so why viki don’t allow one accound by IP’s adress ?
The human-made grade is always biased, but what is good about this solution is…
- that it goes both ways
- that moderators are always outnumbered by subbers, so the one in a more “powerful” position is de facto outnumbered.
There will always be trolls. Luckily, they are a few in comparison to others.
I think interpersonal conflict hurts people much more than a set of numbers from 1-5. Or, rather, words hurt more than numbers. Conflicts we experience on Viki especially shoo away newer volunteers. And they make the project sometimes a living hell for you, for the person you are in conflict with and for your CM.
Additionally, the more voters a person has, the better is the estimate, since the average after 50 people voted is a more honest grade than after two people voted, with or without the trolls. Trolls’ votes would get suffocated in the majority’s vote.
The grading must be anonymous. There is no other way.
Additionally, the grading should be something you as a user must approve for yourself. You should get an option whether you wish to be graded or not, and still be able to use the Marketplace freely.
3 Likes
I am confused? The most lack we have is original language to English, or am I wrong?
Without hearing how can there subtitles created?
Don’t we need a base on which a bulk translation would be possible or are you thinking of only the “lifted access” for other language subber?
All subs belong to Viki, the moment you save them.
It’s a good idea when people are respecting the idea.
Some volunteers might like to have a list of subbers they could pick and just pick “the best”.
If the list is a lie, we won’t be able to benefit from the pros of the “grades”.
And I could create 10 accounts to grade 1 being another of mine and I would approve.
Or I could disapprove all bad ratings whereas people who rated had a basis to put this rate.
I don’t know.
For me, it touches something sensitive when it’s alluding to judging (people? Competences? Honesty?)
I thought about it too first, but then I thought it would be too complicated to manage. Subjective, people feelings involved… complicated.
And giving more place to new volunteers. If people just want the best and not new because it asks time to make them “operational” on viki.
Someone can improve.
If sb put a bad grade, it could be demotivating whereas it’s someone who just wants to progress.
I don’t know.
1 Like
I meant other languages.
I notice that although Korean-English or Chinese-English maybe slow but I think in comparison to other languages they almost always get the job done in less than a couple of days whereas other languages may spend years so maybe this option could be of help to some.
I made this to help raise awareness and make a point about how bad machine translations can be. Feel free to share!
4 Likes
It is already possible to do that. I tried, on Doctor Prisoner, and it was frustrating, I didn’t know who was talking.
1 Like
I don’t know if it would work for a volunteer like me, because I “jumped off” the wagon of on air channels. Completed project of recent years would only be movies.
A lot of older channels I worked on are completely gone …
Other team members. In the latest projects I was pretty on my own as I don’t have a regular schedule open for Viki like in my first years at Viki. So ???
2 Likes
-
Let’s say that you create 10 accounts grading yourself 5-5-5-5 (max grades in all 4 categories). One bad vote of 2-2-2-2 will already lower your average to 4,7. Considering how creating 10 accounts takes sooo much time and so many e-mail addresses, this scenario doesn’t seem so likely. Let’s assume you create 5 faux Viki accounts. The number of volunteers who may grade you in just one project supersedes five already. Therefore, the effect of you cheating to create a better score for yourself is minimal. And this leads me to my point No 2.
-
Only your team members are allowed to grade you. People you have worked with before on at least one common project.
I remember you saying you hated others grading you ever since Uni. And that is super important. Nobody on Viki should be forced to do or withstand anything they don’t want to. Our personal well-being is more important than how we work in a team on Viki. That’s why I said that grading should be optional and reversible. You think you got bad grades unfairly? Turn off the function. Freedom for all.
Good point! So I suggest that in the “Volunteer statistics” part there should also be a field called “Number of Newbies recruited”. Because that behaviour should be rewarded. It’s not always possible to recruit Newbies (on-air dramas), but when it is, we should make an effort.
On your own as a Moderator, you mean? Have you had good interaction with your CM? Have you finished the project within a year? Have you given feedback to your CM in case you saw a segment was missing, or you thought the sub was not very understandable? I’m often forced to translate alone. So, in a team I find myself mostly in contact with the CMs and via the Project Channel - English editors. Those would be the potential “graders”.
Edit: Despite the lack of a “Team grade”, you would still have the “Volunteer statistic”.
LOL I had good laugh, thanks! It’s been awhile.
Well, I had good interaction with a well-known editor on a channel of a k-drama I subbed. Because we knew each other from the past.
When you start with an old, should I say quiet channel, you usually ask for the moderators position if there is no one, usually you get it and that is most of the contact with the CM you get my dear bozoli. Questions about unclear subtitle lines, you will ask the editor/subber. My old CMs sure I had a good contact. But would you grade per project, or can one CM only grade one time at all. It’s gonna be complicated.
1 Like
I always make you laugh! Don’t you know this by now 
Although you have little contact with your CM, she can also see your progress and be happy with it.
One time only. Your grade shouldn’t be final, same as we shouldn’t make a permanent decision about other people. We have the right to change our minds 
It seems complicated to implement something optional on Viki:
The option announcement we could pick not to appear in the page of contributors of the month in last October-November (if I remember correctly).
I see it like stars reviewing for dramas, but it won’t be for inanimate or a game character or fictional character.
Practical aspect Q&A if it was implemented:
- Who will accept bad grades on their profile if only the user who is graded can accept a grade?
- How a CM can grade a moderator for his knowledge in the language? How a CM or moderators can grade segmenters if they are not segmenters? How a subber can grade his moderator if he’s not an editor? What is graded and useful to be mentioned when grading?
Graders have to got knowledge in the area they grade…
It is really subjective and we could grade on impressions, not something certain.
When we graduated from nssa, we were graded by 2 independant panelists. Couldn’t be suvjective.
I made a post on Help Center too. You may want to upvote it. But don’t go right now because it’s still pending approval - for some reason.
1 Like
LOL, they will say "We don’t know for what reason your … was chosen … it must have been … selected … However, well … - and it seems there is more pending approval going on these days (for whatever reason)
I didn’t mean that you could accept one grade from one user and reject another grade from another user. Rather, I suggested that you can turn on or off the function for your profile.
Sometimes a CM knows the language in question, or knows segmenting. I don’t really know how to segment, but I have enough experience to say when segments are bad. Subbers can absolutely grade their moderators. We all assume subbers are less proficient in a language. But most teams I worked in the title subber is just a title. We are of approximately the same level.
In my first draft of the suggestion stood instead of “Quantitative assessment” -> “Objective assessment”, and instead of “Qualitative assessment” -> “Subjective assessment”
Despite what you instincts tell you, I think subjective assessment is not inherently bad. There are many problems we face wile working on Viki which surpass the numbers and statistics. Because we are human, our work also must have a human component in the assessment.
Actually, I would argue that both panelists are subjective, but that the overall grade you get is less so because there is more than one of them. If the categories they are scoring you on have clear instructions what 5 means, what 4 means and so on, then they are closer to being objective. But as humans they will never be an objective measure. (Talking as a scientist here )
indignida com essa situação como isso pode esta acontecendo com os tradutores
Maybe only Gold GCs could grade other volunteers?
Better, still only Active Gold QCs? It’ll be much more difficult to create new accounts to upvote themselves.
I understand the good will and the good use we could make of it.
For the equality of opportunity, I don’t know.
Might give more or less chance to certain people with this system of ratings. So is this system giving more or less chances to people who will need more chances? Or will it only giving more chances to ones who already had or have a lot of chances and so giving less chance to someone else who needs it more?
To whom this visibility will really benefit? It could have opposite effects of what some ppl are trying to look for: more equality of opportunities.
Imagine you have 1 or 10 good ratings for one mod / 30 good ratings for another one / 100 good ratings for another one.
And there are 3 CM looking for a moderator.
How will they pick? How were the mods graded? Who graded them according to what criteria?
(Let’s say we don’t put the number of projects we do and we don’t have limits with not on-air or co-moderation).
It reminds me vaguely of (against my own will, associating):
I don’t know what is pertinent to grade. Not only hard skills (competence in a language) but also soft skills (communication for ex) or is she my friend? Do I have a good relationship with?
Like reviews we have on dramas where it’s not rating the drama.
That the person is a teammember or a CM or a moderator who votes, it doesn’t mean they’re not humans or not biased. How could we know with anonymous votes?
If it gets implemented, I hope I will have the choice immediately and not have like the volunteers of the month list option pending. Will I really have the choice? 
Maybe I expressed myself badly with “subjective”, it was not the correct word to convey the idea.
I’ll try to explain better with “subjective”.
The panelists I got were people who didn’t know me and I didn’t know them, we had no relationships or contact before, they were independant.
Subjective was refering to:
-
impressions, feelings or past with them. It is like an examiner on an anonymous sheet paper, no preconceived ideas on the person, not judging the person, but the quality of his work.
-
grades in nssa are calculated with a table, the % are calculated according to a detailed rule of types of mistakes we make with a coefficient/weight number affected to the type of mistake. It’s really precise to give a xx.xx%, it’s not a truncature or totally approximate.
It is enough precise in my mind to be calculated with formulas.
If I were to apply it to rates, it could be something like:
- I get on well with her: +3 stars
- She’s too talkative: - 2 star
- she doesn’t listen: - 3 star
- I remember she…: + 1 star
- her knowledge in the language: +1 star
- she doesn’t pick me as mod: - 1 star.
Total: - 1 star = 0 star
And it’s anonymous.
1 Like
Amen to that, Sista!
1 Like
This will not work because an IP address is not always a static one, it can be dynamic.