| Σελίδες για το θέμα: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) Αποστολέας σε συζήτηση: Catherine Bolton
|
|---|
Vito Smolej
Γερμανία
Local time: 04:46
Μέλος από 2004
Αγγλικά σε Σλοβενικά
+ ...
SITE LOCALIZER | Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see... | Aug 5, 2006 |
...
Always, no sometimes, I think it's me, but you know I know when it's a dream
I think I know I mean a "Yes" but it's all wrong, that is I think I disagree
Let me take you down, 'cos I'm going to Strawberry Fields
Nothing is real, and nothing to get hungabout
smo
PS: and nothing to add either (sg)
[Edited at 2006-08-05 20:37]
| | | | Nik-On/Off 
Ουκρανία
Local time: 05:46
Αγγλικά σε Ρωσικά
+ ...
I would expect an interesting effect if the colors of the disagree and degree words were exchanged some day. There are guys, many of them, to whom a disagree colored in red is like a red rag to a bull. Well, let's make it blue then!
[Edited at 2006-08-05 21:11]
| | | | Sara Noss
Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο
Local time: 03:46
Μέλος από 2006
Γαλλικά σε Αγγλικά
+ ...
| a pinkish hue | Aug 5, 2006 |
Nik-On/Off wrote:
There are guys, many of them, to whom a disagree colored in red is like a red rag to a bull. Well, let's make it blue then!
[Edited at 2006-08-05 21:11]
Pastel shades are often very calming. I suggest lilac.
Sara
| | | | Linguasphere
Γαλλία
Local time: 04:46
Ισπανικά σε Γαλλικά
+ ...
Mats Wiman wrote:
virgynet wrote: Sorry but when you are "accused" you MUST have the right to defend yourself or to acknowledge you are wrong.
I hope I do not misundestand the above, but if you mean that a Disagree is an accusation, you are exactly off track.
A disagree is (or should be) a friendly rejection of a suggestion - with arguments.
If the answerer is deprived of the possiblility to comment, nobody will find it necessary to "defend" anything.
KudoZ should be a meeting place where suggestions are given and comments are made - not a fighting ground between answerers.
The asker is king/queen!
I do not say a disagree is an accusation, I put "accused" in quotation marks to make you understand the necessity of having the right to defend yourself and your answer.
It was a comparison with the fact than when you are accused of something, the defense right is a basic rule.
So, if someone disagrees with your point of view, you should have the right to defend your own point of view, I think it is a basic rule of discussion.
And I put "accused" because as it was raised by some prozians, some disagrees are unjustified and are just a vendetta because one day this peer put a disagree on somebody's answer, it is a fact ! So, I do not agree with the fact of removing the right to answer but I agree with the right to use the disagree tool without being insulted in return. I have used this tool and until now I have not been insulted in return but it may depend on peers.
And sorry, but the asker is not the queen/king, it is your answer, so it is your own right to "defend" yourself and justify your answer and it may be a good thing if other peers can comment not only the answerer suggestion but also the other peer's comments.
I have seen a lot of times asker choosing wrong answers so I do not think asker is the king/queen, and I hope there is no king/queen on proz !
[Edited at 2006-08-06 01:05]
| | |
|
|
|
Mats Wiman
Σουηδία
Local time: 04:46
Μέλος από 2000
Γερμανικά σε Σουηδικά
+ ...
Εις μνήμην | Eliminiate bickering in order to promote Disagrees | Aug 6, 2006 |
virgynet wrote: I do not say a disagree is an accusation, I put "accused" in quotation marks to make you understand the necessity of having the right to defend yourself and your answer.
It was a comparison with the fact that when you are accused of something, the defense right is a basic rule.
So, if someone disagrees with your point of view, you should have the right to defend your own point of view, I think it is a basic rule of discussion.
And I put "accused" because as it was raised by some prozians, some disagrees are unjustified and are just a vendetta because one day this peer put a disagree on somebody's answer, it is a fact ! So, I do not agree with the fact of removing the right to answer but I agree with the right to use the disagree tool without being insulted in return. I have used this tool and until now I have not been insulted in return but it may depend on peers.
And sorry, but the asker is not the queen/king, it is your answer, so it is your own right to "defend" yourself and justify your answer and it may be a good thing if other peers can comment not only the answerer suggestion but also the other peer's comments.
Wasn't this thread started in order to find a solution to the bickering as a result of a Disagree and the ensuing result that too few dare enter one? ("The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish").
What you and others seem to say is: "The right to bicker is sacred" ("a basic rule of discussion"). This is exactly what creates the mess we are trying to solve.
What I suggest is to close that road because the Disagree is for the asker, not for the colleagues. They can make comments when makeing their own suggestions if they find it necessary to make a comment on a Disagree.
I have seen a lot of times asker choosing wrong answers so I do not think asker is the king/queen, and I hope there is no king/queen on proz !
I used "King/Queen" to underline the fact that a KudoZ question is primarily there for the asker, not for the answerers.
The benefit answerers and observers reap from the exercise is secondary (often a valuable spin-off of the main purpose: To help the asker find a good solution.)
On ProZ.com there is no king or queen but in the KudoZ arena there is: The asker.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Σουηδία
Local time: 04:46
Μέλος από 2000
Γερμανικά σε Σουηδικά
+ ...
Εις μνήμην | If the "Ask the asker box" is hijacked, then it is hijacked and can be 'policed' | Aug 6, 2006 |
cbolton wrote: Mats Wiman wrote:
Possible but then it would at least be possible to correct (as a break of rules) which it is not if comments on a Disagree are allowed.
Why can't that be done anyway? And who does the correcting? I'm not sure I follow you.
If you allow a comment field adjacent to the Disagree you:
1. Invite comments
2. You cannot police answers
The idea with this thread of yours is to promote Disagrees by creating a solution where disagreers aren't deterred because their Disagrees are attacked, isn't?
What is more logical than barring the attackers?
| | | |
Hi, everybody,
I think that people can learn through giving disagrees.
Some time ago, it happened to me that a colleague gave me a "disagree". I invited this person to check the source, which the colleague did and then changed to "agree" recognizing that the comment was wrong.
Graciela
| | | | Linguasphere
Γαλλία
Local time: 04:46
Ισπανικά σε Γαλλικά
+ ...
| It is not my point of view | Aug 6, 2006 |
[quote]Mats Wiman wrote:
Wasn't this thread started in order to find a solution to the bickering as a result of a Disagree and the ensuing result that too few dare enter one? ("The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish").
What you and others seem to say is: "The right to bicker is sacred" ("a basic rule of discussion"). This is exactly what creates the mess we are trying to solve.
What I suggest is to close that road because the Disagree is for the asker, not for the colleagues. They can make comments when makeing their own suggestions if they find it necessary to make a comment on a Disagree.
I do not say the right to bicker is sacred but that the right to answer is sacred: it is not really the same thing.
1) Because with some peers (unfortunately not all but that is life), you can have an interesting and constructive debate regarding a term and it is in the interest of the asker and of all of us and you can have this debate being polite.
2) You may make a mistake but the disagreer may too.
3) It is a fact that some comments regarding a disagree are rude but you do not have to forget that some disagrees are also very rude or are personal attacks or make part of a personal battle between two peers.
4) Because the abuse of some of us should not private all the community of some rights.
I used "King/Queen" to underline the fact that a KudoZ question is primarily there for the asker, not for the answerers.
The benefit answerers and observers reap from the exercise is secondary (often a valuable spin-off of the main purpose: To help the asker find a good solution.)
On ProZ.com there is no king or queen but in the KudoZ arena there is: The asker.
It is not my point of view. I think the KudoZ should benefit to all of us. Of course, in the short term, the idea is to help the asker to find the better solution. But in the long term, Kudoz answers permit to create a glossary that is a very useful tool. Maybe am I a mini serial "KudoZer" but it is sure that I am a Kudoz glossary addict, I look up a lot of words or expressions in this glossary and if I see a disagree, it could be helpful to have the two points of view in addition of those of the asker. I repeat that nobody is perfect, you may propose a wrong answer, a peer can make a mistake when agreeing or disagreeing and sometimes the asker is not able to make the difference between a right and a wrong answer (for example, if he/she is a non native speaker or not a specialist about the topic).
Here is my point of view and you have yours and I respect it. So we can disagree each other and being polite !
Have a nice sunday.
Virginie
[Edited at 2006-08-06 06:18]
| | |
|
|
|
Catherine Bolton
Local time: 04:46
Ιταλικά σε Αγγλικά
+ ...
ΞΕΚΙΝΗΣΕ ΤΟ ΘΕΜΑ Εις μνήμην | Weeding out rubbish is the point | Aug 6, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Wasn't this thread started in order to find a solution to the bickering as a result of a Disagree and the ensuing result that too few dare enter one? ("The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish").
No. I didn't start it to find a solution to bickering. Some people like to bicker, others don't: it's human nature.
My point is weeding out the rubbish. The glossary has tons and tons of rubbish that might not have gotten in there if more colleagues had been willing to "guide" the asker better by using the disagree button rather than a milquetoasty neutral.
Let's get rid of the neutral button instead!
Just kidding... I think
Catherine
| | | | | Please don't reduce a discussion between two pro translators to 'bickering'. | Aug 6, 2006 |
If 2 people disagree about a point, it's quite insulting to dismiss the discussion as 'bickering'. I find that word really out of place in this discussion. This isn't about 'bickering'.
| | | | | Is anyone ever really "neutral"? | Aug 6, 2006 |
cbolton wrote:
Let's get rid of the neutral button instead!
Just kidding... I think
Catherine
What's that neutral button really about, anyway? If you're going to go ahead and post your reaction to an answer, aren't agree or disagree the only real choices (or post an answer of your own)? The neutral button is kind of like going to the polls and writing neutral on your ballot- it's probably a better idea not to go at all...
As far as Catherine's original post, I would say that you hit the nail on the head. Disagrees are actually a useful tool to clear out the rubbish. We (myself included) probably shouldn't feel as hesitant as we do to use it when called for.
Jennifer
| | | | Mats Wiman
Σουηδία
Local time: 04:46
Μέλος από 2000
Γερμανικά σε Σουηδικά
+ ...
Εις μνήμην
This discussion, growing out of another thead, had as its basis that so many daren't disagree because their Disagree is knee-jerk attacked/rejected/debated, all often ending in a rude fight.
Now you all seem to reject the idea of discarding a solution which would forcefully diminish the bickering.
Bickering might be a "fact of life" but I thought we were trying to reduce/prohibit it by smart mechanisms instead of endless talking about how people SHOULD behave - although we already k... See more This discussion, growing out of another thead, had as its basis that so many daren't disagree because their Disagree is knee-jerk attacked/rejected/debated, all often ending in a rude fight.
Now you all seem to reject the idea of discarding a solution which would forcefully diminish the bickering.
Bickering might be a "fact of life" but I thought we were trying to reduce/prohibit it by smart mechanisms instead of endless talking about how people SHOULD behave - although we already know that people do not behave.
Discarding the Diagree debate is a smart way to achieve this.
(Make compulsory argumentation part of the parpcel).
IF it is necessary to make an interesting comment on a Disagree, the option is to do that within one's own suggestion (Which incidentally allows more text=clearer arguments), following the decent golden rule of being obliged to propose something better if you are 'clever/knowledgeable' enough to disagree with someone's suggestions.
[Edited at 2006-08-06 10:53] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| let's get rid of the neutral button | Aug 6, 2006 |
JL Baker wrote:
cbolton wrote:
Let's get rid of the neutral button instead!
Just kidding... I think
Catherine
What's that neutral button really about, anyway? If you're going to go ahead and post your reaction to an answer, aren't agree or disagree the only real choices (or post an answer of your own)? The neutral button is kind of like going to the polls and writing neutral on your ballot- it's probably a better idea not to go at all...
As far as Catherine's original post, I would say that you hit the nail on the head. Disagrees are actually a useful tool to clear out the rubbish. We (myself included) probably shouldn't feel as hesitant as we do to use it when called for.
Jennifer
I'm all for it!
Maybe also the answerer shouln't find it as offensive if the 'neutral' possibility didn't exist.
| | | | Catherine Bolton
Local time: 04:46
Ιταλικά σε Αγγλικά
+ ...
ΞΕΚΙΝΗΣΕ ΤΟ ΘΕΜΑ Εις μνήμην | The purpose of the forum | Aug 6, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
This discussion, growing out of another thead, had as its basis that so many daren't disagree because their Disagree is knee-jerk attacked/rejected/debated, all often ending in a rude fight.
As the person who started the forum, I can tell you that this is only true IN PART. Yes, people seem to be afraid of using the disagree button. No, the forum is not about rude fighting.
Mats Wiman wrote:
Now you all seem to reject the idea of discarding a solution which would forcefully diminish the bickering.
Yours is one opinion on how certain things can be avoided. Others have voiced other - different - opinions. My not-so-tongue-in-cheek idea of getting rid of the neutral button has been seconded by Jennifer and Marie-Christine.
Maybe you don't like that idea. I personally don't like the idea of not letting people respond to a disagree. I think we all have a right to an opinion.
Catherine
[Edited at 2006-08-06 12:27]
| | | | Mats Wiman
Σουηδία
Local time: 04:46
Μέλος από 2000
Γερμανικά σε Σουηδικά
+ ...
Εις μνήμην | The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) | Aug 6, 2006 |
cbolton wrote:
Yours is one opinion on how certain things can be avoided. Others have voiced other - different - opinions. My not-so-tongue-in-cheek idea of getting rid of the neutral button has been seconded by Jennifer and Marie-Christine.
Maybe you don't like that idea.
It is not a matter of liking or not. Decisions should be based on arguments.
I argue that there is no link between the absence of 'Neutral' and an increased use of Disagree. On the contrary, various options to make interesting comments should exist and they are dear to me too. Therefore, the keeping of Neutral and the option to let your own suggestion be accompanied by such comments should be preserved.
Recontructing Disagree:
1. You tick Disagree
2. Are forced to give a reason
3. There is no comment box
would in my view be ideal to decrease bickering and thereby promote an increased use of Disagree - which is the pronounced goal of your thread.
I think we all have a right to an opinion.
So do I.
[Edited at 2006-08-06 11:09]
| | | | | Σελίδες για το θέμα: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) | 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! » |
| | 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 » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
