I've had a rather unfair review lately. I sent a re-review request, and it came back with the same results with the same comment that the reviewer just prefers it that way and doesn't prefer mine. It's not even an error according to Gengo's guidelines. I used to be able to dispute a re-review request by sending for support and they would help me by consulting another language specialist. Apparently, that's just not happening anymore and reviewers have the ultimate power. Support refused to help and said that it was final and they couldn't do anything for me. I have been working with Gengo for more than 3 years, and every time I disputed a re-review and consulted a specialist, I came out right and my score would be adjusted, that's how I got my fair share of 10 scores. I don't know what makes it different this time around. It's not fair for a reviewer to claim that their preference is right and mine is wrong.


  • 3
    Rica Tero

    Hi @Esraa! 😊

    Thank you for sharing your concern here in the forum. You can still dispute a re-review result. However, the only way to do it is to email GengoQualityTeam@lionbridge.com within one week, using ‘Job ID#___________’ in the subject line. Please include the following information in your message:

    1. The section of the source text containing the error that you are disputing
    2. The corresponding section of the translation
    3. Proof and precise explanation (max 100 words in English)

    The Quality Team will review the information you provided and respond within 12 days, but please note that this will not necessarily change the outcome of the situation. You can read more details about re-review requests in this support article or forum post by the Quality team.

    Also, please email me at v-Rica.Tero@lionbridge.com with some details of your re-review request job IDs and/or support tickets so I can further look into it. Thank you! 💗

    Rica Teroにより編集されました
  • 2

    Hello Rica,

    Thank you so much for your response and interest. I followed your advice and sent both emails, one to the Gengo quality team and the other to you. I appreciate your help so much. As I mentioned before, it's not the first time a reviewer was mistaken with my review, so saying it's final is really frustrating. Again, thank you so much.

  • 4

    The whole system has become a sham. It used to be that at least the RSS feed system was the only thing that seemed to work flawlessly, so at least we had that. But now, they've completely destroyed that too and now, all we get is nostalgic memories of when Gengo was a platform that was worth your while. But it seems like those times are gone for good. The re-review system has been a joke for like the past couple of years (for the reasons you mentioned in your post) and the reality is that Gengo is a place where translators are the only ones in the chain that are subject to scrutiny and virtually no one else has to face the same accountability as we do. I'm not saying we shouldn't be. I understand why it has to be that way, given the way the system is built, but all I'm saying is that everyone in the chain be subject to the same standards and be held accountable for long-term sub-par performance, as us translators are expected to be from day one.


    Furthermore, I wrote several very lengthy responses to the last annual survey detailing ways to help solve this or at least improve the current (failed) system, but as we all know, nothing seems to have been done about it (if anything, things are looking to be heading in the wrong direction as the months pass by), or to take any form of action to even try to address the issues. And why that's not only in our best interest (that is, us translators), but also in the company's best interest as a whole, and how they'll only deter those of us who make an effort to go the extra mile and deliver quality work, but will instead attract sub-par employees who don't really care about it and just want to spew out sub-par work for sub-par pay and treatment. In the end, the reality is that we're treated like disposable cattle, and a lot of us just end up looking to take our hard work someplace else where they will value it a bit more and understand the importance of valuing quality employees who deliver quality work, and how it cycles and improves the chain for everyone. 

  • 8

    I remember back when Gengo was still myGengo, a reviewer would e-mail me, pointing out the errors in my translation while providing detailed explanations as to why they are wrong, and giving examples of correct translations. Besides, they would include useful resources to help me find appropriate glossaries and terms. Sometimes they would also point out my strength and give me words of encouragement. Those reviews were extremely helpful when I first started as a translator.

    Those days are long gone. I can't speak for all Gengo translators, but personally I find in recent years many of the reviews seem arbitrary and sometimes even mean-spirited. Once in a while, after submitting the re-review repeatedly, citing credible examples, the reviewer still would not budge even when they have made a mistake, and they are not obliged to explain their reasons. I have suggested in previous surveys that reviewers should also be required to include credible sources when marking errors, to no avail. Nowadays I can hardly learn anything from the review process and improve, and every time an e-mail with "Gengo Job #___ reviewed" appears in my inbox, it brings up a sense of dread in me.