| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | A concrete suggestion about the Blue Board Thread poster: Mark Benson (X)
|
|---|
Mark Benson (X) 
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Just a reply to Tomás and to José Henrique | Jan 3, 2014 |
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: Mark Benson wrote:
And also that I did change the suggestion to contain two different systems: it would be one payment rating and then to keep the LWA that exists today. I have mostly given up on it by now, and I won't pretend that I didn't suspect this to be mostly a matter of time even before I posted, thanks to your (all of you) critical eyes. Yes, I see what you mean. However -- and I am only considering my personal wishes here -- when I look at someone's Blueboard record what I want to decide is whether the outsourcer is trouble. The LWA numbers and comments serve me well in this sense. I would not object to have exact information about late payment, although it is also true that late payment is what triggers most bad LWA marks.
I do agree with you, I can't deny that, just allow me to to point out that I didn't really say anything negative about the LWA in particular. Except that it's a bit too short in my opinion. And then I did modify my suggestion to exist alongside the present LWA. The Blue Board is flawed as a whole and it's not serving the full extent of its purpose. It's inaccurate.
It would be desirable to improve it, as that would improve the rate of correct assessments made based on it. Everyone will gain from that. A working system on ProZ to (at least do what can be done to) ensure payment in the relationship between the translator and the clients he/she gains here is just as basic and fundamental as the payment in itself.
And something could probably be done about it. Now that I'm aware of José Henrique's sugestions, I'm revising the idea I had and preparing to contact him off-list. So José Henrique, that's what I want to say in response to your comment.
| | | | | An alternative | Jan 4, 2014 |
There is another well-known website for translators which concerns itself solely with payment practices in the way suggested in this thread. I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to name it here. For what I consider a modest subscription, it enables translators to rate agencies according to the promptness or tardiness of their payments. I find it most helpful when deciding whether or not to work for a new client. It also allows much more room for comments than the Blue Board. I imagine that professio... See more There is another well-known website for translators which concerns itself solely with payment practices in the way suggested in this thread. I'm not sure whether I'm allowed to name it here. For what I consider a modest subscription, it enables translators to rate agencies according to the promptness or tardiness of their payments. I find it most helpful when deciding whether or not to work for a new client. It also allows much more room for comments than the Blue Board. I imagine that professional translators would be able to offset the subscription against income tax.
For details, please contact me privately.
Merry new year to all Prozians,
Jenny ▲ Collapse
| | | | Lucy Sobrero
United Kingdom
Local time: 00:29
Italian to English
| Blue Board Blues | Jan 5, 2014 |
Hi, just wanted to say that the first and only time I rated an agency for non payment and gave a 0, they then threatened to never pay me if I didn't remove the comment and rating. My entries had caused them to be banned as I was the third. In order to get the approx. 600 euros, I had to back down and remove my entries. They then paid me. Anything that could prevent this kind of coercion would be great!
| | | | Mark Benson (X)
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Rate them now! | Jan 5, 2014 |
lucy sobrero wrote:
Hi, just wanted to say that the first and only time I rated an agency for non payment and gave a 0, they then threatened to never pay me if I didn't remove the comment and rating. My entries had caused them to be banned as I was the third. In order to get the approx. 600 euros, I had to back down and remove my entries. They then paid me. Anything that could prevent this kind of coercion would be great!
Hi, thanks for posting! I strongly encourage you to state the information you just wrote here on their Blue Board entry. I would suggest rating them '1', but this is up to you. Please rate them according to your experience, now that you've been paid.
If you need any help or guidance, or support, in the process of submitting your rating - you are more than welcome to contact me in private!
I also want to add to those who have contacted me in private that I'm very grateful and will be writing back as soon as I have time again.
| | |
|
|
|
Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 19:29
Spanish to English
+ ...
| It is what it is. | Jan 6, 2014 |
Heinrich Pesch wrote:
If you were a member since years, you would not be so optimistic about suggesting changes. Proz.com's aim is to make money for the owners, and all other things are of secondary importance. A BB that would expose paying company members too openly is not what the owners have in mind.
Payment issues are very sensitive for any business. You just have to be careful with whom you start business. Nobody can take this burden from your shoulders.
Yes indeed. In fact, over the last couple of years, I have not been able to post any negative comments on the Blue Board (they have been disallowed in each case under the pretext that they somehow involved "defamation" of the company). So, when I want to enter a negative rating now, I simply enter "1" with the comment "further information via e-mail only" or no comment at all.
Proz.com's resistance to suggestions is well-documented for the fundamental reason Heinrich states. So unless you have a penchant for wasting your time, or are satisfied with staff responses along the lines of "things work well as they are" or "we will deliberate upon this matter in due course," it would be prudent not to invest too much energy in any crusade aimed at fundamental changes in this site's policies.
The Blue Board provides (along with endless inflated ratings and absurdly laudatory comments) some valuable information (e.g., a long string of "5"s usually means that the agency can be counted on to pay on time; and even one or two recent negative ratings/comments ought to be sufficient grounds for caution). But you have to recognize that there are instances in which important adverse information about a company does not make it onto the BB.
In short, the statement heard so often these days in the US regarding situations that are unlikely to change, and that require either an acceptance or rejection taking that fact into account, very much applies here: It is what it is.
[Edited at 2014-01-06 18:21 GMT]
| | | | Mark Benson (X)
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | To Robert Forstag's reply | Jan 6, 2014 |
Robert Forstag wrote: Heinrich Pesch wrote:
If you were a member since years, you would not be so optimistic about suggesting changes. Proz.com's aim is to make money for the owners, and all other things are of secondary importance. A BB that would expose paying company members too openly is not what the owners have in mind.
Payment issues are very sensitive for any business. You just have to be careful with whom you start business. Nobody can take this burden from your shoulders. Yes indeed. In fact, over the last couple of years, I have not been able to post any negative comments on the Blue Board (they have been disallowed in each case under the pretext that they somehow involved "defamation" of the company). So, when I want to enter a negative rating now, I simply enter "1" with the comment "further information via e-mail only" or no comment at all.
I'm well familiar with you and your BB ratings are admirable. Please don't be put off regardless of what happens and keep posting 1s and 2s! I will follow this example.
This is important to making the BB useful in its present form.
Proz.com's resistance to suggestions is well-documented for the fundamental reason Heinrich states. So unless you have a penchant for wasting your time, or are satisfied with staff responses along the lines of "things work well as they are" or "we will deliberate upon this matter in due course," it would be prudent not to invest too much energy in any crusade aimed at fundamental changes in this site's policies.
I should say something to make it clearer what I'm up to. I just thought I got a great idea and wanted to expose it, since it's easier to falsify it for someone else. Figured that was the better thing to do, compared to just tossing it. I was quite convinced when I posted.
If we build it they will come?
The Blue Board provides (along with endless inflated ratings and absurdly laudatory comments) some valuable information (e.g., a long string of "5"s usually means that the agency can be counted on to pay on time; and even one or two recent negative ratings/comments ought to be sufficient grounds for caution). But you have to recognize that there are instances in which important adverse information about a company does not make it onto the BB.
A straight 5 record is what I generally require to take working with an outsourcer into consideration. I know that there will be payment issues otherwise, even though the low ratings sometimes speak very strongly of something different, e.g. low rates and such.
I agree with you and it's obviously good to be capable of deciphering the BB and making the most of it - even as is.
Many thanks for your comments!
[Edited at 2014-01-06 19:45 GMT]
[Edited at 2014-01-06 19:47 GMT]
| | | | Mark Benson (X)
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | | I suggested a solution | Jan 6, 2014 |
lucy sobrero wrote:
Hi, just wanted to say that the first and only time I rated an agency for non payment and gave a 0, they then threatened to never pay me if I didn't remove the comment and rating. My entries had caused them to be banned as I was the third. In order to get the approx. 600 euros, I had to back down and remove my entries. They then paid me. Anything that could prevent this kind of coercion would be great!
I think I sent a support ticket to Proz suggesting the auto-ransom system.
When any translator got such a threat, they would click on a special "Blackmail" button in their entry on that outsourcer's Blue Board record. This would automatically erase their "bad" score, and convert it temporarily into a WWA=5 with no comment. That "Blackmail" button would turn into a "Got paid!" button. Upon clicking on it, the translator would revert to the previous "bad" score. A thief for a thief...
| | |
|
|
|
Mark Benson (X)
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Update on the original idea? | Jan 7, 2014 |
It just occurred to me that the original idea has actually lived on in a new suggestion. Don't know if it would be best to start a new topic, but since the new suggestion follows directly from the one I had original, here it goes:
Is it possible to start collecting payment statistics per company and presenting it on the Blue Board as a complement to the LWA rating?
Translators are encouraged to report the payments they receive to the system and statistics are then gener... See more It just occurred to me that the original idea has actually lived on in a new suggestion. Don't know if it would be best to start a new topic, but since the new suggestion follows directly from the one I had original, here it goes:
Is it possible to start collecting payment statistics per company and presenting it on the Blue Board as a complement to the LWA rating?
Translators are encouraged to report the payments they receive to the system and statistics are then generated and presented on a 'payment statistics' (or similar name) tab, or area on the present BB entry. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 19:29
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Seems unworkable | Jan 7, 2014 |
Mark Benson wrote:
It just occurred to me that the original idea has actually lived on in a new suggestion. Don't know if it would be best to start a new topic, but since the new suggestion follows directly from the one I had original, here it goes:
Is it possible to start collecting payment statistics per company and presenting it on the Blue Board as a complement to the LWA rating?
Translators are encouraged to report the payments they receive to the system and statistics are then generated and presented on a 'payment statistics' (or similar name) tab, or area on the present BB entry.
I don't see this suggestion as workable, or even as adding more information than that which is available (or at least potentially available) under the existing system.
As long as instances of non-payment and delayed payment are reported under the existing system, the generation of a number that would supposedly indicate "percentage of invoices paid" would seem irrelevant. Furthermore, the reliability of any such number would depend on those being paid reporting that this has happened (which seems an unnecessary bother for freelancers).
Finally, there would be inherent limitations to any such statistic, even if the above problem were overcome. For example, if Hypothetical Agency A has a perfect payment record on 49 jobs with a total invoice amount of $4000, and then fails to pay a freelancer $4000 it owes for a large job it has contracted, this would leave it with a payment rating of 98% which, taken in itself, would clearly inspire a confidence far from deserved under the circumstances.
[Edited at 2014-01-07 18:56 GMT]
| | | | Mark Benson (X)
English to Swedish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Good feedback | Jan 7, 2014 |
Robert Forstag wrote: Mark Benson wrote:
It just occurred to me that the original idea has actually lived on in a new suggestion. Don't know if it would be best to start a new topic, but since the new suggestion follows directly from the one I had original, here it goes:
Is it possible to start collecting payment statistics per company and presenting it on the Blue Board as a complement to the LWA rating?
Translators are encouraged to report the payments they receive to the system and statistics are then generated and presented on a 'payment statistics' (or similar name) tab, or area on the present BB entry.
I don't see this suggestion as workable, or even as adding more information than that which is available (or at least potentially available) under the existing system. As long as instances of non-payment and delayed payment are reported under the existing system, the generation of a number that would supposedly indicate "percentage of invoices paid" would seem irrelevant. Furthermore, the reliability of any such number would depend on those being paid reporting that this has happened (which seems an unnecessary bother for freelancers).
Since you're willing to take the idea into consideration, please imagine this:
You click a button. You come to a form. You enter the project reference number from the Job Board. You enter a copy of your PO. You enter proof of the payment. You're prompted to ask a number of questions.
Not only is it easy to report a payment and increase the accuracy of assessments about whether or not to work with an agency based on payment, it's also easier to report a non-payment.
I wouldn't call that an 'unnecessary bother', but rather sharing information that's vital for others to have.
Finally, there would be inherent limitations to any such statistic, even if the above problem were overcome. For example, if Hypothetical Agency A has a perfect payment record on 49 jobs with a total invoice amount of $4000, and then fails to pay a freelancer $4000 it owes for a large job it has contracted, this would leave it with a payment rating of 98% which, taken in itself, would clearly inspire a confidence far from deserved under the circumstances.
[Edited at 2014-01-07 18:56 GMT]
This is actually a strong point against the idea I had.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » A concrete suggestion about the Blue Board | 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 » |
| | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
