1) I am getting rather annoyed by what I call "quick-on-the-trigger" moderating. I just answered a rather difficult question. Before it, I wrote.../Oh Boy, name of the asker, and a smiley/.

For those, who might not understand this US idiom, it means: wow, that's a difficult question! [FOR M E< FOR ME]. And I see no reason to remove niceties, and friendly comments, especially when it is short and sweet in nature.

Furthermore, as the question was pretty hard, I did some research in English to find out what the terms meant. The Asker had it billed as an English-English question, which I did not at first realize. As this particular Asker often asks French questions, I put my answer in French too.

It was summarily deleted with no explanation. Come on, are we here to help people or what? OK, the answer in French may have been irrelevant Glossary Wise, however, I would have copied and pasted it into the Comment Box, HAD I BEEN GIVEN A CHANCE.

2) Oh, and by the way, I find the new feature, where answers cannot be edited to be pretty silly. You can't edit it, but you can erase it. So, now, I just erase the whole thing. And put it a new answer. I think people have to stop thinking of translation as an Event; it is very often a process. And, what should be done, is that a Small-Type Version could be left, and then the New Answer can appear as an edited answer. Since the whole point was to be able to see the Comments from other Translators. I don't think the current solution is very effective. If you erase an answer, it takes the whole discussion away.

3) Finally, I have been insulted directly [ I have the proof] not once, not twice but three times, this time around by someone who is constantly doing that. I disagree with the answers of this person whenever the answers are wrong. Which they often are. I am asking the moderators here, what is being done about this? This has happened a lot in past. If I had said myself anything near what this guy has said to me, everyone would have jumped down my throat. Frankly, this person is not professional and demonstrates that over and over again. He even insulted me in German, in an English-to-Portuguese question!

Now, this same person created another hullaboo last weekend over a term in French to English. There thereupon ensued some 75 comments from a series of translators. They were erased by the moderator as they should have been. The moderator had to work very hard for that. It's interesting that I did not participate in that discussion. It would be interesting, as I said before here, to provide a link from the TC terms to another forum so questions like that may be discussed. The main issue of the discussion centered around "creativity" and "nuance" in translation. Which is of course an interesting discussion. Unfortunately, it degenerated...in any case, had the discussion been linked to an outside forum, the discussion could have remained and other readers would have BENEFITTED from some very interesting comments about translation. Such as when nuance and creativity make sense and when they don't.

4) Finally, about this issue of personal comments. I firmly believe a distinction needs to be made between Personal Comments that are Insults directed at another person AND personal comments by oneself that are by oneself and preceded by I feel. For instance, I often have feelings about answers [not talking about the PERSON], and I would like to be able to express them. That is very different from saying to someone: You + Are + Insult. After all, translation and feelings are intimately connected....and at times, I think an expression of feelings is appropriate. Like saying Oh Boy...which is basically the same as Whew....

Sorry about being long-winded, but I had a lot to say.

First of all, Jonathan, I am used to that Asker asking English to French. No need to chide me. I am not the pope (infallible).

Secondly, I completely disagree with you. When askers/answerers have established a relationship already, or want to express niceties there is nothing wrong with that. And, yes, I would say that saying Oh Boy, expresses the idea of difficulty. It is also lends a tone of introduction to a Long, Laborious Answer.

Is there some "rule" against being nice, polite and expressing that? Well, I dunno....but afaik, you can make up so many rules that it is becomes stifling.

I feel STIFLED, by that. PERIOD. And as far as removing the French, you might have handled it more diplomatically, which would have provided More Information to the Asker. You could have done it by Pasting It Under Comments.

Do you know what I think? I think you are splitting rule hairs. And I don't see how that contributes to the a nice tone.

Everybody criticizes me, nobody points out that I am also friendly and nice. And fyi, I don't need the "reason" for the deletion. I need the content.  

I would like the content of that deleted answer because, as I explained, it was a difficult term, and that asker usually translates Into French, and My answer was to help him. So as I already stated, and now say again, I want the content of that answer into French either posted here, or emailed to me or posted under the Question's Comments, area. Because it is more important to Help the Asker, than adhere blindly to some rule. It's fine that you deleted it.....but it also Fine, for me to Ask for It, either in an email or under the Comments section.

And again, I see it was a mistake. Fine. It is still might help the asker. Which is the whole point anyway.

Ok, Thank You. Jonathan. I appreciate it.

However, I do not appreciate the slew of deletions of my comments. I do not make personal comments, and you just sent me an email saying I was "disrespecting you". That is Untrue. I was Lamenting Something. Lamenting Something. There is no disrespect in lamenting something. Why don't you post what I said so everyone can see it?

You have been picking through everything I do and "going after" all my comments. As someone who has helped others on this site more than anyone else, I find that the lack of respect is that of you to me. With so much assistance provided by me to so many, I would have thought that extraneous thought, funny or nice comments would be OK. They are NOT personal in nature and have never been. I am sometimes a bit sarcastic about answers but never about people. That is when the answers by someone are systematically wrong, and show complete unprofessionalism.

Now, I ask you: what are you doing about the individual who has insulted me repeatedly and even in German (which I don't speak). The number of times and level of insult to me, and to others as well, has been outrageous. The person is not a professional translator. I wonder when the moderators are going to do something about it.

Again, I repeat I had no disrespect. I merely disagreed with the action. And I think there needs to be a Forum for discussing this. I don't think that people like me who contribute so much should be treated summarily.

Good day.

In regards to insults - as you know, anything which does not pertain to terminology in some way gets deleted where I moderate.  Insults get admonishment.  That is how I run my language pair.  I believe my fellow mods have similar devices in place. The "German language" thing I understand happened in an unmoderated forum where we literally could not intervene.  It is now moderated, and I understand this particular problem has been dealt with.  Has nobody made you aware of the changes to that language section?

No time for the other things.

Whether or not somebody is considered a translator is outside our jurisdiction for TCTerms.  Either an answer is valid, or it isn't.  This profession is barely regulated and we cannot start trying to check people's credentials.  It is impracticable.  (Is that a word?)  Content is key.

Maxi

Jonathan,

Interpret my comments as you wish. I just think that if you are applying some letter of the law, re niceties, it's just too bad. Moderator's pet? Please....I'm talking about letting people be themselves by displaying personality. That does not mean "infringing the rules", of course. After all, displaying positive commentary is not a crime. Some leeway should be allowed for people to express themselves.

Maxi:

The Portuguese-English moderator is somewhere you cannot intervene? It said: if there is no moderator, choose one from the list. I did that. The comment was finally removed by someone. I don't know who. But the extreme nature of that comment, and other comments merits, in my view, a personal communication by moderator(s) to me about what is being done. After all, the comments were outrageous. We're not talking about a little jibe. We are talking about someone saying things like disregard this crazy woman.....And this is not just one more instance. This person's comments are removed, and nothing else happens?

I would bet  you that if I had made similar comments, removal of my comments would be the just the least of what you moderators would do. Really....Anyway, I won't go on and on about this. Just want to say that I am fed up with these comments.

Maxi:

Think back several months. There was a guy answering in all combinations using some kind of automated translation. Wasn't it the moderators who intervened to tell him to stop it? Well, if someone just posts in all kinds of combinations and is consistently wrong, isn't this Similar Behavior? Never say Never...

Jane, if I am not the moderator, I am physically incapable of editing or deleting.

I don't understand why this is coming up now since there is now a moderator.  Are you aware that there is a moderator who I understand has taken care of the issue.

In regards to "what happens" - The behind the scenes actions of moderators are not open to public discussion for obvious reasons.  Nor do I have the time or inclination to report on what I'm doing. 

Maxi

I do not want to know what the moderators are "doing" behind the scenes. However, having been the subject of several attacks, it would seem to me that in these cases, there might be some formal acknowldgment by the site and its moderators of the legimitacy of the complaint, privately. Right? After all, I do contribute a lot, and yes, I think that those who contribute a lot should be treated with due respect as we contribute to the value of a site. Yes, to the value of the site, to use contemporary business and non-profit jargon. That is my stakeholder opinion. I know you didn't like that idea much; at least you didn't when I first mentioned it some months ago. But in these times, I think that is an appropriate way to characterize my relationship with the site. And as such, I think that the moderators should consider that. After all, the whole point of site like this is to be a community of stakeholders. If I weren't, I wouldn't even be here. Cheers.

This is not a business.  You are not a stakeholder.  I'm a volunteer and cannot spend any more time on this conversation.  It is not fruitful and leads nowhere as far as I can see. 

Any complaint you have ever sent me has been dealt with promptlly, usually within the half hour, and to my knowledge, anything you have written me has received a prompt answer.

Maxi

Maxi,

This is the last time I will attempt to communicate my idea. I am a stakeholder. Being a stakeholder has nothing to do with being in business per se.

And I do have a stake in this site. I want the site to be successful, attract a lot of good translators and good agencies. That is my stake here. All that rubs off on one, so to speak. The more successful the site, its translators and agencies, the more Everybody's Boats rise.

I respectfully suggest you look into what that means, before telling me what I am and what I am not. Stakeholding is a wonderful concept and if more people knew about it, the better the world would be.

Secondly, I am not complaining about you.  And I wish you moderators would loosen up a bit. I am merely saying that I have a right to say what I feel I need to say without being "rapped on the knuckles" like a child. I think I have a right to discuss what I think works and what I think doesn't work here. Now, if you don't have time, that's fine. Don't discuss it with me. But I don't accept that only moderators have a voice in thing. I just don't.

Frankly, I think there are others who contribute a lot too, and it would be nice to hear them as well. I don't think for one minute that this site depends only on what moderators think or do. They are also stakeholders. We all have an interest is seeing this site be successful.

Peace.

PS...Virtual Communities + Stakeholders provides lots of reading material. Just one example:

Gatekeeping in Virtual Communities: On Politics of Power in Cyberspace
Barzilai-Nahon, K.
System Sciences, 2006. HICSS apos;06. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Hawaii International Conference on
Volume 6, Issue , 04-07 Jan. 2006 Page(s): 135c - 135c
Digital Object Identifier   10.1109/HICSS.2006.193
Summary: Gatekeeping/Information Control is exercised frequently and daily in virtual communities. Gatekeeping exists in four different levels: Regulators, service providers, communities’ managers and members of communities. **The article analyzes the sensitive balance of relationships among these stakeholders. ** Additionally, it examines how information control is being exercised in forums and more specifically constructs explanatory models which explain different reasons for deleting messages in forums. The empirical examination combined qualitative and quantitative methods, integrating content analysis along aside data mining, over data of three years on 715 virtual communities. The results suggest behavior patterns of users in virtual communities that can be identified and addressed. Three levels that impact gatekeeping nature are analyzed — the gatekeepers, the community and the gated while addressing: first, the duality of gatekeepers as protectors or manipulators; second, the politics of power of marginalized groups in cyberspace and finally, the meaning of anonymity to information control through looking at history of users’ activities and gender.

Just an example of available literature on the idea of virtual community and stakeholders.

Originally written by Christen Sohnholz on November 21, 2008 8:05 AM My first experience with TC Terms was negative. ... My rant is somewhat tangental, and I apologize for that. I appreciate just a moment of hijacking. I don't post often.

On the contrary, Christen, words of wisdom like yours are always appreciated. I don't know how the point system works on Wikipedia or other collective international efforts, but here it definitely does not work.

Jacek

I agree that the point system doesn't work here and that it "makes an easy scapegoat" when so many users behave like small children fighting over a few cookie crumbs.

Whenever I venture into TCTerms again, people whose native languages have nothing to do with English try to help, which would be appreciated, but for the fact that their answers often float in outer space.

Why help when you don't have the language expertise to do so? And the answer is...?

Nanna

Does anyone know whether the same happens on the numerous wikipages? That is, whenever there is a stub article accompanied by an invitation to develop it, scores of volunteers from all over the world flock in, regardless of their language or expertise, and try to "help" by writing articles on subjects they have no clue about?

Originally written by Laurent Chiacchierini on November 21, 2008 11:31 AM Originally written by Nanna Mercer on November 21, 2008 11:07 AM ... people whose native languages have nothing to do with English try to help, which would be appreciated, but for the fact that their answers often float in outer space. ... Ideally, this should result in a wonderful collaborative effort to get to the best translation for the given context (if any, that is). Unfortunately, it often turns into a "I-know-my-language-better-than-you" tug-of-war.

I do not care if you speak, read and write Polish, French, Greek, Russian or Latin, what I care about is the right answer to my TCTerms question.

Last, I used TCTerms, I was in a dreadful hurry and needed help. Instead, I had to write four or five polite and pleasant replies to answers that I could not use. I could easily have hammered down a DISAGREE, but I have never used it and I don't see any reason to start now.

I found the answer in a few very helpful comments.

Nanna

A year or so ago, a client alerted me to the Wikipedia page for my home town. "Would I please correct the information and also edit the English?" Since I work for the local tourist board, I checked the page and found several factual mistakes that I corrected. I also did a fast edit. However, the more information is added to the page, the worse it gets and I have stopped editing.

So, yes, I think the lack of expertise is problematic in wiki-pages as well.

Nanna 

So we do have a widespread serious problem with democracy...

Is that a question or a statement?

Nanna

Yeah, I've seen questions asked with no question mark at the end...

Maybe we can get back on track.  We can have any number of ideals, but first we need the thing to run on a basic level.  If there are to be ideals to be striven for (the stakeholder and all that) somebody has to do a lot of work to implement them.  Right now volunteers have their hands full just trying to steer the ship.  Cooperation would be greatly appreciated.  We are all full translators running our businesses and we do not have the time to spare.

In the view of keeping TCTerms functioning, the moderators have taken actions as a group and individually that in their eyes needed to be taken.  Nothing is done frivolously.  And no, we do not have to report the reasoning of every small action that is taken - it is unfeasable and unnecessary.  This thread began with complaints about our day to day actions and our decisions, but now is dressed in some ideals.

Let's look at what is at issue.

Answers: The functioning of TCTerms is the first priority.  It is a living glossary, meaning that a person 3 years ago should be able to look up a term, read the discussion on it, and it should be easy to follow and make sense.  To that end, answers and comments should be to the point without excess rambling, address the question (terms), and it must be possible to follow the discussion.

Some people had the habit of changing their answer, which was subject of discussion, so that the previous discussion no longer made sense.  They might have argued that the "k" didn't belong, or "fuer den" was ungrammatical, and there was no "k" or "fuer den" in the answer.  Why?  Because the answer under discussion was no longer the answer displayed.  This simply cannot happen, folks!

Members themselves asked answerers not to change their answers.  Moderators asked them not to.  In one case I, as moderator, spent time explaining to a newer member that answers should not be changed - a comment could be put on the top telling people that you were no longer satisfied with this answer, and a new answer could be posted.  Another member then came along and instructed this individual that changing answers was acceptable and the right way to go about it!   We moderators have had to spend enormous time dealing with the confusion caused by changed answers.

Now that the confusion is resolved, and discussions on answers can make sense, we have in this thread a complaint by someone who does not like that decision.  Sorry, that decision was made after long deliberation, and after having explained to members repeatedly, requesting them not to change their answers.

Editing of posts:  This puts moderators into an awkward position.  If we edited posts, it was because we saw something wrong with those posts.  Do you really want me to go into an analysis into why I edited any of your posts, and what I see problematic in what I edited?  I do not feel comfortable criticizing or critiquing a peer in public.

In general, reasons for editing or deleting posts are as follows:

- not pertinent to the task of finding an answer to a term.  We do not want to have a permanent record of who lived overseas longer than who, why you think everybody is picking on you with others saying that no they're not, what everyone has had for breakfast this past week.  Some of these things can go into a discussion forum like here.  TCTerms is a kind of glossary.
- not pertinent to the answer under discussion.  We should not be discussing whether your answer was the better one. That should go under your answer.  Discussion of a particular answer should deal with the merits and demerits of that answer.
- Comments and asides that give a tone which can influence or intimidate but is not related to the answer itself.  This includes things such as pointing out your vast experience or superior education while at the same time highlighting how little knowledge or experience the other person has had.  Sometimes it can be implied just by how things are worded.

I consider the last serious, because decisions must be based on what is presented.  People should not feel timid about offering their answers.  These things interfere with impartial decision making, and these decisions affect the professional output of the translator.  Such comments can also discourage someone from posting who may have something to say.  They do not want to be embarrassed or put under a microscope.  What should go under the microscope is the term.  There is no reason to colour this with your own persona or background.

An exception to this is pertinence.  If we are discussing a medical term used in a hospital, and somebody has worked in a hospital and is drawing on his background and experience, this is directly pertinent, and a help in deciding how to consider an answer.

- rhetoric, emotionalism, sarcasm.  Can quickly turn into arguments.    In the "76-post thread" that Jane alluded to, of which I was the unfortunate moderator, somebody suggested that TCTerms is a good place to vent.  No, it's not!  It took me 40 minutes to take care of these vents.  That is 40 minutes of my private time, unpaid time, to moderate that day.

There's more.

------------------

Before we try to improve and hone the professional stature of TCTerms and whatnot, let's get what exists running, shall we?  I have just highlighted two problem areas.  We have implemented solutions.  And now our time is to be taken by discussing those very solutions.  Cooperation might be the better route.  1.  Don't change answers (well, now you can't) 2. Make your posts succinct, to the point, and pertinent.

qualification and qualities of person posting:  There is no way that any kind of system could be set up that would allow this person in and that person out.  Translation is a largely unregulated profession. There seems to be a subtle push to have certain members made unwelcome - I'm not sre if I'm reading this right - and the allegation is that this or that person is not a translator.

We are looking for correct terms.  If a prehensile-tailed monkey gave good terms, that monkey is in.  I want that monkey! 

It has to be about the term, not the person proposing the term.  Discussion has to be on the merits of the term.  Moderators cannot make a decision on what terms should be allowed in, unless it is in extreme cases.  One reason might not be obvious but should be: TCTerms is for experts, and professionals are supposed to be asking difficult questions that a translator may not necessarily know the answer of.  People with various expertise are making themselves available.  No moderator in any language combination has super-expertise in all fields.  The whole point is that it is up to the participants (those who are experts) to judge the merits of the term and ask some touch questions.  That is what the whole thing is about.

If the purpose of this thread in any way includes a wish to screen members and thus raise the level of professionalism in TCTerms, I don't think that it can be done.

And I do think that the points system has a large influence on this particular issue.  But this has been discussed, and we know that this system is here to stay.  We do get an awful lot of participation. 

In the "good old days" before TCTerms, any answers to a terminology question tended to be intelligently brought forward, and discussed in a polite and professional manner.  However, it sometimes took days for even one answer to appear.  Nowadays it can be minutes, and at most, hours.  It is a case of carrying a huge winnowing basket with the sign of scepticism on one side, and gratitude on the other.

I hope this helps.

Maxi

My modest experience with the quality has been very negative, though. This only relates to a tiny fraction at which I have looked close-up. Maybe I was just out of luck.

Jacek

Jacek, I can't find what you're quoting in order to see context.

Which of the issues that I have presented are you commenting on: 1. answers not to be deleted 2. criteria for editing posts for reasons listed 3. necessity of the same 4. the unfeasability of screening members 5. the idea of using content instead of poster as crieria?

What suggestions are you making?

Maxi 

You made a comparison, Maxi, on which I commented (see your own context). Otherwise, you know that my suggestions in this particular respect do not matter, so let's not dwell on them.

Jacek

Ok, now I remember what it was about.  In the days before TCTerms we simply asked each other questions in the language forum.  We could discuss however we wished, go off on tangents which often gave creative avenues back to the answer.  The discussions were of quality, at a professional level, courteous, and not like the circus-like atmosphere we have now.  However, these answers were rare, questions were rare, and the answers took so long to come that the translation would be long gone.

In comparison, we get answers and suggestions within the hour or in a few hours.  There is a lot of chaff and nonsense.  An intelligent and informed translator can sometimes still squeeze something out of the chaff.  A lot more people participate.  Not everything is bad about this, and not everything about the "good old days" was superior.

Maxi

Maxi,

I agree that translation is an unregulated profession. Now, in many "unregulated" areas, there is that wonderful concept called "self-regulation" (originally, /self-regulation by business/). Many critics of regulation, in whatever economic field, decried regulation (though in the currect financial crisis that is now changing as I write), and called for self-regulation.

Now, how can one apply this to translation?

Here's how: the site can have some icons which translators would self-apply to their names. Naturally, there will be cheaters. However, let's for a moment imagine, that cheating would be mostly a marginal thing. If all the translators give themselves a qualification, that can in part, help to show the experience level of a person. And if anyone doesn't want to use the icons, they don't have to.

Twice, I have heard mentioned on radio, a book on how long it takes to become a master at what one does (can't remember the name of the book), and last night, again heard a related interview by the author of a book called Outliers, where he talked about ten years at least it takes to become a real pro at what one does. Be that as it may, for a self-rating system in translation, I propose: Master Translator (10 years at least), Journeyman or Journeywoman (and I and II here) (I=4-6, II=7-9), Apprentice (1-3 years)....

Each translator would choose what best applies to him or her. Of course, there will be cheaters, but it will be obvious who they are. I think the shame factor will go a long way to keeping people in check.

Personally, I think it is a good idea. It would at least provide some perspective on people's experience/background. Recently, there have been a lot of answers in TC terms by people who barely have any knowledge of the target language. I doubt many of these people would put a Master Translator icon next to their own names....

Finally, regarding not being able to change an answer. That's fine. Like I said before, if the discussion is so important to an answer, why not have a way of freezing the original answer, having it still show, (I understand this is a programming issue and might not work! But were it to work...), and then allow the answerer to modify or edit his or her answer. After all, in translation, what counts in getting to a good one, is the Process. Also, there is the "after the fact" issue. Often, the proper translation may suddenly come to one later. By freezing the original answer, but allowing an edit, the discussions are "preserved", but the new answer is available. Anyway, it's just an idea....

This discussion is going in an area far removed from the original topic.  I am glad that you understand the need for the actions of moderators you discussed, and hope to count on your (everyone's) cooperation in helping make TCTerms run more smoothly for all concerned.

Categorizing, identifying or similar of translators on an international forum is not a goal that I am currently aware of for the majority of people here.  It would lead to absurdity, and in all likelihood it would lead to such strife that the best translators would be driven away in the aftermath.

Trying to establish the validity or competence of people in any professional field such as this one within a forum will lead to a breakdown of the community, hurt feelings, dispute, and worse.  I've seen this happen several times.  A membership that takes your background into account might be had among your local professional organization.  TC can't do that - not for translation.

Maxi

After all, in translation, what counts in getting to a good one, is the Process. Also, there is the "after the fact" issue. Often, the proper translation may suddenly come to one later. By freezing the original answer, but allowing an edit, the discussions are "preserved", but the new answer is available.

I suggest a comment by the Answerer directly below the answer (this can still be edited) saying "I have changed my answer and no longer stand by this one - see (name of answer) below." or similar.  That would give the desired results, I think.

Maxi

Yes, that's great. Like this: [using a recent answer by me]

First answer:  <b>smoothly</b>Since skin treatments are all about smoothness...\

Modified Answer: without a ripple

The reason that won't work, Jane, is because each answer is within an answer slot, and gets to be seen that way.  When an asker selects an answer, that works with the computer program, sticking that into other places.  Your proposed answer is outside of that system.  You can put that into the comment, but also create a new answer so that it can be selected and bump its way along the system.

Maxi

Yes, Laurent, you are referring to me, among others. I have no problem saying it. I see it as providing a ton of help to a lot of people. Something wrong with that?

Anyway, I think that sometimes the translation process makes it so an answer comes up later. So, now, when I see something I have done, that I don't like. I will just remove the whole answer.....why leave up my answer if I don't like it? Good discussion or not. Sometimes there is not a good discussion and sometimes there is.

I am sorry to have created so much "trouble"...sorry for:

- Making  suggestions to improve the site.

-  I mentioned anything at all and didn't say anything.

That way, by not saying anything, we are in the best of worlds. Everything just staying the same and never changing.....until the end of time. What do you think?

Seriously, why criticize someone WHO GIVES SO MUCH for free to so many people? Huh?

Yes, I enjoy answering questions A LOT. I don't enjoy negative innuendos. And not having a role to play. AND I AM NOT INTERESTED IN BEING A MODERATOR. BUT I am interested in making suggestions.

Maxi:

I understand about the answer chosen by the asker being slotted somewhere. I am talking about BEFORE there is a choice by the asker. Of course, I don't know what the programming issues are. It was just a suggestion which I thought could KEEP the discussion and the answer that might come to the answerer at a later time. Which is how translation actually works. You often get to the end of a text, and say, oh yes, such and such a term is X. It would be nice to have a system that reflects that. If it is too difficult or too time consuming, let's just FORGET it. Sorry to have "bothered" everyone.

Maxi: I am not talking about establishing the validity or competence of people. I am talking about PEOPLE stating their Own Level. And It Can Be Optional. People can OPT IN or OPT OUT of Self-Classification. Believe me, not too many will OPT IN to saying they are master translators, when they are not. That, of course, might be an optimistic view. Cheers.

Nothing good will come of this, and there is no purpose to it.  The actual professionals will not care to do anything about it - why should they?  They know what they are capable of.  Those who want to play games, or are insecure, or see "marketing value" will play with it.

I am interested in what people have to say, and whether they know anything soon comes across through what they say, and how they say it.  Clarity of presentation is also a thing in and of itself, evidencing precise thinking, attitude, and a host of things.  I like to judge the wine by the wine.

Maxi

Yes, me too. But we aren't allowed to do that, now are we?

The wine is what has been written.  Tasting =

"Are you able to clarify your suggestion?  When you say that this is the only correct term, what is your source."

Answer: "Every time the cleaning lady stubs her toe, she uses this, and no other word.  So it has to be the correct one."

Wine has been tasted, bottle label doesn't matter.  Next!

Maxi

Patrick,

Your thoughts are wise. I, for one, do use the disagree function at times. And I will tell you why. There are times, though not in the Fr<>Eng so much, when there are a spate of answers completely off the mark, and the answerers are encouraging each other down the wrong path. So, at times, it can be useful. Also, I recently goofed an answer into French. It was very useful to have a disagree. It made me think about it even more. Mostly, I was too quick off the draw as I usually just know the answer. Obviously, this at times is not good.

Second, I agree with your red-flag notion. However, there is a difference between arguing a point linguistically, and not. Using dictionaries is not providing an argument. I attempt to argue linguistically on the basis of my knowledge of a language. And not by saying, this is how someone else has said this. So, it's too bad that disagrees set people off. They should do as I do. When they are wrong, they should admit it.

 I think language is all about the personal experience. Even dictionaries are a subsequent compilation of lived experiences. What I dislike is NOT the rule that says one can't make personal comments about others, such as, you are an ass. Yes, that is a GOOD RULE. But interpreting that as the answerer not being able to Comment on his/her own feelings and experience re some answer, I feel is a BAD RULE. I think one's own personal experiences are the whole point, as it were, in translation.

Now about your yatching argument. Yes, a person with specific field knowledge may know the term better than someone who does not have specific field knowledge. What I find is that the issue is usually not specific field knowledge, the issue is vey often Advanced Knowledge of Source Language intricacies. It's easier to go and learn concepts if you know a target language, than if you don't. Also, yes, a French yatchman may know how to say "yaw" in English better than an English speaker who doesn't sail. But the point is the yatchman is not a translator. And when things are really dicey, I will pick  up the phone and call the sailor who speaks the target language I am working into [for me, only English], and describe my problem, and usually get a good answer.

Because it's better to ask knowledgeable people in the field who are not translators than to ask a non-knowledgeable person who is a translator...I have seen instances where "technical" translators get it wrong because they simply don't know the "rest" of the language. Best to check with an expert...in the target language.

Also, I think it would be a good idea for their to be a bit of humility. Now that might sound funny coming from me....but in fact it isn't. Many times in TC terms I have acknowledged misreadings and mistakes. There was a recent case in point in Spanish. Over night, I realized my answer had been wrong, and then corrected it. I also stated that my answer was incorrect so everyone could see it. People who know me well, know I have done this before. Newcomers who don't know me sometimes attack me because they are unaware of this...No one can be right 100% of the time. In anything. Except pilots. They better be right 100% of the time...

That brings me to my last point. Often, the answer comes to one, later, or in the aftermath, it floats up from the unconscious, I would say. That's a fact. How many times does one finish a translation, leaving this or that term in brackets, and suddenly one realizes the answer?