| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) Thread poster: Catherine Bolton
|
|---|
df49f (X)
France
Local time: 14:53
| yes Charlie this is precisely the subject... before it was hijacked that is... | Aug 6, 2006 |
Charlie Bavington wrote:
And I thought that the purpose of the thread was precisely to encourage responsible use of the disagree option, safe in the knowledge that this is perfectly acceptable behaviour.
Yes Charlie, this is indeed precisely the point of Catherine's thread, and that is exactly what was being discussed before it got hijacked.... (sigh)
Charlie Bavington wrote:
...my main point was that I see no useful purpose at this stage in discussing changes to the system from a technical viewpoint, e.g. removing the answerer's option to comment on a disagree (which I happen to think is probably the worst idea I've heard this year). Technically, I believe the system as it stands is OK.
And agree too, that the merit of this tool is to exist, we don't have to beg for anything from site staff and some of us believe that it can be put to good use to improve answering quality AS IT STANDS : the idea is simply to encourage everyone to use it appropriately, responsibly and whenever justified, in an attempt, as Catherine just explained, to get cowboy answerers to think before shooting. We're talking here about making the most of the system and rules as they exist and turn them into an advantage for everyone.
What is wishful thinking is to start an endless (and straying) discussion about CHANGING the existing tools that site staff will not listen to anyway... and which is for once NOT NECESSARY (both neutral and replies to disagrees are absolutely necessary and to everyone's benefit - removing either or both would be detrimental to the system).
So please, let's end this useless discussion of changes started and dragged on endlessly and needlessly by Mats, into which we got trapped against our wishes and is going absolutely nowhere... and let's get back to the real subject matter as re-explained by Catherine and re-formulated by Charlie:
1°) As Catherine suggested, grow thicker skin to disregard rude replies to our justified disagrees and not allow any rude answerer to intimidate us. If needed, refer the matter to a moderator, including taking the initiative of doing it myself if I see someone else being insulted (I've found quite frequently that a Mod took care of insulting/rude replies without my ever having to say anything about it).
2°) As Kim suggested (twice without anyone picking up on the topic), find ways to express our disagreement on the answering "process" in a way that will not be regarded as "personal" and therefore outlawed. Since we're all supposed to be "word experts", we can each find ways of saying things in an appropriate manner... ways that can then be "copy-catted" by others almost as "standard phrases".
3°) 4°)... any other suggestions ??
dominique
| | | | IanW (X)
Local time: 14:53
German to English
+ ...
| Wishes schmishes | Aug 6, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Wishing that people should use Disagree brings nothing.
Agreeing that people should do something is beautiful but it will change nothing.
You need an automatic well-weighed technical solution to bring about change.
Otherwise the long, long list of wishes has only grown with another item.
Nobody is wishing that people should use the disagree function, Catherine is merely pointing out what it is there for and that it will help to weed out some of the rubbish. And, regardless of what you think, Mats, it will certainly help - and has started already. I also agree with Charlie that nothing needs to be changed on the technical side - well, at least nothing that stands a chance of being implemented.
And, while we're at it, isn't "doing nothing" your usual strategy as far as improvements to the KudoZ system is concerned?
| | | | df49f (X)
France
Local time: 14:53
| can we please get back to the topic of Catherine's thread?? | Aug 6, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote:
Wishing that people .... etc and blablabla
We all now perfectly understand that you are not a believer in what we're attempting here - You've made your point perfectly clear and have had ample room to express your own contrary opinions - though it has distracted our time and attention away from the real topic initiated by Catherine (not very polite BTW...:-(). Fine, no problem, to each his own... Nobody here is trying to enroll anyone by force into anything... In that case however, it would now be courteous to step aside, rather than continue monopolizing the thread on your own pet issues and forcing the discussion to stray off-topic, so as to allow others (who ARE interested) room enough to discuss the subject constructively... which we haven't much been able to do in view of your numerous off-topic comments.
"YOU need...", no, we do not need any more dictatorial sovieto-fascisto-rule-based-god-imposed system: you may have noticed that all contributors to this thread are intelligent persons, responsible and conscientious professionals; i.e. we do have a brain that works well (hinting otherwise is rather insulting...) and we intend to exercice our free-will by using in a responsible manner the existing system in an attempt to change things in a way that will be beneficial to all (and incidently even to site owners since it will enhance the quality and hence the value added of the one reason that attracts paying subscribers).
And lastly FYI, things HAVE indeed already moved, and for the better, even as we speak, at least in the Fr/En & En/Fr pairs I visit. Little by little, we can (not just wish) help improve the answers for the benefit of askers and glossary entries for the benefit of all.
I would urge everyone from this point on to respond only to constructive and on-topic contributions, so we can stop going round in circles because of unproductive issues.
Have a pleasant evening!
dominique
[Edited at 2006-08-06 19:01]
| | | | Mats Wiman 
Sweden
Local time: 14:53
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | "The Disagree Drive" is no drive? | Aug 6, 2006 |
Ian Winick wrote:Nobody is wishing that people should use the disagree function, Catherine is merely pointing out what it is there for and that it will help to weed out some of the rubbish. And, regardless of what you think, Mats, it will certainly help - and has started already. I also agree with Charlie that nothing needs to be changed on the technical side - well, at least nothing that stands a chance of being implemented.
"The Disagree Drive" is without doubt a wish for extended use of the Disagree function, supported by all of us.
The difference is that I do not beleive in the effectiveness in wishing it. I simply propose a mechanism for attaining, but some (like you Ian) do not argue. You prefer to try to insult me.
| | |
|
|
|
Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 14:53
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam
df49f wrote: Mats Wiman wrote:
Wishing that people .... etc and blablabla
This is not avery constructive way to lead a discussion.
We all now perfectly understand that you are not a believer in what we're attempting here - You've made your point perfectly clear
To me this posting indicates that this definetely is NOT the case.
... and have had ample room to express your own contrary opinions - though it has distracted our time and attention away from the real topic initiated by Catherine
Excuse me but in what way have I drawn attention from the real topic ("The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish")?
What is the real topic if not how to increase the use of Disagree?
(not very polite BTW...:-(). Fine, no problem, to each his own... Nobody here is trying to enroll anyone by force into anything... In that case however, it would now be courteous to step aside, rather than continue monopolizing the thread on your own pet issues and forcing the discussion to stray off-topic, so as to allow others (who ARE interested) room enough to discuss the subject constructively... which we haven't much been able to do in view of your numerous off-topic comments.
Be my guest: I have not stopped anyone from discussing their pet projects, I simply can't understand why nobody is interested in creating methods and means to achieve the presumed goal: The increased use of Disagree.
You seem only to be interested in agreeing that something is problematic and as long as everybody is in agreement, everything is fine. That is wishful thinking and does not influence the tens of thousands participating in the KudoZ arena.
"YOU need...", no, we do not need any more dictatorial sovieto-fascisto-rule-based-god-imposed system: you may have noticed that all contributors to this thread are intelligent persons, responsible and conscientious professionals; i.e. we do have a brain that works well (hinting otherwise is rather insulting...) and we intend to exercice our free-will by using in a responsible manner the existing system in an attempt to change things in a way that will be beneficial to all (and incidently even to site owners since it will enhance the quality and hence the value added of the one reason that attracts paying subscribers).
"sovieto-fascisto-rule-based-god-imposed system"??
"we do have a brain that works well (hinting otherwise is rather insulting...)"??
And lastly FYI, things HAVE indeed already moved, and for the better, even as we speak, at least in the Fr/En & En/Fr pairs I visit. Little by little, we can (not just wish) help improve the answers for the benefit of askers and glossary entries for the benefit of all.
Have you had an avalanche of Disagrees or how is your statement to be understood?
I would urge everyone from this point on to respond only to constructive and on-topic contributions, so we can stop going round in circles because of unproductive issues.
"so we can stop going round in circles"?
So would I. Who is "going round in circles"?
Have a pleasant evening! dominique
Is that really what you wish?
| | | | Catherine Bolton
Local time: 14:53
Italian to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER In memoriam | Can I have my forum back? | Aug 6, 2006 |
I'm leaving in this entire quotation. I'm not looking for mega-changes, nor am I looking to change the world. I am simply trying to raise awareness THAT THE DISAGREE BUTTON EXISTS (and, yes, I'm shouting).
If you like, you can start your own forum about squashing the disagree comments. But since you happen to be a MODERATOR I would like to ask you to respect the rules you are supposed to uphold.
In the meantime, I'm contacting a moderator to moderate you.
Now, can we can back ... See more I'm leaving in this entire quotation. I'm not looking for mega-changes, nor am I looking to change the world. I am simply trying to raise awareness THAT THE DISAGREE BUTTON EXISTS (and, yes, I'm shouting).
If you like, you can start your own forum about squashing the disagree comments. But since you happen to be a MODERATOR I would like to ask you to respect the rules you are supposed to uphold.
In the meantime, I'm contacting a moderator to moderate you.
Now, can we can back on topic?
Catherine
Mats Wiman wrote: df49f wrote: Mats Wiman wrote:
Wishing that people .... etc and blablabla This is not avery constructive way to lead a discussion. We all now perfectly understand that you are not a believer in what we're attempting here - You've made your point perfectly clear To me this posting indicates that this definetely is NOT the case. ... and have had ample room to express your own contrary opinions - though it has distracted our time and attention away from the real topic initiated by Catherine Excuse me but in what way have I drawn attention from the real topic ("The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish")? What is the real topic if not how to increase the use of Disagree? (not very polite BTW...:-(). Fine, no problem, to each his own... Nobody here is trying to enroll anyone by force into anything... In that case however, it would now be courteous to step aside, rather than continue monopolizing the thread on your own pet issues and forcing the discussion to stray off-topic, so as to allow others (who ARE interested) room enough to discuss the subject constructively... which we haven't much been able to do in view of your numerous off-topic comments. Be my guest: I have not stopped anyone from discussing their pet projects, I simply can't understand why nobody is interested in creating methods and means to achieve the presumed goal: The increased use of Disagree. You seem only to be interested in agreeing that something is problematic and as long as everybody is in agreement, everything is fine. That is wishful thinking and does not influence the tens of thousands participating in the KudoZ arena. "YOU need...", no, we do not need any more dictatorial sovieto-fascisto-rule-based-god-imposed system: you may have noticed that all contributors to this thread are intelligent persons, responsible and conscientious professionals; i.e. we do have a brain that works well (hinting otherwise is rather insulting...) and we intend to exercice our free-will by using in a responsible manner the existing system in an attempt to change things in a way that will be beneficial to all (and incidently even to site owners since it will enhance the quality and hence the value added of the one reason that attracts paying subscribers). "sovieto-fascisto-rule-based-god-imposed system"?? "we do have a brain that works well (hinting otherwise is rather insulting...)"?? And lastly FYI, things HAVE indeed already moved, and for the better, even as we speak, at least in the Fr/En & En/Fr pairs I visit. Little by little, we can (not just wish) help improve the answers for the benefit of askers and glossary entries for the benefit of all. Have you had an avalanche of Disagrees or how is your statement to be understood? I would urge everyone from this point on to respond only to constructive and on-topic contributions, so we can stop going round in circles because of unproductive issues. "so we can stop going round in circles"? So would I. Who is "going round in circles"? Have a pleasant evening! dominique Is that really what you wish? ▲ Collapse
| | | | Andy Watkinson
Spain
Local time: 14:53
Member
Catalan to English
+ ...
| Not again........... | Aug 6, 2006 |
Mats Wiman wrote: Ian Winick wrote:Nobody is wishing that people should use the disagree function, Catherine is merely pointing out what it is there for and that it will help to weed out some of the rubbish. And, regardless of what you think, Mats, it will certainly help - and has started already. I also agree with Charlie that nothing needs to be changed on the technical side - well, at least nothing that stands a chance of being implemented. "The Disagree Drive" is without doubt a wish for extended use of the Disagree function, supported by all of us. The difference is that I do not beleive in the effectiveness in wishing it. I simply propose a mechanism for attaining, but some (like you Ian) do not argue. You prefer to try to insult me.
Mats,
As pointed out by someone earlier, everyone who's posting here seems to have got past Sesame St. level.
You have advocated a change:
To wit, making it impossible to disagree with a disagree.
Nobody agrees with this, as far as I can tell. Nobody.
You refer to other people's "pet projects": this is obviously yours, but nobody's buying it.
I repeat. It's not that they don't understand. They simply don't agree. Perhaps you might benefit from taking a breather and trying to think of something which people do consider "a Good Thing". (1066 et al.)
You have been repeatedly asked to allow everyone to get on with the subject of this thread, namely "encouraging" people to use the Disagree option in the right way and when it's appropriate.
And it's not that they're "trying to insult" you.
They're trying very hard not to insult you; I can assure you.
Andy
P.S. Mats wrote: "Doing nothing will produce nothing"
Shakespeare phrased it rather better:
"Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again"
(Lear to Cordelia)
P.P.S. Mats, forget the "speak again" bit. Pls.
| | | | Mats Wiman
Sweden
Local time: 14:53
Member (2000)
German to Swedish
+ ...
In memoriam | OK I'll leave | Aug 6, 2006 |
I wish you all a happier more goal-oriented discussion.
I obviously have misunderstood what your goal is, Catherine.
| | |
|
|
|
df49f (X)
France
Local time: 14:53
| thanks a million Andy! | Aug 6, 2006 |
Andy Watkinson wrote:
Mats,
As pointed out by someone earlier, everyone who's posting here seems to have got past Sesame St. level.
You have advocated a change:
To wit, making it impossible to disagree with a disagree.
Nobody agrees with this, as far as I can tell. Nobody.
You refer to other people's "pet projects": this is obviously yours, but nobody's buying it.
I repeat. It's not that they don't understand. They simply don't agree. Perhaps you might benefit from taking a breather and trying to think of something which people do consider "a Good Thing". (1066 et al.)
You have been repeatedly asked to allow everyone to get on with the subject of this thread, namely "encouraging" people to use the Disagree option in the right way and when it's appropriate.
And it's not that they're "trying to insult" you.
They're trying very hard not to insult you; I can assure you.
Andy
P.S. Mats wrote: "Doing nothing will produce nothing"
Shakespeare phrased it rather better:
"Nothing will come of nothing. Speak again"
(Lear to Cordelia)
P.P.S. Mats, forget the "speak again" bit. Pls.
THANK YOU Andy!! I was getting blue wasting my breath on trying to get this message through and my tongue is bleeding from biting it to keep from being insulting!!
Now, maybe we can get on with the initial subject of Catherine's thread, at long last!
dominique (relieved to know she's not alone feeling this way )
PS: decided to reproduce your entire post since it really deserves to be read at least twice to make sure the message finally gets through - including and first and foremost your PPS, at least as regards the "ban responses on disagrees" issue - any other constructive suggestion would still be most welcome)
[Edited at 2006-08-06 21:40]
| | | | | Let's agree to disagree (more often) | Aug 6, 2006 |
I am firmly in favour of being more liberal with the red ink when it comes to rating KudoZ responses. On the board that I frequent - the Russian-English - there is, quite bluntly, an awful lot of tosh passed off as valid answers (more than average, I'd hazard) and pressing disagree is one of the few current means of quality control available. It is not a case of being unkind to the answerer, but helpful to the asker, the community at large, and indeed, being true to the principles that serious p... See more I am firmly in favour of being more liberal with the red ink when it comes to rating KudoZ responses. On the board that I frequent - the Russian-English - there is, quite bluntly, an awful lot of tosh passed off as valid answers (more than average, I'd hazard) and pressing disagree is one of the few current means of quality control available. It is not a case of being unkind to the answerer, but helpful to the asker, the community at large, and indeed, being true to the principles that serious professional translators hold dear.
The Russian-English board is, I am guessing, unusual, in that it seems to be inhabited by more Russian native speakers than English ones. This is driven, I guess, by the fact that so many Russian native speakers work into English (a quirk of global economics and 20th/21st century demographics) Many of them are excellent linguists, but even so are still - and I hope the good ones would admit this - rarely in a position to give a more reliable, more intuitive, more idiomatically fluent response than a native English speaker on this pair. Many quite simply should not even be opening their mouths to offer translation solutions for Russian into English and should stick purely to the reverse pair. However what often seems to happen is that you have a "blind leading the blind" syndrome, where a majority of Russian native speakers reinforce each others mistakes, by applauding (ie agreeing) their various mis-translations. At times, the results verge on the Kafka-esque in the absurdity stakes.
So, in short, I will continue to keep my disagree button in overdrive mode, and will continue to be blunt in my comments, whenever I see daft attempts at Runglish on the RU-EN board....
[Edited at 2006-08-07 01:23]
[Edited at 2006-08-07 01:24] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Setting the tone in a language pair | Aug 6, 2006 |
Daniel Brennan wrote:
The Russian-English board is, I am guessing, unusual, in that it seems to be inhabited by more Russian native speakers than English ones. This is driven, I guess, by the fact that so many Russian native speakers work into English (a factor of economics, and 21st century demographics) Many of them are excellent linguists, but even so are still - and I hope the good ones would admit this - rarely in a position to give a more reliable, more intuitive, more idiomatically fluent response than a native English speaker on this pair. Many quite simply should not even be opening their mouths to offer translation solutions for Russian into English and should stick purely to the reverse pair. However what often seems to happen is that you have a "blind leading the blind" syndrome, where a majority of Russian native speakers reinforce each others mistakes, by applauding (ie agreeing) their various mis-translations. At times, the results verge on the Kafka-esque in the absurdity stakes.
Good point, Dan. I understand that things are pretty bad in the Dutch - English pair as well, where, apparently, the tone isn't being set by educated native English speakers but by Dutch folks who seem to think their English is flawless and possibly superior to what most native speakers produce. This pair currently has no moderator.
This isn't the case in the German / English and French / German pairs. In the English to German group, for instance, the educated German natives usually have the last word.
[Edited at 2006-08-06 23:54]
[Edited at 2006-08-07 15:32]
| | | | Linda 969
Local time: 14:53
Italian to English
+ ...
| All for the Drive | Aug 7, 2006 |
I'll definitely start using more of that red ink and hope others do the same. We do need quality control.
As for aggressive responses, the Italian>English board - the only one I'm really familiar with - is very civilized, I don't think we run a serious risk of comment wars as long as the disagree comments are polite and relevant.
Linda
| | |
|
|
|
| Results of this thread | Aug 7, 2006 |
I've found this thread really interesting (not to mention a little bit... ironic).
Linda- While I agree that the IT>EN board is usually pretty polite, I do have to say that the only time I posted a disagree, with a reason, I was sort of leapt upon by the answerer's next response.
Now, I think that if that happens again, I'll just post a link with this thread as a comment!
One suggestion I liked a lot was tick boxes for various types of incorrect answer (for... See more I've found this thread really interesting (not to mention a little bit... ironic).
Linda- While I agree that the IT>EN board is usually pretty polite, I do have to say that the only time I posted a disagree, with a reason, I was sort of leapt upon by the answerer's next response.
Now, I think that if that happens again, I'll just post a link with this thread as a comment!
One suggestion I liked a lot was tick boxes for various types of incorrect answer (formulated by Klaus Herrmann): Not used by target audience, Out of context, Technically wrong, Non-native, Does not exist, Unrelated to question.
Another option to expand the ability to discuss 'wrong' answers or disagreements about terms, instead of using the 'notes to asker' box, might be to automatically create a small forum thread for any disagree, separated from the normal forum, or in a sub-folder of the forum. This might, however, be a bit technically complicated to engineer (I'm not much of a computer person).
Best to all,
Anna ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Rubbish / Disagrees / Brainstorming / Hiding | Aug 7, 2006 |
May I make a suggestion.
This "disagree campaign" wo(uld)n't be effective enough on itw own IMO. I would like to suggest an additional step which I think could work miracles in cutting down on the amount of "rubbish" floating around. My suggestion concerns the hide-my-answer function.
In a nutshell:
Make it more difficult (embarrassing) to hide answers!
(And before resident Mats comes back, it's not about superiority, but seriousness. I think serious ... See more May I make a suggestion.
This "disagree campaign" wo(uld)n't be effective enough on itw own IMO. I would like to suggest an additional step which I think could work miracles in cutting down on the amount of "rubbish" floating around. My suggestion concerns the hide-my-answer function.
In a nutshell:
Make it more difficult (embarrassing) to hide answers!
(And before resident Mats comes back, it's not about superiority, but seriousness. I think serious translators would benefit.)
It often seems to be the "rubbish" (thanks Ian!) contributors who hide their answers as soon as the disagrees arrive. Others, when they see that another answer was chosen. On the other hand, some hide when they see someone else was faster with the same suggestion, or when they realise they've misread/misinterpreted the question. I've hidden answers too. I can even remember childishly doing so on a few occasions mid-question when I simply didn't want to help the uncommunicative asker any more. There are plenty of reasons for hiding and it can be useful, especially when decluttering is the objective.
However, I don't think many of the "serious" translators here would object if answers could not be hidden. (OK, there are always exceptions. So just give us a few jokers. Say, 5 or so a year). We all have limitations and make mistakes (and we overlook things in the KudoZ-heat of the moment), but wrong answers with a disagree or two also help the asker and others. And it is (or should be) also a learning process for answerers. What's wrong with admitting mistakes? A lot of the time we're only brainstorming! If someone points out a weakness in my interpretation, it wakes me up but doesn't embarrass me into hiding my suggestion.
IMO we should not be able hide. Period.
Or if that is too radical a change, then how about at least showing the names of those who have hidden answers and their reasons given (which should also require approval by a moderator)? I suspect that would dissuade many of them from posting in the first place, especially if the "disagree campaign" takes off.
Ciao,
C ▲ Collapse
| | | | langnet
Italy
Local time: 14:53
Italian to German
+ ...
| Results of the thread - a suggestion the other way around | Aug 8, 2006 |
Why not abolish all, i.e. "agree", "neutral", "disagree" substituting these by something like "comment (on) this answer".
Some considerations to support my suggestion:
1) Proz.com is supposed to be a meeting point for professional translators - "newbies" and "old-timers" - though being open to everyone.
2) Being - and calling oneself - a professional translator, to me means being at least familiar with the basics and aware of how to handle information inp... See more Why not abolish all, i.e. "agree", "neutral", "disagree" substituting these by something like "comment (on) this answer".
Some considerations to support my suggestion:
1) Proz.com is supposed to be a meeting point for professional translators - "newbies" and "old-timers" - though being open to everyone.
2) Being - and calling oneself - a professional translator, to me means being at least familiar with the basics and aware of how to handle information inputs given by others. Our job needs a good share of common sense that can't be taught anywhere.
3) Supposing the above, there is no need of the "agree" and "disagree" markers, what matters are the comments on an answer. Every asker is able to read (otherwise s/he wouldn't be able to even post a KudoZ question ) and has to make up his or her own decision. The markers are fine for a quick visual overview for those who know how to handle them, but can lead others with less experience to rather unreflected answer selections.
4) Who cares if the unexperienced asker - or he or she who doesn't bother too much about context and sample sentences when asking - choses the wrong answer (I suppose that experienced translators know their business and how to handle answers)? KudoZ is term help. Do you lack the necessary background expertise and basic verifying skills ("common sense")? Your problem, not ours who have been through to it. Questions with poor context? WYGIWYAF (what you get is what you've asked for, as WYSIWYG ), and YOU have to deliver your translation.
KudoZ is not a teaching course, answerers aren't fortune-tellers with a crystal sphere -> the main problem here in my opinion are the Glossary entries.
5) By abolishing the colour with text markers ("agree", "neutral", "disagree") leaving only the feature "add a peer comment" it would be mandatory for commentators to give reasons. BrowniZ earning would still remain in place (rewarding contribution), but somewhat more "difficult" as you would really have to "earn" them by giving reasons when adding a comment. No simple "agrees" only for BrowniZ grabbing and "disagrees" without justification anymore (or, at least, abusers could be identified in an easier way).
6) By abolishing the colour with text markers, askers would be "forced" to really read through ALL comments posted as they could be either agreeing or disagreeing (or neutral) ones. It also would favour real discussion and enhance the contribution rewarding system.
Only some thoughts on the topic... ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » The Disagree Drive (aka weeding out the rubbish) | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
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 
