Poll about Editor roles and double contribution points

As most of us already know, since last August, Viki, based on a misconception and misunderstanding, separated Other Language editor roles into two, the General Editor (who is basically a proofreader) and the Translation Editor, who takes care of cultural notes, idioms, slang and general fluency. This is clearly stated here.

Why am I talking of a misunderstanding? It’s here.

You helped validate the level of effort involved in editing, and specifically, the responsibility of a Translation Editor to understand the whole drama – the entire plot, all the dialogue, and the cultural references in order to ensure consistency across names, terms, and subbing conventions.

Ehm, no! The Translation editor of the English team (and only the English team) is valuable because s/he knows the source language and the cultural references. But ensuring consistency is also (if not mostly) the GE’s responsibility. And knowing the “whole” drama, plot etc. is for all three English editors.

It is with this confirmation that the team has decided to adjust the current rewards system to reward Translation Editors for the level of effort involved. Starting next Wednesday, August 14th PDT, the reward for translation editing will be increasing by one contribution point. A specific Editor role for Translation Editors is being created and will be released on the same day. Once that role is ready, anyone assigned to a Translation Editor (TE) role will earn two (2) points instead of one (1) for every one subtitle that they edit (e.g. translation/cultural reference checked and additional cultural reference added, when needed).

The two contribution points were not because TE is more valuable than anyone else, but probably to lure them back to Viki because there are few of them. But again, the ones who are few are only the English TEs.

We also asked you if combining the Translation Editor (TE) and General Editor (GE) roles was a good idea. Many of you shared that the TE and GE roles have different responsibilities and that keeping them separate helps ensure quality subtitles and contributes to team efficiency. Based on this feedback, we will be keeping the TE and GE as separate roles.

Of course, we had told them not to combine the English TE and GE roles. (And it couldn’t mean anything else but that because at the time there was no OL TE role). Yes, TEs are indispensable in the English team because one of them knows the source language very well but English not so well, and the other two (GE and CE) know English well but not necessarily the source language.
Actually, I don’t think that they were even thinking of Other Languages when they took that decision, they remembered it only after the discussion started, and then they said “Oh, but of course, we also meant Other Language Editors, so we will create the TE role for them as well!”

In Other Languages, there are no different editing roles

However, in Other Languages, the distinction between editors that is stated on the help page does not exist. Only one editor does both the proofreading and the actual editing. (Or, if there are two, as may happen in a minority of teams, they do exactly the same thing, only it’s a second pair of eyes, which is always useful because, well, we’re human, and something might have slipped the net).
In English teams, the TE is our link to the source language. But in OL teams, the source language is English. All editors of Other Language teams know both English and their destination language, and all can assess and edit the translation: grammar and formatting but also meaning, idioms and slang and whether the sentences flow well. There are not two separate people for those jobs! The description on the Help page is WRONG.

The double point for editors system

As for more contribution points for one of the two editor types, I seriously doubt that any of us ever said that TEs should get more contribution points. That was wholly Viki’s idea.
And not a good idea at all. With the new system, some members of the team are treated like VIP members and others as less important. Which goes contrary to what is really happening in the Viki translation teams. Each one of the team members is a necessary link in the chain, and the team cannot function if even one of the links is not present and efficiently does the job. We are all equally necessary, we are all equally valuable. Making such distinctions is divisive, harbours misunderstandings and strife, thus not conducive to harmony, not to mention the risk of some using the system to cheat for gaining more contribution points.

The situation is stagnating. Let’s vote!
We talked and talked about all this, at the time. Many of us have asked to bring back the old system to one contribution for each role. And eliminate the two different editor roles for Other Languages.
But nothing came of it. Three months later, nothing has changed, the unfair contribution reward system is still there.
Maybe Viki thought that the majority of us were happily on board with the new situation and only a few people were nagging?
Now let’s speak with our vote. Please choose one option that represents you better.

  • Keep things as are now (since August 2024). Two different editor roles for Other Languages, double contribution points for all TEs (English and OL)
  • Eliminate the TE role for Other Languages, but keep double contribution points for English TEs
  • Eliminate the TE role for Other Languages and the double contribution points for all editors (English and OL) but keep double points for segmenters
  • Eliminate the TE role for Other Languages and the double points for everyone, including segmenters who do two jobs on one segment. Come back to 1 contribution, 1 point for every volunteer.
0 voters

I agree with a lot of what you say, but why do you have to dis the segmenters again? That’s a completely different situation. Segmenters have to earn both points, even if they happen to occur on the same segment. TEs get the bonus point for free. Plus, TEs, unlike segmenters, have never been “underpaid” for years in a row. Just keep this about editors, please, and about bonus points instead of earned points.

  • Don’t give TEs bonus points they haven’t actually earned
  • Give bonus points to ALL English editors because of their stressful work
0 voters
7 Likes

Segmenters don’t get double points, we get one point for each segment we adjust. If we need to combine or split a segment, we also need to modify the subtitles in it accordingly, which rewards us a point for each of the languages we modify. Well earned points considering that the more languages the more work we have to do for a single combo/split.
Moreover I don’t know how Viki could remove the subtitle contributions we get. For sure the solution is not reverting back to segmenters not getting contributions for segments’ adjustments, but just for subtitle modifications, as it was for a long time.

14 Likes

I agree with Mirjam why does the segmenters have to be draged in to this… If we go back to the old system we will work on things for hours without points…

10 Likes

Voted. I’m an OL and this new statue of TE is confusing. I would like things stay as they were before. TE is only for English language.

1 Like

The OL TE role is being misused beyond what I had imagined.

I saw a drama recently with 11 OL TEs of ONE language, just 1! That is, in fact, very questionable.

5 Likes

I am not dissing anyone (“again”?!!!). I just included all the different options that people have suggested in the discussion back then. Whether I agree with them or not (for instance I certainly don’t agree with the first one of leaving things as they are now. Because the idea is to find out what everyone thinks.

P.S. I haven’t voted yet

1 Like

You say it like segmenters don’t have to work with both, segments and subtitles, at the same time. We only earn 1 contribution by adjusting a segment (this reward was created few months ago, before this we were doing the whole work to earn nothing), if we have to combine a subtitle (which is not often needed), we’ll earn 1 point for creating a new subtitle.

We worked for years just to earn something when we combined subtitles and as I said, it’s not always needed. I worked in movies as CS and earned not even 50 contributions.

So saying we earn “double points” is totally a tendentious way of saying. We earn based exactly on what we work.

8 Likes

So don’t vote for that one. This is a poll. The discussion has already taken place last August (I provided the link). Again, the point is not to endlessly discuss our own views but to assess, by the votes who thinks what - and let Viki know.

And no, the way it’s written is not tendentious. It is impartial and correct. Two points per segment worked on is double. Segmenters, subbers and editors, they all sometimes have an easy and quick job and sometimes they have to spend a lot of time when there is some complication: in the case of segmenters it is when they have to move the text from 2-3 languages as well, whereas in the case of subbers and editors it’s when they encounter a tricky word or expression, specialist jargon or have to search a cultural reference, or hunt for a flashback in previous episodes to ensure it is said in the exact same way. As an editor, it has happened to me to spend 20 minutes or more for a single subtitle.

1 Like

It is because people may think we earn 2 contributions per segment, which is a lie. Every adjusted* segment gives you 1 point.

*if it doesn’t need adjustment, we don’t earn nothing.

5 Likes

Who thinks that? It wouldn’t make sense to think that anyone gets contributions for segments that somebody else made and don’t need any further work.
Isn’t it the same for editors? If the segment is fine, we don’t touch it and we don’t get anything.

I hope no one does :pray: I just made it clear.

1 Like

I beg to differ on this. OL TEs also take care of cultural notes, idioms, slang, and general fluency. The editing we do, and I’m talking just about me and some people I know in my community, are all 3 editors in 1. We check translation (from English to Portuguese), add cultural notes, and use language sayings that bring the subs to our reality and understanding, aside from the research we sometimes do to make sure things are fluent and enjoyable to the viewers. So, they do as much work as the English Translator Editor. However, I do understand that some people may be using this the wrong way. It doesn’t matter what it is, we’ll always have this. To award the hardworking we end up awarding the hardlyworking people, too.

3 Likes

As I could gather, you only get 2 points if you edit the segment and also edit the subs for more than one language. This, is at least, 3 editing to get 2 points. Or did I get that wrong?

Adjusting the segment you’ll earn 1 point. If you combine one language, 1 point, if you combine 2 languages, 2 points…

2 Likes

You don’t get me. I clearly wrote that we OL teams only have one editor for all those things, not two. And in the teams where there are two, they both do all those things. I am an OL editor too, shouldn’t I know it very well? In the August discussion, I wrote that it is pointless to make this distinction in OL editors, because we all are TEs.

And I wrote in my previous comment here that editors sometimes have to take quite a long time to find a way to say a tricky sentence or research a technical jargon word or proverb or slang or acronym. They do both proofreading (typos, punctuation, spelling, formatting…) and meaning and style (fluent sentences). This is also the job that in publishing houses is done by two different people, the editor and the proofreader. Yet it’s done here by one person, and it’s no problem either. We never said we want two points because we are doing all this.
Come on! One contribution, one point. If you touch a previously done segment/subtitle, in any way, to correct it, you get one point. Fair and square.

But…
You people really want to have this discussion here, AGAIN?
Why discuss it. If you agree with one option, vote for that one, don’t vote for the others.
It’s the last time that I reply to anything on this thread. Not because I don’t value people’s input or opinions, but because that’s not the purpose of this. Let’s just vote.

1 Like

It wasn’t a problem until one group of people got elevated above the rest of us by being rewarded with bonus points without doing anything extra. As soon as anyone gets advantaged over the others, it’s only logical that the others start questioning this.

There is literally nothing fair about that and even though you suggest above that you are neutral in this matter, you clearly are against segmenters getting their well-earned points and even dare to compare it to the bonus points TEs get as a gift.

1 Like

People, for fairness sake, I believe Irmar didn’t intend to make our beloved Seggers True Hard work go back to that very ungrateful old point system.

The way I read it, she is referring exclusively to when we adjust a segment or edit one. They are two different tasks for two completely different roles of volunteers: one is for Seggers, the other for Editors.

Chillax, guys!

TE two-point system, for me, is too unfair, as I said in other topic: All Editors have the same value.

Seggers only earn the points they deserve by having the task of adjusting/combining segments and keep track of a crescent number of pre-subbed languages. If they have to fill segs with written data, of course they deserve as much points as languages they have to insert the content.

I said this just in case. I only wanted to make it more clear (if possible, beacuse it was fully explained by many people around here on other topics) for anyone that, after sooo many time and explanations, may still be in doubt about their Super Hard work: Seggers deserve the points they earn now.

2 Likes

It seems like the changes in the editing system have sparked a lot of debate. I understand your frustration about the different contribution points for roles. Ideally, all contributors should feel equally valued, regardless of the role they perform. Keeping things fair and transparent is crucial for a healthy and motivated team. I agree that any changes should prioritize unity and balance within the community.

3 Likes