examples that it actually works, and you posted none. I have not seen a single case where this name-possibly-to-be-amended format has encouraged any noticeable number of bashful posters to get off the benches and onto the dancefloor, so what do we need it for? Is it dogmatic that once some Proz heads have dreamt up something, it is immune to all reasoning?
And you remain silent as to the abuse of the format by some Proz staff. Whose interests are you really serving? Those of the staff or those of your paying members and other users? Are you a schoolmaster or a service provider? I'm not really sure any more.
And should Proz be turned into a kindergarten just because some members feel shy about posting? What is it specifically that holds them back? Bullying? Quarrelling? Isn't it the moderators' role to deal with that? Some of them don't hesitate to gold-plate the rules when it suits them if just a single snowflake has complained about feeling offended by something innocent.
If any specific posters are causing trouble, maybe it would be better just to deal with them individually instead of sanitising entire topics by putting posters into straitjackets. A forum format is ill-suited for limiting the number of posts.
| | | |
Henry Dotterer wrote:
Of course, it works. (People who have to have the last word hate it, though.:))
Can you provide evidence to support either of those assertions, as I and others have requested repeatedly?
Or are we all just supposed to take your word for it?
| | | | | Inverse euphemism disorder | Oct 18, 2023 |
Zea_Mays wrote:
non-conversational format
or "informational", or "concise" as proposed by Thomas T. Frost.
Has everybody come down with inverse euphemism disorder?
This alternate format places restrictions on:
- the number of posts per person,
- the length of posts, and
- the amount of poster bio data.
So why not just call it what it is: Restrictive format?
Then everybody will know what they're dealing with.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [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 » Remove inclusive format (Staff: we'll rename it to "concise") | 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 » |
| | 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 
