| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Should non-paying non-verified members forum posts be vetted? Thread poster: Ty Kendall
|
|---|
Sheila Wilson 
Spain
Local time: 01:34
Member (2007)
English
+ ...
| Have you seen the effects on other sites? | Jul 13, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
But why can't just everyone be allowed to post regardless of identity verification?
I still don't see the logic in thinking that people who pay $5 or people who turn up to a little party are any more/less likely to be disruptive.
I think if we remove the barrier, then the forum threads will be all the more enriched.
As I said, there are plenty of safeguards already in place to take care of the bad apples.
I know of several forums where the sensible discussion is riddled with total rubbish. People register one minute, then pepper the forums the next. In some cases, I believe the registration process is carried out totally automatically, by a program rather than by a person. Sometimes, you just get a load of jumbled letters (why they bother do that I just can't imagine, but it's very annoying for legitimate users), or else they spam their advertising all over the forum.
I'm sorry if it inconveniences some people but I'd rather the discussion here centred around translation, not enhancing your (certainly not my ) penis.
Sheila
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | I agree with the safeguards.... | Jul 13, 2012 |
I have no problem there.
I just think the starting point should be changed. Let all non-paying non-verified members post in real time until they infringe the rules and then impose the safeguards. The way it stands now is that non-paying non-verified members are automatically subjected to these safeguards without having done anything to warrant it.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | Moderation is far stricter here though...... | Jul 13, 2012 |
Whilst the level of moderation on this site is often raised as a negative, in this instance it is positive.
The "comprehensive" moderation I mentioned earlier would prevent such spamming and trolling.
And as I said, the safeguards are still there to be exercised if need be......
| | | | | Forum contribution | Jul 13, 2012 |
I am a non-paying and non-vetted member. I do not spam and always stay polite but like to be subversive. Some of my posts are not published or taken away after vetting. Those are the rules. If I want to come here I have to accept them.
Please note that direct forum participation is one of the (rare) advantages of paid membership. Proz management won't take this advantage away from paid members.
| | |
|
|
|
| Yes, I have seen other sites. Have you? | Jul 13, 2012 |
Sheila Wilson wrote: Ty Kendall wrote:
But why can't just everyone be allowed to post regardless of identity verification?
I still don't see the logic in thinking that people who pay $5 or people who turn up to a little party are any more/less likely to be disruptive.
I think if we remove the barrier, then the forum threads will be all the more enriched.
As I said, there are plenty of safeguards already in place to take care of the bad apples. I know of several forums where the sensible discussion is riddled with total rubbish. People register one minute, then pepper the forums the next. In some cases, I believe the registration process is carried out totally automatically, by a program rather than by a person. Sometimes, you just get a load of jumbled letters (why they bother do that I just can't imagine, but it's very annoying for legitimate users), or else they spam their advertising all over the forum. I'm sorry if it inconveniences some people but I'd rather the discussion here centred around translation, not enhancing your (certainly not my ) penis. Sheila
There is no need to use such inefficient and aggravating methods to tackle the spam problem. A decent captcha and some monitoring/IP banning works just fine for all sorts of forums around the internet, and much larger ones than this tiny little operation. Forums that have had trouble with spamming have successfully introduced simple rules, such as restricting new users to 1 post every 15 minutes to avoid machinegun spamming, preventing new users from posting links and banning IP ranges to shut out repeat offenders. These are well known solutions that work. Manually vetting every post is only a reasonable idea if your main goal is to nudge people towards paying a membership fee. If that's what you are doing, that's fine I guess, just own up to it.
Just think about it for a minute: currently, mods have to read and approve/reject every single post by non-paying members. In a normal setup as used by 99.9% of other forums, they would only need to skim the forum as they normally do anyway, and review posts flagged as spam by users. Which do you think requires a greater effort?
[Edited at 2012-07-13 10:37 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | Not an "official" incentive for membership or verification | Jul 13, 2012 |
christela wrote:
I am a non-paying and non-vetted member. I do not spam and always stay polite but like to be subversive. Some of my posts are not published or taken away after vetting. Those are the rules. If I want to come here I have to accept them.
You don't have to accept them! If a rule is rubbish in some way you can strive to get it changed!
Please note that direct forum participation is one of the (rare) advantages of paid membership. Proz management won't take this advantage away from paid members.
But it's not...not even by their own marketing standards i.e. it isn't touted as a main advantage of membership. The advantages they advertise are:
●Promotion of your services (directory ranking, priority in job posts, SEO).
●Access to member-only jobs
●Blueboard access
●KudoZ participation (members can ask 3 times as many questions)
●Networking
●Website hosting and email services
●Online invoicing
●Access to virtual conferences
●Training (discounts on webinars etc)
●Miscellaneous benefits (track visitors on profile, translation contests, other discounts, etc).
http://www.proz.com/membership/campaign
I agree that it is indeed a benefit of being a paying member, but it doesn't seem like ProZ is using it as a clear incentive to pay membership (and as the ladies on the last page clarified, verified non-members can still post without membership).
I only wonder why they don't take the next step (which is fairer for those non-verified non-paying members) and more conducive to the forums as a whole.
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | Proving my point | Jul 13, 2012 |
Thank you FarkasAndras, Terry Richards and Texte Style, you have practically proved my case.
I was starting to feel quite lonely out on my soapbox.....
The only reason I knew to go back to page 1 for your posts was that I am the topic starter and I get emails of every new posting. Otherwise I'd have carried on clicking on page 2 and never saw your posts.
Texte Style - you seem to get me - it is extr... See more Thank you FarkasAndras, Terry Richards and Texte Style, you have practically proved my case.
I was starting to feel quite lonely out on my soapbox.....
The only reason I knew to go back to page 1 for your posts was that I am the topic starter and I get emails of every new posting. Otherwise I'd have carried on clicking on page 2 and never saw your posts.
Texte Style - you seem to get me - it is extremely disheartening to try to be part of a conversation only to be constantly left behind to the point that your posts become irrelevant and unintentionally ignored by the lack of being able to post instantly.
In fact, I know of people who have left the site because the main reason they are here is for forum participation, but they are thwarted at every turn by automatic vetting (when they have commited no transgression other than being a non-paying non-verified member).
Terry - I think it was Angie who posted the link on page 1 with ways how to get verified...
http://www.proz.com/?sp=vid_application .....here it is for convenience. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Natalie
Poland
Local time: 02:34
Member (2002)
English to Russian
+ ...
MODERATOR SITE LOCALIZER | Tracking forums | Jul 13, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
The only reason I knew to go back to page 1 for your posts was that I am the topic starter and I get emails of every new posting. Otherwise I'd have carried on clicking on page 2 and never saw your posts.
Please refer to http://www.proz.com/faq/3076#3076 (How can I receive notification of new forum postings (forum tracking)?)
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | But not everyone wants endless emails like that | Jul 13, 2012 |
Natalie wrote: Ty Kendall wrote:
The only reason I knew to go back to page 1 for your posts was that I am the topic starter and I get emails of every new posting. Otherwise I'd have carried on clicking on page 2 and never saw your posts. Please refer to http://www.proz.com/faq/3076#3076 (How can I receive notification of new forum postings (forum tracking)?)
Sometimes they just want to follow a thread without receiving endless emails, indeed many of us have quite enough emails landing in our inboxes without adding to the flood.
It seems quite a drastic thing to have to do just to make sure posts aren't missed (and it would have to be done by a lot of people simultaneously for it to have the desired effect - quite unlikely I think we can all agree).
As Texte Style's experience shows, the majority of people won't track threads and therefore the problem persists.
[Edited at 2012-07-13 11:10 GMT]
| | | | | What is particularly frustrating... | Jul 13, 2012 |
... is when somebody posts a "help, I have a deadline in the morning and I have a technical problem" post late at night (relative to the forum moderator's time zone) and you know the answer that can help them save the job and they can't see your reply until it is too late. I have had posts of this type go unvetted for more than 24 hours.
As for the ways of getting vetted, there are apparantly 3:
1) Full membership paid for with a credit card. Sorry, I don't choose to do... See more ... is when somebody posts a "help, I have a deadline in the morning and I have a technical problem" post late at night (relative to the forum moderator's time zone) and you know the answer that can help them save the job and they can't see your reply until it is too late. I have had posts of this type go unvetted for more than 24 hours.
As for the ways of getting vetted, there are apparantly 3:
1) Full membership paid for with a credit card. Sorry, I don't choose to do this as I see no reason to do so. If I got any busier my head would probably explode. In any case, why should my business decision to not take out full membership affect my reliability as a forum poster?
2) Meet an approved Proz vetter in person. I've never met any of my customers in person, let alone a Proz member and certainly not one of the ones on the list. It is vanishingly improbable that I ever will.
3) Pay $5. No thanks. I only ever post on here if I think my post can be helpful to someone. I have no intention of paying for the priviledge even if the amount is minor.
Might I suggest that vetting based on posting history might actually be more useful? It is a relatively simple matter to find all of my posts where it would be quite evident that my posting history is 99.9% positive.
T. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Natalie
Poland
Local time: 02:34
Member (2002)
English to Russian
+ ...
MODERATOR SITE LOCALIZER | Of course, too many notifications are annoying | Jul 13, 2012 |
Ty Kendall wrote:
But not everyone wants endless emails like that
But in this case people shouldn't complain that they haven't seen posts that appeared at previous pages of the thread
[Edited at 2012-07-13 11:17 GMT]
| | | | | I meant Vulgarities and similar spamming | Jul 13, 2012 |
FarkasAndras wrote: Angie Garbarino wrote:
Non paying members can post without being vetted when their identity is verified.
This is for preventing new and unknown users to post freely, saying whatever they like
If you ask me, there is no reason whatsoever to stop new and unknown users from posting freely, saying whatever they like. That's how a community should work. My posts generally show up 3 to 6 hours after I post them. Guess if I like that... and no, I have no intention of paying proz or "having my identity verified", ever.
Sorry, English is not my native language so sometimes I am not clear enough, but I meant vulgarities and similar, infact I have now edited my post.
| | |
|
|
|
Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER | But there's legitimate cause to complain | Jul 13, 2012 |
Natalie wrote: Ty Kendall wrote:
But not everyone wants endless emails like that
But in this case people shouldn't complain that they haven't seen posts that appeared at previous pages of the thread [Edited at 2012-07-13 11:17 GMT]
The issue goes beyond not seeing posts that appeared on previous pages of the thread. That's only an issue for the readers. The real gripe in this situation is for the writers, whose voices go unheard because of the automatic vetting policy for non-paying non-verified members.
You could also argue that discussions are prevented from becoming inclusive and thorough when some participants in those discussions are systematically overlooked.
As I said, I think the forum experience will be all the richer for all involved if everyone's voice can be heard, not just the paying verified members.
Sometimes non-paying non-verified members make some great points, but by the time their posts see the light of day you are 4 pages removed, the topic has shifted and their contributions become somewhat pointless and add little to the discussion as they are rarely addressed or acknowledged.
I don't believe the answer is to track threads, that's putting the onus on everyone else to endure emails for the sake of non-paying non-verified members to get their opinions across.
This won't happen, it's just not human nature.
[Edited at 2012-07-13 11:37 GMT]
| | | | Ty Kendall
United Kingdom
Local time: 01:34
Hebrew to English
TOPIC STARTER
Terry Richards wrote:
Might I suggest that vetting based on posting history might actually be more useful? It is a relatively simple matter to find all of my posts where it would be quite evident that my posting history is 99.9% positive.
I know ProZ is a business and all, hence you might expect them to squeeze $ out of us, but the current system seems to imply that trust can be bought. We trust people who pay membership, who pay $5 (who attend a Powwow), but we don't trust people who don't get their wallets out.
FarkasAndras has highlighted that it wouldn't be opening the floodgates to all kinds of nonsense and Terry has raised a good point that vetting should not be based on $ but citizenship.
This site already has a very open door policy so why not extend that to the forums.
Give people the benefit of the doubt. Vetting can still be imposed on the bad apples if they prove themselves to be disruptive/offensive etc.
Innocent until proven guilty?
| | | | Kay Denney
France
Local time: 02:34
French to English
Ty Kendall wrote: Terry Richards wrote:
Might I suggest that vetting based on posting history might actually be more useful? It is a relatively simple matter to find all of my posts where it would be quite evident that my posting history is 99.9% positive. I know ProZ is a business and all, hence you might expect them to squeeze $ out of us, but the current system seems to imply that trust can be bought. We trust people who pay membership, who pay $5 (who attend a Powwow), but we don't trust people who don't get their wallets out. FarkasAndras has highlighted that it wouldn't be opening the floodgates to all kinds of nonsense and Terry has raised a good point that vetting should not be based on $ but citizenship. This site already has a very open door policy so why not extend that to the forums. Give people the benefit of the doubt. Vetting can still be imposed on the bad apples if they prove themselves to be disruptive/offensive etc. Innocent until proven guilty?
I would indeed like to be innocent until proven guilty.
I know of forums where you can just click on an icon to let moderators know that things are getting out of hand or if people are throwing insults at each other
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should non-paying non-verified members forum posts be vetted? | 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 
