Hello fellow translators,
I wanted to see if there are others who have seen similar results or have had similar experiences with your overall translator score. I just got a review that was marked as 7.40/10.00, resulting in my overall score to go down 0.4 points. Which means that I went from 9.3 to 8.9 in my overall score. And in turn, when I get job reviews with 10/10, most of the time I barely see any improvement and sometimes any movement at all, for that matter, on my score.
I can't begin to tell you how long and how many 10/10 job reviews it took to get to my 9.3 score, all for a single review to bump it down 0.4 points! Heck, with a 0.4 reduction on my score, you'd think I committed some gross violations or got a 3 or lower job review. I ask, how is that fair? Have you guys had similar experiences? It'll probably take me months (if that) to restore it back to where it was, and that's assuming I don't get hit by a similarly unfair job review. How is it that it takes us months to climb up the ladder of the scores, and it takes just one moderately rated job review to fall back so quickly, in just one full sweep? Again, how is that fair or logical?
Needless to say, I did submit a re-review request because I thought the LS did a poor job marking errors (they basically marked everything as a medium grade error, which severely impacts the final score) when in reality every error had very different grades of error, and in a couple of instances, the tools the LS's have, such as offering suggestions without marking them as errors, weren't employed. I don't need to tell you how much higher the final score had been if the LS had done a proper job with how they marked the errors. But we all know how it goes, we go through all the trouble of submitting a re-review and do the research to back up our claims, only to be met with the same answer: that it all comes down to what the LS thinks is "correct", no matter what or how good our sources and claims are.
And don't get me wrong, I have more than 58,000 completed jobs on Gengo, so this isn't new to me, and I've had my fair share of job reviews.
I really don't see how the recent changes in how translator scores are set were in any way beneficial to us, even though that's mainly how they sold the new changes to us.
It really gets tiring. Gengo ought to pay for therapy for translators, just based on how much frustration and stress their whole review system creates, and that's leaving out all the time and effort one has to invest defending what shouldn't have been marked as errors in the first place.
Thanks for your time.
Hi Fernando, I agree with you that instead of marking "errors" it would often be appropriate for the LS to make a suggestion. Psychologically, I would be so much easier for us translators to listen to them and respect them, because respect should be mutual. Very often it is only a matter of taste. I believe I said something like that before in the forum.
I agree with you Heike, thanks for your input.
I can't even find the energy to submit the re-review when in EN-ESMX they correct things like "spirits" as "bebidas alcohólicas" when what follows is clearly a list of bebidas espirituosas, like the Mexican government calls tequila and mezcal.
@Val I know!! You're totally spot-on with the issues that I'm having as well. I also just find it so draining to have to deal with this, and just as you say, what they mark as errors just goes into the highly subjective territory, and it just comes across as the LSs trying to come up with any excuse to mark anything as an error. I don't know if they teach them that they don't have to mark errors no matter what, but it seems like they don't emphasize that enough and the LSs end up thinking that that's their job. Furthermore, I personally have also been having the most issues with the Mexican Spanish LSs, I seriously don't know what's their problem. So frustrating...
I wish there was a way to get in touch so that we could come up with solutions or bond over at the very least...
Anyway, as follow-up: I did end up sending a re-review request and to no one's surprise, they ended up getting back to me with the same old and nothing changed, nor they provided any solid evidence to back their claims. Their "sources" always comes down to: "If I say so, then it must be correct." Which leads me to another issue: LSs should be required to provide solid and trustful resources to back their claims when translators request re-reviews and we get told that it's still wrong and they won't be reverting those particular errors. If we're asked to, why not them? It can't be left to their whims and subjective views and estimations.