| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] | Job posters are now able to specify "confidentiality level" Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
|
|---|
| I say go for it, José | Dec 21, 2016 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Henry, someone there went to a seminar somewhere, and heard that Proz needs to "add value" to its offer.
Sorry, José, I know exactly what you mean but that is not at all the environment here at ProZ.com. (Maybe you saw a movie. )
I have seen several - often haphazard, IMO, as a former OD consultant - attempts to add value to Proz, such as making it compatible with smartphones to some extent, and countless tidbits here and there. Does it make a difference? Certainly, however each improvement adds value to SOME constituents.
You're right about SOME constituents. We have a diverse group of members and users and any one feature is of interest only to a minority at any given time. The SecurePRO program is no exception.
This "confidentiality" gizmo has been under fire from all sides on this thread and, if there was any, I must have overlooked any post that said "THIS is exactly what I was expecting from Proz."
You are experienced, so I think you may know that one will get that reaction only for a certain type of improvement, usually an incremental one. Usage patterns (my own use of the term, by which I mean "what people actually do") turns out to be a much more important indicator of the need for, and usefulness of, a feature. So while dozens of people critique the program here, making very valid and useful points without which proper refinement would not be possible, hundreds (and now over a thousand) make use of the feature in ways that we are taking take time to observe and analyze carefully, even as we engage this discussion. So both forms of input to the process are important, but usage patterns are more "true", which anyone can understand when you consider that if people welcome something in a forum but don't use it, it is not useful, whereas if one constituency rejects something in a forum while another "constituency" takes right to using it, well, it is useful, at least for that constituency.
And by the way by this point, after a long history of releasing novel features to the industry, we have an established constituency of about two hundred people (or about one-quarter of 1% of active site users) who for one reason or another tend to actively oppose, in turns, just about any new service introduced here. Many of those posting "against" in this thread have a track record of opposing other new services, even if they have gone on to use and benefit from them. I want to be clear, as I posted earlier in this thread, this sort of feedback serves a useful purpose and is appreciated. But to José's point, the "negativist" phenomenon is taken into account when we assess the "uptake" of a new service.
Let's take my question #2... What's the most recurring issue on Proz forums, perhaps second only to Trados malfunctions? I'll give you ONE shot...
Translation RATES!
And what has Proz done about them, other than (IMO rightfully!) defusing requests to refrain from publishing jobs offering rates below a certain level?
To answer your question, ProZ.com has done nothing about raising translator income except everything we could think of, and as far as I know, significantly more than anyone else ever has. The results? There are probably over a hundred thousand translators who have earned more money, not less, as a result of having used ProZ.com.
However it could lead to the first universal guide to translation rates. Translators would enter their actual job rates/requirements. Clients could enter theirs, and the system would calculate what would be FAIR for them to pay for translation, taking into account offer and demand.
Your vision for multi-variable calculation of fair pay is interesting, if optimistic. But it has nothing to do with ensuring confidentiality of data in remotely outsourced translation projects, an issue that exists regardless of rate of pay, so I'll leave it at that, except to say why not go for it, if you have time? Seriously.
| | | | Henriette Saffron (X) 
Denmark
Local time: 18:37
English to Danish
+ ...
| I don't see the point | Dec 21, 2016 |
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Tom in London wrote:
I'm wondering what the next brilliant idea is going to be. Should I take cover?
We are at risk of being shot by a runaway think tank.
I may have taken a hit from that runaway think tank, because I fail to see how this feature will enhance the level of confidentiality.
People, who run their businesses professionally, do not need all the bells and whistles, which are being introduced at the moment. It makes me wonder, if Proz.com is going after a different clientele.
| | | | Sanjay Ray
India
Local time: 23:07
Member (2002)
English to Bengali
+ ...
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Mirko Mainardi wrote:
I have just seen the first example of a job posted on the board using the new option. "Confidentiality level: HIGH" for a source text already published on the Internet... (the link to it was provided in the job description) and with a budget of €.03 per source word, and it was not an "Eastern" agency, but a (very) Western end client...
Of course, being given the option, all job posters - especially the groveling-rate ones - will demand ultimate confidentiality level, even if it's just a "no smoking" sign.
It's the same breed of customers who demand "must have Trados" for translating audio/video recordings, handwritten notes, "dead" (= scanned) PDF files, etc., and won't let Proz give their time of the day to anyone who doesn't have it. The cherry on the top is that they need it done yesterday, but will pay (if they ever do!) 60 days after this month ends. Their rates? About USD 1 or 2 cents/word; who would expect more?
Perhaps the burden has been placed on the wrong side. I treat each and every job as top secret, even if it's translating and subtitling a video from YouTube that has received a million "likes" on Facebook already.
| | | | | Your prediction was wrong | Dec 26, 2016 |
Sanjay Ray wrote:
José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
Mirko Mainardi wrote:
I have just seen the first example of a job posted on the board using the new option. "Confidentiality level: HIGH" for a source text already published on the Internet... (the link to it was provided in the job description) and with a budget of €.03 per source word, and it was not an "Eastern" agency, but a (very) Western end client...
Of course, being given the option, all job posters - especially the groveling-rate ones - will demand ultimate confidentiality level, even if it's just a "no smoking" sign.
Again, it isn't turning out that, folks. What we see (updated) is 33% of job posters indicating "high", 52% indicating "medium", and 15% indicating "low".
Perhaps job posters are not as homogeneous as is sometimes portrayed here in the forums.
| | | | | 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 » Job posters are now able to specify "confidentiality level" | 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! » |
| | TM-Town | Manage your TMs and Terms ... and boost your translation business
Are you ready for something fresh in the industry? TM-Town is a unique new site for you -- the freelance translator -- to store, manage and share translation memories (TMs) and glossaries...and potentially meet new clients on the basis of your prior work.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
