| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51] > | New at ProZ.com: Outsourcer "willingness to work again" feedback for translators Thread poster: Enrique Cavalitto
|
|---|
MichaelRS (X)
Local time: 21:21
Before moving on to that, I would like to hear from the others who opposed on the first grounds.
Thanks!
Manipulation?
| | | | | Sorry, MichaelRS? | Jun 27, 2006 |
MichaelRS wrote: Before moving on to that, I would like to hear from the others who opposed on the first grounds.
Thanks! Manipulation?
Can you explain what you mean by that?
I'd let the comment go, but I'd like to keep the tone of this thread professional.
| | | | MichaelRS (X)
Local time: 21:21
I clicked on your profile, Henry, and then clicked on "Evaluation".
I didn't enter one, but I saw the choice between "make public" and "enter for my own information" or the like.
How many PO'd clients would like to enter that for "their own information" (only visible to them).
All of this doesn't seem to jibe with the stated purpose.
| | | | | Thanks, Michele | Jun 27, 2006 |
Michele Fauble wrote: Henry wrote:
... testimonials from satisfied clients are a good thing for good translators. And negative feedback from unsatisfied clients is a bad thing for good translators. ... There is no guarantee that ... good translators will not receive undeserved negative feedback.
Good point and you're right. There is certain to be some misuse, and I expect that we may need to take steps beyond those we initially planned (and those added by Ramon.)
The same was true with the Blue Board. Together, we came up with solutions.
| | |
|
|
|
MichaelRS (X)
Local time: 21:21
I'd let the comment go, but I'd like to keep the tone of this thread professional.
Apparently, I'm a potted plant in the corner.
Did you read my remark above about registering as an agency using www.hiproxy.com or similar programs?
It would be very easy to get good "evaluations" by doing that ... among other things.
Which means that this is pretty much useless on an individual basis, but maybe OK on a mass data-collection basis.
| | | | | Check the initial posting, Cristóbal | Jun 27, 2006 |
Cristóbal del Río Faura wrote:
Is Proz.com going to collect feedback on members from members’ clients, even on those members who have opted for not being involved in this new feedback feature at any level?
To quote the initial post in this thread:
Opting out
It is possible to opt out of displaying feedback in your profile, and you may do so freely as suits your purposes.
It is not possible to opt out of receiving feedback... This means that you might receive feedback from clients, but you will be the only one who sees it.
I hope this clarifies.
The second point, of course, is what is currently being debated. At the moment, I am trying to confirm that we are all square on the first.
| | | | | A poll is nice, but...the majority's wish is NOT the point here | Jun 27, 2006 |
Polls are great, but there are some problems with them.
First, to be valid, a poll has to represent a random sampling of a given population (here, the members, or the paying members, of ProZ, whichever seems appropriate). Samping is in fact a science, and not one to be mastered in an hour or in the span of time it takes to click "post" on a forum poll entry.
Posting a poll and then assuming that since everyone theoretically had access to participate in it, whatever resu... See more Polls are great, but there are some problems with them.
First, to be valid, a poll has to represent a random sampling of a given population (here, the members, or the paying members, of ProZ, whichever seems appropriate). Samping is in fact a science, and not one to be mastered in an hour or in the span of time it takes to click "post" on a forum poll entry.
Posting a poll and then assuming that since everyone theoretically had access to participate in it, whatever results you get are valid, is unfortunately not statistically healthy methodology.
Secondly, to be valid, a poll of this type needs to be worded in a neutral way that will tap into all the issues the polling organization wants to know about. It's easy to word a poll in such a way that the answers will be skewed in one direction or another.
This is why professional companies get paid big bucks to do valid polls, and why amateur polls are not valid. They may be subjectively interesting, but the trends they forecast cannot be generalized onto the population in question.
Regardless of this, the crux of the issue is NOT whether "the majority" wants or does not want this feature; it is whether an INDIVIDUAL who does not wish to have data collected or stored regarding him has the right to forbid ProZ to do so.
As has been said before, if individuals want this feature, I am all for them participating in it, and displaying or not displaying the data so collected as they wish. However, if individuals do NOT want to participate, NO data of this sort should be collected or kept on their "behalf" or regarding them. Full stop. It's the only true "opt-in" solution and one that is well within the technological reach of this site. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | The concern about non-English-reading members is also valid | Jun 27, 2006 |
The concern stated a page or two ago about the fact that this is an English thread and those who do not read English cannot participate also has not yet been addressed.
My translation INTO Chinese and Spanish is poor, but I'd be happy to do a translation of a neutral summary or neutral poll into those languages if necessary. Other than that, I'm afraid I can be of little assistance.
| | |
|
|
|
MichaelRS (X)
Local time: 21:21
| Second response ... | Jun 27, 2006 |
I'd let the comment go, but I'd like to keep the tone of this thread professional.
Maybe you misunderstood, I don't mean manipulation by you (or whatever prompted that remark).
I pointed out a valid concern, and you apparently didn't even read my comments above.
| | | | | There will be abuse to address | Jun 27, 2006 |
MichaelRS wrote:
Apparently, I'm a potted plant in the corner.
 Sorry! (But in my defense, did you notice that there are 280 other posts here?)
Did you read my remark above about registering as an agency using www.hiproxy.com or similar programs? It would be very easy to get good "evaluations" by doing that ... among other things.
Yes, and you are right, of course. Same type of thing happened with the Blue Board.
No system is foolproof, of course, but there are all sorts of little things that can be done to combat this sort of abuse. We know the registered dates of profiles, for example. We can also look at other site activity. If all a profile has ever done is register, leave feedback and never again visit the site, that profile is suspect.
There are also lists of IPs used by anonymizers, etc.
Again, I'm not saying the thing will be foolproof. There will be some abuse or attempted abuse, we'll address it, and the struggle will go on. This is unavoidable in everything we do.
| | | | heikeb 
Member (2003)
English to German
+ ...
| legal issues | Jun 27, 2006 |
Ivana de Sousa Santos wrote:
Many people suggested a poll on this subject and this request has been ignored so far. Why don't you do that and see the real figure it shows? (Something like: do you want this feature? Are you satisfied with this feature being implemented by proz.com? Do you think it will be useful? Or otherwise... And just put 2 answers for people to vote for "yes" and "no" (the "other" option has been largely discussed in here I guess).
I will probably be convinced this is a good feature for me and others depending on the poll results.
Even if in a poll the majority would vote in favor of the feature, I still believe that every individual should have the right to decide whether or not data of any kind is being collected and stored on some server.
For me, the opt-in feature - though already a welcome step in the right direction - is not enough as long as feedback is possible and data is being stored somewhere.
Whenever data is collected, a privacy statement including a statement of intended purpose should be provided and the statement that the information will not be used for any other purpose. Also, the person whose data is collected should have the right to opt-in/opt-out whether this data is collected (and stored) at all, and not just whether it is made public.
===============
Here are the Fair Information Practice Principles (http://www.privacy.ca.gov/code/fairinfo.htm):
Openness
There should be a general policy of openness about developments, practices and policies with respect to personal data. Means should be readily available for establishing the existence and nature of personal data, and the main purposes of their use, as well as the identity and usual residence of the data controller.
Collection Limitation
There should be limits to the collection of personal data and any such data should be obtain by lawful and fair means and, where appropriate, with the knowledge or consent of the data subject.
Purpose Specification
The purpose for which personal data are collected should be specified not later than at the time of data collection and the subsequent use limited to the fulfillment of those purposes or such others as are not incompatible with those purposes and as are specified on each occasion of change of purpose.
Use Limitation
Personal data should not be disclosed, made available or otherwise used for purposes other than those specified as described above, except with the consent of the data subject or by the authority of law.
Data Quality
Personal data should be relevant to the purposes for which they are to be used, and, to the extent necessary for those purposes, should be accurate, complete, relevant and kept up-to-date.
Individual Participation
An individual should have the right: a) to obtain from a data controller, or otherwise, confirmation of whether or not the data controller has data relating to him; b) to have communicated to him, data relating to him within a reasonable time; at a charge, if any, that is not excessive; in a reasonable manner; and in a form that is readily intelligible to him; c) to be given reasons if a request is denied and to be able to challenge such denial; and d) to challenge data relating to him and, if the challenge is successful, to have the data erased, rectified, completed or amended.
Security Safeguards
Personal data should be protected by reasonable security safeguards against such risks as loss or unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification or disclosure of data.
Accountability
A data controller should be accountable for complying with measures which give effect to the principles stated above.
=================
And here the Safe Harbour principles (http://www.export.gov/safeHarbor/sh_overview.htm):
Notice: Organizations must notify individuals about the purposes for which they collect and use information about them. They must provide information about how individuals can contact the organization with any inquiries or complaints, the types of third parties to which it discloses the information and the choices and means the organization offers for limiting its use and disclosure.
Choice: Organizations must give individuals the opportunity to choose (opt out) whether their personal information will be disclosed to a third party or used for a purpose incompatible with the purpose for which it was originally collected or subsequently authorized by the individual. For sensitive information, affirmative or explicit (opt in) choice must be given if the information is to be disclosed to a third party or used for a purpose other than its original purpose or the purpose authorized subsequently by the individual.
Onward Transfer (Transfers to Third Parties): To disclose information to a third party, organizations must apply the notice and choice principles. Where an organization wishes to transfer information to a third party that is acting as an agent(1), it may do so if it makes sure that the third party subscribes to the safe harbor principles or is subject to the Directive or another adequacy finding. As an alternative, the organization can enter into a written agreement with such third party requiring that the third party provide at least the same level of privacy protection as is required by the relevant principles.
Access: Individuals must have access to personal information about them that an organization holds and be able to correct, amend, or delete that information where it is inaccurate, except where the burden or expense of providing access would be disproportionate to the risks to the individual's privacy in the case in question, or where the rights of persons other than the individual would be violated.
Security: Organizations must take reasonable precautions to protect personal information from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction.
Data integrity: Personal information must be relevant for the purposes for which it is to be used. An organization should take reasonable steps to ensure that data is reliable for its intended use, accurate, complete, and current.
Enforcement: In order to ensure compliance with the safe harbor principles, there must be (a) readily available and affordable independent recourse mechanisms so that each individual's complaints and disputes can be investigated and resolved and damages awarded where the applicable law or private sector initiatives so provide; (b) procedures for verifying that the commitments companies make to adhere to the safe harbor principles have been implemented; and (c) obligations to remedy problems arising out of a failure to comply with the principles. Sanctions must be sufficiently rigorous to ensure compliance by the organization. Organizations that fail to provide annual self certification letters will no longer appear in the list of participants and safe harbor benefits will no longer be assured.
===========
What can be considered sensitive information that requires an extra security level?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_sensitivity:
Sensitivity Indicator: [...]
[...]
# public disclosure might negatively affect the safety, career, reputation or lifestyle of an individual.
=========
That means, even if negative feedback is absolutely justified, the information is to be considered sensitive since "public disclosure" definitely would "negatively affect the [...] career, repuation [...] of an individual".
Therefore, "for sensitive information, affirmative or explicit (opt in) choice must be given if the information is to be disclosed to a third party". (And they're not even talking about publishing this information on the Web!)
Any negative feedback can be challenged, no matter how justified and independent of whether this challenge could be substantiated. Would ProZ have the necessary tools, staff, lawyers in place to follow up any challenge made? Or would they just take the easier, cheaper way out and just withdraw any disputed feedback rather than risking a law suit?
Handling personal and sensitive information has - rightfully - become a highly complicated legal issue.
Does this whole feedback feature really serve the (well-) intended purpose or are we opening a Pandor's Box?
[Edited at 2006-06-27 20:38]
| | | | | polls are great, forum topics are even better | Jun 27, 2006 |
Terry Thatcher Waltz, Ph.D. wrote:
Polls are great, but there are some problems with them.
First, to be valid, a poll has to represent a random sampling of a given population (here, the members, or the paying members, of ProZ, whichever seems appropriate). Samping is in fact a science, and not one to be mastered in an hour or in the span of time it takes to click "post" on a forum poll entry.
Posting a poll and then assuming that since everyone theoretically had access to participate in it, whatever results you get are valid, is unfortunately not statistically healthy methodology.
Very, very true. The same applies to forum topics (as well as a bunch of other problems that make them even less indicative of overall opinion) yet those against this feature repeatedly argue that they are the majority and justify their demands in this way.
Others still say that if the majority is for this feature they will think it's a good one.
How about we stop claiming majority support and actually discuss the practical pros and cons of this feature.
On the issue of abuse - yes, it will happen but it's not as hard as you imagine to deal with.
On the issue of "informational self-determination", it's quite amusing that the very same people who make regular use of and contributions to the Blue Board argue so vociferously againsts a feature that is essentially the same thing...the only difference being, of course, that in this case it is their "privacy" that is affected (even though an option to completely hide/ignore any feedback is available).
| | |
|
|
|
| I'm sure I won't! | Jun 27, 2006 |
MichaelRS wrote: Ivana de Sousa Santos wrote:
I will probably be convinced this is a good feature for me and others depending on the poll results. You will be? I'm usually just a Steppenwolf who thinks what I think, regardless of what a lot of people say. I'm just not quite sure what is going on here. Maybe it's the lack of real competition.
I really think people against it are much more than people for it.
I think that a poll is a way for proz.com to realize that most people won't be happy with it.
They are just talking about the "good aspects" of it and I don't see none (you will have to refer to my previous posting).
Anyway, I stick to what I said previously and I WON'T USE THE FEATURE in any way, since it's my way of disagreeing with it.
| | | | Marc P (X)
Local time: 21:21
German to English
+ ...
| the Prior matter | Jun 27, 2006 |
Henry,
My question: Are you now satisfied on the issue of choice, and control over your profile and marketing choices?
It would help me to hear responses not only from Terry, but also from those who objected previously on the grounds of being able to control their profiles and businesses.
I have considered the issues very carefully, and I wonder whether my concerns really are the same as those of others expressed here.
I don't object to feedback from customers: on the contrary, I expressly ask them for it. I don't mind customers talking about the service I provide: that is in fact precisely the way in which most new customers find me. I'd be a little surprised to find them doing so on ProZ.com, but can't say that I have an inherent problem with that, either. I'm not worried about negative testimonials.
The issues of data protection and the potential for abuse strike me as valid concerns that should be taken seriously, but they aren't the ones that concern me most.
You asked if I had read what you have been saying, so I went back and re-read it, and it didn't make me any happier second time around. Here it is again:
"There is still the chance that an outsourcer will enter feedback for you via a channel other than your profile (to be created later), but such feedback will not appear to anyone, and you can simply ignore it."
This suggests that at some point in the future, somewhere on this site, there will be a message along the lines of "If you are a customer of this translator, please take a few minutes to comment on how satisfied you were with his or her service."
My approach to customer relations is one of close co-operation and communication; if I want feedback or testimonials, I can ask for them. Yet now, ProZ.com has decided to ask them on my behalf, in an arrangement very strongly reminiscent of eBay. The eBay rating system works well - for private individuals who buy used goods from other private individuals on the other side of the country. No offence to eBay, of which I happen to be a satisfied customer, but I don't consider this model to be part of my public image or customer relations. Yet this looks set to happen, apparently on my behalf yet without my consent. The fact that I can choose to ignore the resulting comments is absolutely no consolation whatsoever.
What I still completely fail to understand is why the prompt for "feedback" can't be omitted from the profiles of those who don't want it, and from this ominous "other channel".
As an aside: it would be nice if the terms "testimonial" and "feedback" could be used properly. They are two different things.
Finally: as a non-paying user, I don't feel that I am in any position to object to the arrangements on ProZ.com in a personal capacity. The strength of feeling on this issue though confirms my view that this feature could be potentially very damaging to the reputation of ProZ.com.
Marc
| | | | MichaelRS (X)
Local time: 21:21
"There is still the chance that an outsourcer will enter feedback for you via a channel other than your profile (to be created later), but such feedback will not appear to anyone, and you can simply ignore it."
That quote and the other one I cited on the last page lead me to believe that there is a data-collection adventure being started here.
Although my Mom will give me a good reference, that's why I'm thinking that this site suffers from a lack of real competition and the attitute that does with it. Yup, that's an idea.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » New at ProZ.com: Outsourcer "willingness to work again" feedback for translators | 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 » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
