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