[Viki Community Team] French Machine Translations


If the rates are only accessible to gold QC (so we reduce the possibility of people who would created accounts to give good or bad rates) and it’s only positive rate and a report? So if the volunteer is bad (google trad, etc.) you flag him but if he was good you give him a good review, if he was correct (like a 6/10 for you), you don’t rate him.

We can have categories: communication, moderation, translation, edition, segmentation, etc.
We can have different flag too: use google trad, too many CM projects, too many mod projects, etc.



Joke aside (I was just ‘‘playing along’’) in my opinion this system will be so wrong bc some ppl. here can be so vindictive and will find a way to use that against You/me/whomever they may choose to give bad rate/review, and knowing this site for years… the teams will be at each other’s throat trying to be rated the best team. We have a saying in spanish: ‘‘Guerra en Troya’’ ‘‘Trojan war,’’ and I’m not talking about the condom but the war…hahahaha


we can remove the flag option, so it’s just posivite rate, if you don’t like the person, you won’t be able to show it there.


There’s a catch to that bc no one will know who does sloppy work (Mod/CM who are no show), subbers who do bad subtitles, disrespectful behaviors towards the volunteers etc…

I don’t see a positive side to this.


I think that transparency is the key. If everyone has to provide a justification for the grades they give, it will be difficult to grade someone on the basis of being friends or enemies. As @bozoli said: honest assessment. Only hard facts, facts that one can confirm.


And, how can we confirm those hard facts?

Where we will find that honest assessment?

You know how many backstabbing goes in here?

How much hypocrisy is in this place?

How much bullying they are capable of doing, when their ‘‘team’’ joins the game?

I personally don’t trust that is feasible to do here at this site.

Very little light, and too much darkness.


Your peers are supposed to assess your work, your project, as a standalone product of the mind. Your opinion on pasta recipes is nothing to them.
Raters judge you through your work and take every aspect of you into consideration, consciously or not.

Ratings may carry negative connotations for some people, because of personal, social or national experiences. Viki’s micro-universe is no different.


In Greece, as you know, they have established an assessment system in the public sector. I have a friend who is a teacher in an elementary school, and to advance to vice director after all these years she needs a good rating from the director. But the director dislikes her for unrelated reasons. Guess what, promotion ain’t going to happen.

There is a big chunk of the Italian subtitling community which gathers in a Facebook Group, where they make potential subbers take an exam, and they give them a rating.
Although most of the time these ratings really reflect the reality, I have seen quite a few blatant mistakes, unskilled people being given high ratings and skilled ones relegated to medium ranks, that I somehow don’t trust this system anymore.
I prefer to give a subber a part to sub, as a test, and make my own judgement, rather than rely on those.


As I see it, the grading system wouldn’t be particularly useful or beneficial 'cause, after all, it’d be based on personal subjective evaluations which, in a sense, it is already happening right now with the difference that it doesn’t gets reflected on a graphic or scale under the everyone’s eye.

Anyway, to add a suggestion on this topic, we could take the baton throwed by @bozoli and settle a categories’ system instead of grading people, that is, creating some “sections” to be rated by either volunteering community and users, like:

  • Edition
  • Subtitling
  • Segmentation
  • Overall

Therefore, we could get a general assessment about the work issued in each project or drama. That could generate a statistic algorithm in which, after a sum of good ratings (all calculated by the algorithm), the members involved would get a Status such as ‘Qualified Editor, Subber, Segmenter, Moderator’ (apart from the already in use contributor status). In order to do this, it’d be necessary to be able to assign the roles by the moderator (except this one pointed by de CM).

Antoher option, desregarding the aboves, could be limited to just take in account the general appraisal, figure out the team involved and draw our own conlusions for future recruitment.

However, I like better the Marketplace implementation proposal and also I’d rather leave the grading matter end up on the scrap heap of history.


Funny how we use ‘volunteer’, ‘marketplace’ and ‘rating’ in the same argument.
There is a financial term for that, something to do with self-service business models, but I can’t remember it.

…which walks like a social rating system, talks like a social rating system…


You see that everywhere. I lost my job because people complained about me towards my boss. Some complains where lies. For some other complains I was like talk to me. I told my boss some complains where not true but did they believe me? No! Did they check my work and went to see how I work? No! Some of my clients called my boss because they didn’t want me to leave as they thought I was the best help they ever had… didn’t work. For an other job my boss didn’t like me because I pointed out some mistakes she made and I knew the law and my rights to well at some points. So basically it’s just a matter of do they like you or not, not about your skills o how well you do your job.


Yes, this ranking system may make moderators or editors here who actually care about the quality of work get low ratings because incompetent subbers might rate them so because of their criticism which was meant to improve subs’ quality.
I am sorry the sentence was so twisted.


Hahahaha. Indeed! There’s this business model called Clover Structure in spanish (don’t know if goes the same in english) where the fourth leaf is held by clients serving themselves.


It might be something what we in Germany call - to have “Vitamin B”.
The “B”= Beziehungen - in English connections and it works in all places. “Eine Hand wäscht die andere.” lit. One hand washes the other, similar to “I scratch your back, you scratch mine.”


Please note that I am not saying that the Facebook Italian group - of which I’m also a member, although I usually work independently (I have never been given a single moderation from the person in charge) - rates according to personal friendships etc.
In their case, I think it may be also human mistake or chance: i.e. the specific questions in the test happened to be known by an unskilled person and happened to be unknown by an otherwise skilled one, and then when testing actual subbing, the part being assigned may have been easy for one but difficult for another because they are more knowledgeable in that genre etc.
Of course there is also the question of personal criteria being different from one person to another. Some mistakes (for instance literal translation) may be more important to me than other mistakes, which are more important to them.

What I mean is, even if one wants to be impartial, we are all human beings and (apart from actual grammar, where there is no question of opinion) our standards are different. That’s exactly why I am wary of the ratings idea.


I found this channel by accident

Does the French community have access to this one?
The channel says:
Spanish, Portuguese and French subtitles are created by auto translation (beta)


I just checked the comments of that channel

and look. I don’t speak French but I can guess she is complaining about the subs?


I understand a bit …
"I am very disappointed with the translation of the drama. I have read that it was done by automatic translation. No, but that’s nonsense. How to read these subtitles and in the meantime try to understand the real meaning of the sentences? …

And it’s a paying customer, an unhappy paying customer …


This channel is a new way Viki operates, it seems.

  • The comment you posted was created two months ago. Which means that the VikiBot has been silently operating for a while.

  • When you try to click on the Channel Manager - 404 Dog Error. Interesting…

  • There is no human team whatsoever. Even more interesting.

Conclusion: It’s easier not to have a community CM and moderators, so Viki can do whatever they like with their toy.

Perhaps it even stands in the licence contract for the drama that the English subtitles will be provided by the distributor, while the French, Spanish and Portuguese subs by VikiBot.

In any case, that drama in my eyes is ruined for OLs.


Now, that you mention it “our friend -unknown” is here, CM and no team not a sign of it.

No license on my end anyway …

I wish I had found this one earlier, well …