| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Blue Board Blackmail Thread poster: sarahbenson
|
|---|
sarahbenson 
Local time: 05:27
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Take it off or we wont pay | Jul 26, 2012 |
As it stands I haven't taken my remark down though they say they won't pay as a result as they claim I have unneccesarily damaged their reputation. I sent them an extract of the Proz rules that state entries and non payment reports may be edited after payment has been received but as it stands they are refusing to pay.
| | | |
I expect this agency to be banned soon by Proz staff. It has forfeited its right to use this site for job posting.
| | | | Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 00:27
Spanish to English
+ ...
| I myself could not agree more... | Jul 26, 2012 |
Christel Zipfel wrote: Natalie wrote:
"I will remove/edit my entry immediately upon the receipt of the payment".
Natalia
the more coming from a mod. Such a behaviour would cleary nullify the whole purpose of the BB, like others have pointed out. But like Peter says, it would be a good tactic to say so in order to get the money and NOT to do it after they eventually paid. I think you won't continue to work for them anyway, so you have nothing to lose by doing so. Good luck! [Bearbeitet am 2012-07-26 13:56 GMT]
...with the above comment, and with the other strongly expressed disagreements with the suggestion offered by the moderator.
[Edited at 2012-07-26 15:15 GMT]
| | | | Rodion Shein
Russian Federation
Local time: 07:27
English to Russian
+ ...
I believe it makes sense to treat BB grade (LWA) and BB comment as two separate things: you can change your comment according to the issue status (paid, not paid, resolved somehow or another, etc.), while leaving the initial LWA. I always warn an outsourcer that LWA won't be changed, even if they pay; however, my BB comment will show the actual situation. I think it's quite logical that the likelyhood of my further cooperation with the troublemaker is fairly low, regardless of the payment status... See more I believe it makes sense to treat BB grade (LWA) and BB comment as two separate things: you can change your comment according to the issue status (paid, not paid, resolved somehow or another, etc.), while leaving the initial LWA. I always warn an outsourcer that LWA won't be changed, even if they pay; however, my BB comment will show the actual situation. I think it's quite logical that the likelyhood of my further cooperation with the troublemaker is fairly low, regardless of the payment status.
Tom in London wrote:
This once happened to me. I said "OK I'll change my entry as soon as I receive payment into my account". I then changed my BB comment to report exactly what had happened. Unfortunately after that, the outsourcer managed to persuade Proz to get my comment removed.
Tom, did you ask the site staff what the reasons for removal were? Perhaps, if the staff could investigate your position a bit deeper, you would have your entry reinstated. Actually, the only reason for removal is violation of ProZ.com rules: if your entry is in line with them, there's no way to get the comment removed. Thus, it's a good idea to request the reasons for removal and provide your counter evidence (e.g. the outsourcer might cheat or provide some false info or misinterpretation). ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Robert Forstag
United States
Local time: 00:27
Spanish to English
+ ...
| Modifying the system in this way would make a good deal of sense | Jul 26, 2012 |
Rodion Shein wrote: I believe it makes sense to treat BB grade (LWA) and BB comment as two separate things: you can change your comment according to the issue status (paid, not paid, resolved somehow or another, etc.), while leaving the initial LWA. I always warn an outsourcer that LWA won't be changed, even if they pay; however, my BB comment will show the actual situation. I think it's quite logical that the likelyhood of my further cooperation with the troublemaker is fairly low, regardless of the payment status. Tom in London wrote:
This once happened to me. I said "OK I'll change my entry as soon as I receive payment into my account". I then changed my BB comment to report exactly what had happened. Unfortunately after that, the outsourcer managed to persuade Proz to get my comment removed. Tom, did you ask the site staff what the reasons for removal were? Perhaps, if the staff could investigate your position a bit deeper, you would have your entry reinstated. Actually, the only reason for removal is violation of ProZ.com rules: if your entry is in line with them, there's no way to get the comment removed. Thus, it's a good idea to request the reasons for removal and provide your counter evidence (e.g. the outsourcer might cheat or provide some false info or misinterpretation).
***
I myself was about to make this same suggestion last night. It makes a great deal of sense to me.
This would avoid trade-offs and blackmailing and (at least ideally) might get outsourcers to address problem situations BEFORE BB ratings and comments are posted.
If outsourcers who have behaved poorly want to redeem themselves, they can treat their future collaborators better, but ratings reflecting poor past behavior should not be erased because agencies have suddenly been stirred into action in order to erase a negative BB rating. By allowing deletions of previous ratings and comments, this site in fact encourages the kinds of trade-offs that detract from the value of the BB.
If the kind of change that Rodion and I advocate is adopted, then the site could introduce the following questions whenever a low rating is entered:
If the low rating is due to payment, have you attempted to resolve the matter with the agency? (YES or NO)
If the answer to above is YES, then how many attempts have you made to secure payment? 1 2 3 4 or more
If the answer to the first question is "no," or if the answer to the second question is only "1", then the responder would receive a message telling him or her to make efforts to resolve the non-payment issue prior to making a BB entry.
[Edited at 2012-07-26 19:37 GMT]
| | | | Ildiko Santana
United States
Local time: 21:27
Member (2002)
Hungarian to English
+ ...
MODERATOR | Blue Board Blackmail should be strictly prohibited | Jul 27, 2012 |
I am in full agreement with those of you who strongly oppose both the attempts at this sort of blackmail and the acceptance thereof. As per Blue Board Rule #8,
"Attempting to influence another's use of the Blue Board is prohibited. Exerting pressure on someone to change a Blue Board entry or reply, or to make a new entry or reply of a specific nature, is forbidden."
Use of the Blue Board for any purpose (getting paid, looking good, hiding unp... See more I am in full agreement with those of you who strongly oppose both the attempts at this sort of blackmail and the acceptance thereof. As per Blue Board Rule #8,
"Attempting to influence another's use of the Blue Board is prohibited. Exerting pressure on someone to change a Blue Board entry or reply, or to make a new entry or reply of a specific nature, is forbidden."
Use of the Blue Board for any purpose (getting paid, looking good, hiding unprofessional conduct, gaining unfair advantage, etc.) other than what it is intended for should be prohibited. See Rule #1:
"The ProZ.com Blue Board is provided as a resource for referencing outsourcers of translation, interpreting and other language-related work, and for expressing willingness to work again with given outsourcers. Use of the Blue Board for other purposes is not permitted."
What really baffles me is why on earth would anyone purposely *mislead* their colleagues and lie about a client who should be *avoided* for unprofessional conduct and, even more puzzling, why would anyone want to *continue* to work for such shady client?!
Jacqueline Sieben wrote:
I expect this agency to be banned soon by Proz staff. It has forfeited its right to use this site for job posting.
I find your expectation very reasonable, Jacqueline. I have received two such requests so far from clients who had failed to comply with our contractual terms and complete payments on time, also ignoring my reminders, and for whom I have left negative Blue Board entries. One asked me to edit my comments, the other asked me to retract my entry. Both times I refused to cooperate. Just as much as they cannot undo their breach of our contract, I cannot undo my resulting opinion that I am *not* willing to work for them again. The second time, where the client was especially nasty and tried to prove that their late payment was actually my fault (!) I reported the outsourcer to ProZ.com staff. Because our Forum rules disallow any discussion of moderators' conduct and/or (lack of) action, I will not discuss it but simply quote below exactly what has been done in this case:
On a happy note, my Blue Board entries are still there and hopefully save at least a few colleagues from getting burned. ▲ Collapse
| | | | sarahbenson
Local time: 05:27
Portuguese to English
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Payment Received | Aug 2, 2012 |
I have received payment from the company and have altered my comment on the Blue Board to acknowledge this. My LWA remains unchanged however.
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:27
Member (2008)
Italian to English
sarahbenson wrote:
I have received payment from the company and have altered my comment on the Blue Board to acknowledge this. My LWA remains unchanged however.
Hmm. I hope it remains clear what you had to go through to get paid, and that you didn't enter into a Faustian pact with the company. That's what I hope.
| | |
|
|
|
| what prompted them to pay? | Aug 2, 2012 |
sarahbenson wrote:
I have received payment from the company and have altered my comment on the Blue Board to acknowledge this. My LWA remains unchanged however.
Is there anything in particular that you did that made them pay you - I assume everything they owed you? And I take it you didn't promise them anything regarding changing your BB entry?
B
[Edited at 2012-08-02 17:05 GMT]
| | | | | What matters is.... | Aug 2, 2012 |
....that outsourcers take the Blueboard VERY SERIOUSLY! This is very good news indeed, and makes the Blueboard work to our protection from dubious business practices or, if we are really soft about it, sheer carelessness about payment practices.
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:27
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
This is very good news indeed...
Is it? We don't know, yet, how Sarah modified her BB entry, and why.
| | | | | Taking my words out of context? | Aug 2, 2012 |
Tom in London wrote: Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
This is very good news indeed... Is it? We don't know, yet, how Sarah modified her BB entry, and why.
What I meant to say that was good news is that outsourcers take the BB very seriously.
| | |
|
|
|
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:27
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote: Tom in London wrote: Tomás Cano Binder, CT wrote:
This is very good news indeed... Is it? We don't know, yet, how Sarah modified her BB entry, and why. What I meant to say that was good news is that outsourcers take the BB very seriously.
I know what you meant to say, and I agree with you. But in this case, the news is not good news until we know whether there was some sort of agreement that resulted in the outsourcer ending up with a favourable BB entry. That would NOT be good news
[Edited at 2012-08-02 17:54 GMT]
| | | | | Trusting our colleagues judgement | Aug 2, 2012 |
Tom in London wrote:
I know what you meant to say, and I agree with you. But in this case, the news is not good news until we know whether there was some sort of agreement that resulted in the outsourcer ending up with a favourable BB entry. That would NOT be good news
I honestly can't know about that since I am no part in the matter at hand other than being a fellow translator. Whatever our colleague has decided and whatever the reasons may be are both things I will not question.
| | | | Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 05:27
Member (2008)
Italian to English
See Thayenga's post above. "That's what they're waiting for". It's very important that an outsourcer who has failed to pay is recorded in the BB as having failed to pay - it would defeat the purpose of the BB if a non-paying outsourcer agreed to pay on condition that a previous BB notification of their failure to pay were removed, or a negative rating changed to a positive one.
[Edited at 2012-08-02 19:05 GMT]
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Blue Board Blackmail | 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! » |
| | 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 
