| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | Moderators: what happens now? How is it proposed to recruit new moderators? Thread poster: Marie-Hélène Hayles
|
|---|
Uldis Liepkalns 
Latvia
Local time: 07:53
Member (2003)
English to Latvian
+ ...
| Just to clarify dates | Mar 5, 2009 |
Lia Fail wrote:
So, were moderators aware of the changes beforehand or not?
Moderators meeting with Henry and Jared took place in Warsaw, Poland on February 14th and 15th. Henry's public announcement is dated March 2nd.
In Warsaw there were some 15 moderators present (yes, me too), while many others were kept informed on discussions taking place via Internet.
So I'd say no moderator resigned without considering the matter at least for a week.
Uldis
[Rediģēts plkst. 2009-03-06 00:17 GMT]
| | | |
Jared wrote:
I realize we may be running off-topic here already, but can you tell me more about the loss of community spirit you mention, and why you believe this is not a community-run site? When I look around I find it difficult to see anything that was not originated and shaped by the community. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the matter.
Best regards,
Jared
I can not say if there has been any loss in community spirit, because I have been here since 2007 only. But IMHO, since that year (I don't know before) this is not a community. You have explained it very well:
Jared wrote:
Henry created the site, but I wouldn't say it's his site-- it's the community's. The company behind the site is run by Henry, and Henry, just like every other member of staff, is working for you.
If this were a community, Henry and the staff would be working with us, not for us. Henry is the owner and the one who decides what and how this site must be. Nothing wrong with that. If this were a community we would either decide all or elect people to decide in our representation. But this would not be compatible with the site being a private company. For me, this is just a mutual benefit relationship between us, translators and agencies, and proz.com company. For me, a community is more than a mutual benefit relationship; for me, a community is also a relationship between equals. A private company may be a community only for its owners. We, the users, may consider ourselves a community, but proz.com is not part of it because it is neither owned not ruled by us. Most probably, we have a different idea about what a community is.
¡Salud!
Ignacio Vicario Esteban
| | | | | Survey? Refer to the accounts department. | Mar 6, 2009 |
Aniello Scognamiglio wrote:
The conclusions I have drawn during the last months are that ProZ.com is no longer the "community" it used to be but a company aiming at maximizing its profits (which is a normal thing I have no problem with).
BUT: ProZ.com management should keep in mind that the paying ProZ members (translators, interpreters etc.) are the ProZ clients. Has ProZ.com ever conducted a client satisfaction survey?
I imagine Proz receives regular bank statements, yes.
As you said, it is a corporate venture. As with all corporate ventures, the only truly effective way the customer base can influence policy is with their wallets.
For the record, my membership came free with the London conference in November.
Russell Jones wrote:
I am feeling the loss of community spirit and any sense of meaningful involvement very keenly. I was happy to pay membership fees for a community run site but a commercial enterprise is another matter entirely.
Likewise.
| | | | Aniello Scognamiglio (X)
Germany
Local time: 06:53
English to German
+ ...
| Moderators should get paid for their precious time! | Mar 6, 2009 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
As with all corporate ventures, the only truly effective way the customer base can influence policy is with their wallets.
Right Charlie, exactly my thoughts. ProZ.com is a content-rich website for translators increasingly facing change management issues, but next year my wallet will be empty if a couple of things are not professionally addressed, such as the "misplaced" Google Ads, data protection etc.
Back to the topic: Moderators should get paid for their precious time!
How can a commercial enterprise expect that "employees" work for a big "thank you"?
| | |
|
|
|
| Moderators are volunteers | Mar 6, 2009 |
Hi Aniello,
Back to the topic: Moderators should get paid for their precious time!
How can a commercial enterprise expect that "employees" work for a big "thank you"?
Moderators have always been volunteers, and have been willing to serve as such, I believe, because they find the returns interesting. I think you may find some moderators who would tell you they would not serve as a 9-5 paid employee but are happy contributing what they can, when they can.
Best regards,
Jared
| | | | | Community, moderators, influencing site development | Mar 6, 2009 |
Jared wrote:
The extent to which a moderator could, as a moderator, directly influence site development is no longer part of the role of moderator. In place of this other opportunities are presenting themselves, to the community at large (moderators or not, but not as an integral part of the moderator role). Moderators still serve an important and valuable role within the site, but it is a different role.
The feeling I have these days is that we (the community of translators) and proz (the company) have both lost a lot with this development.
Knowing that out there, there were some of us (translators),
the best of us,
the ones with the most experience
and the ones that most had an insight of where proz could go or should go,
in order to improve things for all of us,
people with names and surnames,
in some way accountable,
that could directly influence to some extent site development,
gave many of us the feeling that proz - although a private enterprise - was also partly ours or at least was in some way developing in the interests of our community.
Now all this does not exist anymore. Moderators rotate annually, and they have no "consulting" role in developments.
The "community at large" is everyone and no-one.
Small groups chosen to test or analise changes are unaccountable to the community (to us), because they come and go, we don't know who they are, how they were chosen, etc. In any case, they would work on short term issues, without having a long term horizon to reason on.
The "community at large" has always had the opportunity to say what it thought in the fora. This is nothing new.
But a team of moderators (we are not speaking of a closed oligarchy in search of power, but of a large group of people serving the community and the company for free), translators that could seriously discuss issues with the staff and with the ownership, is another thing.
Is Proz (the company) really convinced that, without their determinant role in influencing site development, things will go better both for us (the community) and for the company?
Have the moderators so far been a drag on the site, the company and the community? Or have they contributed to improving the whole environment?
| | | | Aniello Scognamiglio (X)
Germany
Local time: 06:53
English to German
+ ...
| They find the returns interesting? | Mar 6, 2009 |
Jared wrote:
Moderators have always been volunteers, and have been willing to serve as such, I believe, because they find the returns interesting. I think you may find some moderators who would tell you they would not serve as a 9-5 paid employee but are happy contributing what they can, when they can.
Best regards,
Jared
Hi Jared,
I know that moderators are volunteers. 9-5 paid employees? I didn't say that.
Allow me a question, please:
If moderators find the returns interesting why have they given up?
| | | |
Francesca Pesce wrote:
Jared wrote:
The extent to which a moderator could, as a moderator, directly influence site development is no longer part of the role of moderator. In place of this other opportunities are presenting themselves, to the community at large (moderators or not, but not as an integral part of the moderator role). Moderators still serve an important and valuable role within the site, but it is a different role.
The feeling I have these days is that we (the community of translators) and proz (the company) have both lost a lot with this development. Knowing that out there, there were some of us (translators), the best of us, the ones with the most experience and the ones that most had an insight of where proz could go or should go, in order to improve things for all of us, people with names and surnames, in some way accountable, that could directly influence to some extent site development, gave many of us the feeling that proz - although a private enterprise - was also partly ours or at least was in some way developing in the interests of our community. Now all this does not exist anymore. Moderators rotate annually, and they have no "consulting" role in developments. The "community at large" is everyone and no-one. Small groups chosen to test or analise changes are unaccountable to the community (to us), because they come and go, we don't know who they are, how they were chosen, etc. In any case, they would work on short term issues, without having a long term horizon to reason on. The "community at large" has always had the opportunity to say what it thought in the fora. This is nothing new. But a team of moderators (we are not speaking of a closed oligarchy in search of power, but of a large group of people serving the community and the company for free), translators that could seriously discuss issues with the staff and with the ownership, is another thing. Is Proz (the company) really convinced that, without their determinant role in influencing site development, things will go better both for us (the community) and for the company? Have the moderators so far been a drag on the site, the company and the community? Or have they contributed to improving the whole environment?
| | |
|
|
|
| Influencing site development | Mar 6, 2009 |
Hi Francesca,
Thanks for posting.
But a team of moderators (we are not speaking of a closed oligarchy in search of power, but of a large group of people serving the community and the company for free), translators that could seriously discuss issues with the staff and with the ownership, is another thing.
True. Would you find it unproductive if that large group of people were composed of not just moderators?
Is ProZ.com (the company) really convinced that, without their determinant role in influencing site development, things will go better both for us (the community) and for the company?
Have the moderators so far been a drag on the site, the company and the community? Or have they contributed to improving the whole environment?
Moderators have contributed to making the site what it is, their help has been immeasurable. But being a moderator is not a requirement for effecting change and improvements on the site; nor does being a moderator mean that your voice will not be heard.
Best regards,
Jared
| | | | | They find the returns interesting | Mar 6, 2009 |
Hi Aniello,
Allow me a question, please:
If moderators find the returns interesting why have they given up?
Some moderators have stepped down. Others have not. See http://www.proz.com/?sp=mod/list for the list of currently serving moderators. As I say earlier in this thread,
Moderators still serve an important and valuable role within the site, but it is a different role. I would not expect everyone to agree with this role, to want to carry it out, or to even agree with its implementation. I would also expect some to say "Okay, I've done this, now I'm moving on."
Best regards,
Jared
| | | | | Off topic(ish) to Lia and more | Mar 6, 2009 |
Lia Fail wrote: Jared wrote:
The ProZ.com mission: Provide tools and opportunities that translators, translation companies, and others in the language industry use to:
* network,
* expand their businesses,
* improve their work,
* experience added enjoyment in their professional endeavors.
Last week I called into question whether ProZ abided by its mission statement, especially those referring to * network and * improve their work, as it has introduced a new policy to ban announcements of events of interest to translators by small non-profit associations; these announcements sufddenly had to be "advertised" (and paid for). Someone (Drew) contacted me as recently as yesterday - I can only assume becuase of an outcry - to say that these kinds of announcements would be possible in the future under certain conditions. I couldn't be bothered to reply, especially as I'd have had to submit another support request (reply wasn't directly possible). I have no time nor energy nor interest in dealing with any backtracking or aboutfacing in policy - as far as I'm concerned the damage has been done (arbitrary decision making, locking posts, deliberately reducing the visibility of posts). Like Riccardo, I tend to distrust what Riccardo called "corporatese"and what I called "corporate speak" in my own post.
While I am firmly of the opinion that your announcement should never have been banned in the first place, surely the backtracking can only be interpreted positively? They made a mistake, they recognise it and they've corrected it.
Still off-topic, but changing the subject: we've heard from a lot of people who seem to be very hostile to the site management and supportive of the outgoing moderators, and I think from no one who has anything to say in defence of the site management. Is everyone's opinion really that negative? Are all the outgoing moderators that saintly? Clearly this is not the place (nor would it be appropriate in any case) to go into details, but I'm aware of several disputes between individual site members and individual monitors over the years - is no one of the opinion that this might be the right time for a "spring clean"?
Finally, is no one prepared to consider even for a moment that Henry & Co might actually be acting in good faith?
[Edited at 2009-03-06 14:45 GMT]
| | | | | My views on "community" and "business" | Mar 6, 2009 |
I was asked a few times in this thread for my views. Basically, the situation is this. I set out by developing the site that I wanted as a translator. Over time, a group of members came together around that site. Nowadays, we on the site team often think in terms of serving that group, or "community", as some have identified it.
Contrary to the frequent forum speculation, we seldom feel challenged to balance "business" interests against "community" interests. Translators are our cus... See more I was asked a few times in this thread for my views. Basically, the situation is this. I set out by developing the site that I wanted as a translator. Over time, a group of members came together around that site. Nowadays, we on the site team often think in terms of serving that group, or "community", as some have identified it.
Contrary to the frequent forum speculation, we seldom feel challenged to balance "business" interests against "community" interests. Translators are our customers, so the the best thing for the "community" tends to also be the best thing for the "business". Whether you believe it or not, in the rare instances when something appears to be best for the community but bad for the business, I have gone with what appears to be best for the community, and trusted that things would work out. They always have.
The question raised in the initial post was "what happens now?" I believe that Oleg put it best:
Oleg Osipov wrote:
Looks like the resignation of some moderators and moderator-related changes have entailed certain frustration on behalf of some colleagues, leading to a hot [discussion].
To me it's the same community as it was before. It is in progress. It is driven by commonly shared passion for languages and our trade. It's a meeting point of colleagues and a powerful workplace with good tools to work with. The core values prevail over whatever may be thought of as irregularities...
I am glad that you said "core values", Oleg, and not me. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
| Thanks, Marie-Hélène! | Mar 6, 2009 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote:
While I am firmly of the opinion that your announcement should never have been banned in the first place, surely the backtracking can only be interpreted positively? They made a mistake, they recognise it and they've corrected it.
Yes, that is pretty much what happened.
Finally, is no one prepared to consider even for a moment that Henry & Co might actually be acting in good faith?
Thanks, Marie-Hélène!
To be fair, the forums can give one the wrong impression. There are plenty of people who have been believers and supporters of what we have been doing since the early years (we're coming up on ten), and they remain so today. They just don't feel the need to say it all the time in the forums.
| | | | | Corrected it how? | Mar 6, 2009 |
Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote:
While I am firmly of the opinion that your announcement should never have been banned in the first place, surely the backtracking can only be interpreted positively? They made a mistake, they recognise it and they've corrected it. Henry D wrote: Yes, that is pretty much what happened.
I haven't seen any statement of what the new policy after the "correction" of the "mistake" is.
The original statements by Drew and Henry (in another thread) appeared to be very restrictive about any site members passing on news of events or courses (and basically to outlaw everything except paid advertising), and when I pointed out the possible consequences of this, Henry thought that I was being sarcastic. If this policy has now been amended, I would welcome this. But I, for one, find it a bit difficult to read between the lines.
Henry, would you like to explain what the new policy is?
| | | | | Drew will post, Viktor | Mar 6, 2009 |
Victor Dewsbery wrote: Marie-Hélène Hayles wrote:
While I am firmly of the opinion that your announcement should never have been banned in the first place, surely the backtracking can only be interpreted positively? They made a mistake, they recognise it and they've corrected it. Henry D wrote: Yes, that is pretty much what happened. I haven't seen any statement of what the new policy after the "correction" of the "mistake" is. The original statements by Drew and Henry (in another thread) appeared to be very restrictive about any site members passing on news of events or courses (and basically to outlaw everything except paid advertising), and when I pointed out the possible consequences of this, Henry thought that I was being sarcastic. If this policy has now been amended, I would welcome this. But I, for one, find it a bit difficult to read between the lines. Henry, would you like to explain what the new policy is?
I think Drew will make a posting at the proper time, Viktor, in a thread dedicated to the topic. I believe he wanted to contact Lia and a few others first.
| | | | | 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 » Moderators: what happens now? How is it proposed to recruit new moderators? | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | 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! » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
