Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >
Plus features: Announcing the SecurePRO™ program
Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
Daryo
Daryo
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:28
Serbian to English
+ ...
Where is the real value of this? Dec 9, 2016

Germaine wrote:

Confidentiality and security procedures are part of the ethics and practice of a professional translator. Clients do not expect anything less from us. Some of the procedures suggested are so basics that it brings more shame than honor to highlight them. Besides, all derive from Proz Professional Guildelines most members/users of the site already endorse. And I can't see why a client would accept to pay a premium for the so-called "upon request" procedures, the idea itself being somehow insulting to me.

The information may be educative for some clients/users who don't know what to expect from, or offer as, a professional translator, but in the end, the program, for creating fake value, will probably prove detrimental to members who don't subscribe to it, and what to say of its competition with the "Certified Pro" status - whose translators should be "SecurePro" by definition, shouldn't they?


Couldn't say it better.

The problem is real - communications over the Web are since the beginning of the Web by design not secure, and there is a rather slowish game of catch up going on.

But this proposed solution (SecurePRO™ program) is unconvincing, and what is worse it can create a false sense of security.

If a document is really confidential, make the translator work on client's premises using client's equipment; maybe sounds old-fashioned and not "modern" - but imagining that you will get the same level of protection of data over the Web [without boring you to death with technical details] is simply delusional - too many weak links totally out of control from either client or translator, even if BOTH are enough technically savvy to secure what they can secure at their end!

The only result I can foresee is that those who know little about real dangers can see some false sense of security in this "feature".

As for the "human factor" - a declaration is nothing more than that - a declaration.

Last but not least, before giving tons of personal information to be "verified" to a site based in US, many Europeans might consider first the cavalier standards of "privacy protection" in US compared to Europe.


Jean-Pierre Crespo
shem ageta
 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 12:28
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
On hiding the hide... Dec 9, 2016

Hey folks,

You may be familiar with ProZ.com's guiding principles. As they indicate, it is characteristic of ProZ.com's approach to offer services in such a way that if you are not interested in a particular thing, you can just not use it. Going beyond that, whenever appropriate, the option is provided to opt out, so that you are even less affected. But as point #12 states ("Each site user is given the maximum degr
... See more
Hey folks,

You may be familiar with ProZ.com's guiding principles. As they indicate, it is characteristic of ProZ.com's approach to offer services in such a way that if you are not interested in a particular thing, you can just not use it. Going beyond that, whenever appropriate, the option is provided to opt out, so that you are even less affected. But as point #12 states ("Each site user is given the maximum degree of control over his/her workplace experience. However, recognizing that we share a workplace in which one person's actions may affect another, site users cooperate and compromise as necessary"), it is not always possible to guarantee that a person who chooses not to use a service won't be affected indirectly by it.

Mirko, Fiona, Jenny, I respect your decision not to make any use of the SecurePRO card. But to use an analogy, while happy to accommodate your choice not to go to a party, we don't have a way to prevent those who do go from noticing that you are not there.

In other words, you can opt not to have a SecurePRO™ card, but ultimately, people who look for one are going to see that you don't have one. There is nothing we can do about that, short of not offering the service at all.

Should the program be scrapped? In less than two days, several hundred people have begun to create SecurePRO cards. The ratio of users to opt-outer is 10:1. This is validation, so the program will move forward.

I'll certainly evaluate the idea of not showing the row. For now, I feel that this is a significant program that will warrant inclusion in the standardized section of the profile. But I'll keep any eye on it. We have some time before cards become visible to others.

Thanks for your feedback.
Collapse


shem ageta
 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 12:28
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks, Germaine Dec 9, 2016

Germaine wrote:

Confidentiality and security procedures are part of the ethics and practice of a professional translator. Clients do not expect anything less from us. Some of the procedures suggested are so basics that it brings more shame than honor to highlight them. Besides, all derive from Proz Professional Guildelines most members/users of the site already endorse. And I can't see why a client would accept to pay a premium for the so-called "upon request" procedures, the idea itself being somehow insulting to me.

These are valid points of view, shared by some, and not held by others. These are the sorts of philosophies that people are expressing in their SecurePRO™ cards now. That is the differentiation that I talked about in the introductory video.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 12:28
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Thank, Daryo Dec 9, 2016

Daryo wrote:
The problem is real - communications over the Web are since the beginning of the Web by design not secure, and there is a rather slowish game of catch up going on.

Exactly.

If a document is really confidential, make the translator work on client's premises using client's equipment; maybe sounds old-fashioned and not "modern"

Yes, as I said in the video, this is exactly what is done on the most sensitive projects. This program is for projects in the middle -- where confidentiality matters but there is not such a need that translators must be brought on-site.

but imagining that you will get the same level of protection of data over the Web [without boring you to death with technical details] is simply delusional - too many weak links totally out of control from either client or translator, even if BOTH are enough technically savvy to secure what they can secure at their end!

Right again. This program does not aim to reach the level of confidentiality assurance of on-site work. It proposes to improve upon the status quo of distributed outsourcing.

The only result I can foresee is that those who know little about real dangers can see some false sense of security in this "feature".

This is insightful. Surely we have to guard against giving a false sense of security.

Last but not least, before giving tons of personal information to be "verified" to a site based in US, many Europeans might consider first the cavalier standards of "privacy protection" in US compared to Europe.

ProZ.com privacy policies have been certified (by TRUSTe) for years to meet and exceed European standards.


shem ageta
 
Maggie WAKEFIELD
Maggie WAKEFIELD  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 17:28
French to English
+ ...
How is this VFM? Dec 9, 2016


Seriously, though, do consider that the partners we are using to verify phone numbers, verify addresses and other such data, and the partner we will work with to verify corporate registrations, all charge fees. And don't forget that implementation of all this stuff involves significant development work and therefore costs. If you see value in this work and want to benefit, select the Plus package.


I'm still struggling to understand what value this third-party verification service is adding that makes it worth the cost. I mean, if a new client really feels the need to verify my phone number, all they have to do is ring me on it; takes a few seconds and costs one cent max. The real winners here seem to be the 'partners'...


 
Fiona Grace Peterson
Fiona Grace Peterson  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 17:28
Italian to English
False logic Dec 10, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

In less than two days, several hundred people have begun to create SecurePRO cards. The ratio of users to opt-outer is 10:1. This is validation, so the program will move forward.


Sorry, but this is false logic. Several hundred people have begin to create cards because they have the option to do so as part of the PRO package. Implying that the 10:1 ratio you mention is validation of the Secure Pro program is like saying an increase in visitors to Rome is due to the fact that Francis is Pope. Any increase is possibly due to Bergoglio in part. But that's not the whole story.

You know the old adage about statistica and pizza, right? If I eat two pizzas and you eat none, we've eaten an average of one each. But in reality someone is feeling pretty hungry.


shem ageta
 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 16:28
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Please let us know Dec 10, 2016

I only found out about this thing when absentmindedly browsing through the forums. It made me anxious and sent me off checking my profile to make sure nothing had been changed without my knowledge, or whether there was something I needed to review/change myself.

In future when something is changed that might affect our online presence, I would appreciate it if we paying members could be notified with an email.

[Edited at 2016-12-10 14:24 GMT]


shem ageta
 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 12:28
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
An email will go out Dec 10, 2016

Tom in London wrote:

I only found out about this thing when absentmindedly browsing through the forums. It made me anxious and sent me off checking my profile to make sure nothing had been changed without my knowledge, or whether there was something I needed to review/change myself.

In future when something is changed that might affect our online presence, I would appreciate it if we paying members could be notified with an email.

An email will go out. We normally release in stages. The SecurePRO program has taken shape over the past two years, based on information we hear from site users about trends in the industry. A survey was done around the end of the summer. After a few months of development and third-party selection, a preliminary announcement of the program was done in the CPN forum last week. Adjustments were made based on the feedback, then came this public forum announcement. After we make further improvements (like fixing the bug in phone verification caught by one user), we let everyone know. That way we have some confidence that the program is solid before potentially wasting members' time.

This is fairly typical of our development and release process for major programs.


shem ageta
 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 12:28
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
The program has been well-received Dec 10, 2016

Fiona Grace Peterson wrote:
Henry Dotterer wrote:
In less than two days, several hundred people have begun to create SecurePRO cards. The ratio of users to opt-outer is 10:1. This is validation, so the program will move forward.

Sorry, but this is false logic. Several hundred people have begin to create cards because they have the option to do so as part of the PRO package. Implying that the 10:1 ratio you mention is validation of the Secure Pro program is like saying an increase in visitors to Rome is due to the fact that Francis is Pope. Any increase is possibly due to Bergoglio in part. But that's not the whole story.

You know the old adage about statistica and pizza, right? If I eat two pizzas and you eat none, we've eaten an average of one each. But in reality someone is feeling pretty hungry.

Thanks, Fiona. We count 50+ custom-developed services among the two ProZ.com member service suites. For each service that exists, two or three were tried and abandoned. Consequently, by now I know what validation of a service looks like. This program has been well-received.


shem ageta
 
Katalin Horváth McClure
Katalin Horváth McClure  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 12:28
Member (2002)
English to Hungarian
+ ...
On the party analogy: calling attention to things Dec 12, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

But to use an analogy, while happy to accommodate your choice not to go to a party, we don't have a way to prevent those who do go from noticing that you are not there.


Yeah, some may notice, but if you have a sign up on the wall saying "Here are the people who were invited but decided not to come" that sort of changes things, doesn't it? As you are specifically calling attention to it?

In other words, you can opt not to have a SecurePRO™ card, but ultimately, people who look for one are going to see that you don't have one.

That is true, but if you specifically saying this person doesn't have one, then those who do NOT look for it will also see it, and may think that this person is somewhat less then those who have it. It is especially dangerous, because if the person wasn't looking for this parameter, then he/she probably does not know what it stands for, and may have the wrong impression (i.e. indication of reliability of the person or something).

I'll certainly evaluate the idea of not showing the row.

Please do so. I feel this is the only fair way of handling it, based on the discussions here, and in earlier threads regarding the Standard vs. Plus memberships. Many other rows' visibility can be toggled by the user, and I think this should be one of those. It is a feature, a service that is optional, and not something that should be pointed out if someone does not take advantage of it.


For now, I feel that this is a significant program that will warrant inclusion in the standardized section of the profile.

You did not do anything like this with the "Verified identity", right? That was the correct way of handling it.
Those who have verified their identity, have the little checkmark, but those who did not, simply don't have it next to their name. You do not display any extra text pointing out that this person's identity is unverified, right?

This is exactly the same thing. Those who want it, let them have it and display it, but those who don't want it, should be able to choose a full and complete opt-out, where there is no trace of this feature on their profile. (Just like with TM-town, "what I am workin on" and other optional features.)
Katalin


Jean-Pierre Crespo
 
Georgie Scott
Georgie Scott  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 17:28
French to English
+ ...
Well put Dec 12, 2016

Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:

Henry Dotterer wrote:

But to use an analogy, while happy to accommodate your choice not to go to a party, we don't have a way to prevent those who do go from noticing that you are not there.


Yeah, some may notice, but if you have a sign up on the wall saying "Here are the people who were invited but decided not to come" that sort of changes things, doesn't it? As you are specifically calling attention to it?

In other words, you can opt not to have a SecurePRO™ card, but ultimately, people who look for one are going to see that you don't have one.

That is true, but if you specifically saying this person doesn't have one, then those who do NOT look for it will also see it, and may think that this person is somewhat less then those who have it. It is especially dangerous, because if the person wasn't looking for this parameter, then he/she probably does not know what it stands for, and may have the wrong impression (i.e. indication of reliability of the person or something).

I'll certainly evaluate the idea of not showing the row.

Please do so. I feel this is the only fair way of handling it, based on the discussions here, and in earlier threads regarding the Standard vs. Plus memberships. Many other rows' visibility can be toggled by the user, and I think this should be one of those. It is a feature, a service that is optional, and not something that should be pointed out if someone does not take advantage of it.


For now, I feel that this is a significant program that will warrant inclusion in the standardized section of the profile.

You did not do anything like this with the "Verified identity", right? That was the correct way of handling it.
Those who have verified their identity, have the little checkmark, but those who did not, simply don't have it next to their name. You do not display any extra text pointing out that this person's identity is unverified, right?

This is exactly the same thing. Those who want it, let them have it and display it, but those who don't want it, should be able to choose a full and complete opt-out, where there is no trace of this feature on their profile. (Just like with TM-town, "what I am workin on" and other optional features.)
Katalin


 
Jennifer Forbes
Jennifer Forbes  Identity Verified
Local time: 16:28
French to English
+ ...
In memoriam
Attending the "party" Dec 12, 2016

Thank you, Katalin and Georgie.
Re the "party" analogy, it is not usual at a party to display a notice saying "XXX was invited to attend but declined" - is it?
I believe that most of those who decide not to subscribe to the "Plus Package" do not want this "SecurePRO" line to appear in their profiles at all.


shem ageta
 
Mirko Mainardi
Mirko Mainardi  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 17:28
Member
English to Italian
Differentiation Dec 12, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

Mirko, Fiona, Jenny, I respect your decision not to make any use of the SecurePRO card. But to use an analogy, while happy to accommodate your choice not to go to a party, we don't have a way to prevent those who do go from noticing that you are not there.

In other words, you can opt not to have a SecurePRO™ card, but ultimately, people who look for one are going to see that you don't have one. There is nothing we can do about that, short of not offering the service at all.

Should the program be scrapped? In less than two days, several hundred people have begun to create SecurePRO cards. The ratio of users to opt-outer is 10:1. This is validation, so the program will move forward.

I'll certainly evaluate the idea of not showing the row. For now, I feel that this is a significant program that will warrant inclusion in the standardized section of the profile. But I'll keep any eye on it. We have some time before cards become visible to others.


Shortly after the new membership tier was announced, in addition to writing some (unaddressed) posts about this, I even opened a support ticket, because I kind of knew where this was going (and also felt my "standard" membership would've been "depreciated" as a consequence) despite your reassurances to the contrary. This is the reply I received from Jared about that: "It is also important to point out that, as it stands, there will be no visible difference between the two membership packages on the site, in terms of presentation to clients, membership ribbon, directory advantage, etc., as Henry mentioned in his presentation today. It is all the same membership. One service package will come with additional services and benefits that have not been available before, and so it carries a different price".

Well, as it stands, it turns out the above doesn't really hold and that "visible difference(s) in terms of presentation to clients" are already there (both in profiles AND in the directory search), and they're there because you purposefully decided to introduce them, not because some user did... So, this has little to do with "validation" (and I concur with what Fiona was saying about that), and all to do with the fact this actually goes against what I quoted above.

Furthermore, and linked to that, if "plus" members are going to be marked as "secure"(?), what does that implicitly say about "standard" members, who are excluded from the program (and from directory searches that use the new search options)? The same could be said about the "PRO" badge, but at least in that case each member is free to apply, while that is not the case here.

While I perfectly understand the fact you're trying to entice as many users as possible to transition to the more expensive "plus" tier, I also strongly believe this should not negatively affect (the now) "standard" members as a result. Obviously no problem at all if "plus" members have access to additional features, such as video library, training, CAT tool and other "additional services and benefits", but I think there definitely is quite a big problem if those "additional services and benefits" directly and structurally create an internal competition between members and a different perception of their respective worth/reliability/etc. in the eyes of potential clients. What is happening now is that you are creating a divide which is not so different from the already existing one between paying and non paying users, while you said this wouldn't happen...

In closing, it seems to me this "verification" is a one-off thing (just like when PayPal verifies your account, credit card or documents, when any website you register with verifies your email address, etc.), not a recurring cost, so I find it quite difficult to fathom why it couldn't have been handled differently, as to entirely avoid this issue (even considering the associated "verification" costs...).
Just to make an example, what happens if a "plus" member gets verified and then decides to switch to "standard" the following year? Will their "securepro™" verification be revoked, although they are in fact "verified" for all intents and purposes? (BTW, this could be a way to go about it, although I don't particularly like it...)


Jean-Pierre Crespo
 
Angie Garbarino
Angie Garbarino  Identity Verified
Local time: 17:28
Member (2003)
French to Italian
+ ...
At the risk of being insulted Dec 12, 2016

I would like to share my opinion:

For those who are afraid that "standard" members are excluded from directory searches that use the new search options, why don't you pay for plus membership?

It is a very small difference, I can understand that for someone living in a developing country could be an important amount, but strange enough I see complains coming from colleagues living in Western Europe or in the USA.

Please... do not tell me that this is a pro
... See more
I would like to share my opinion:

For those who are afraid that "standard" members are excluded from directory searches that use the new search options, why don't you pay for plus membership?

It is a very small difference, I can understand that for someone living in a developing country could be an important amount, but strange enough I see complains coming from colleagues living in Western Europe or in the USA.

Please... do not tell me that this is a problem for you.
40 dollars per year? With this sum I (and those living in Western Europe) don't even buy food for 3 days.


Have a nice day!

Edited for typo

[Edited at 2016-12-12 13:56 GMT]
Collapse


 
Maija Cirule
Maija Cirule  Identity Verified
Latvia
Local time: 18:28
German to English
+ ...
My point exactly Dec 12, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:

I would like to share my opinion:

For those who are afraid that "standard" members are excluded from directory searches that use the new search options, why don't you pay for plus membership?

It is a very small difference, I can understand that for someone living in a developing country could be an important amount, but strange enough I see complains coming from colleagues living in Western Europe or in the USA.

Please... do not tell me that this is a problem for you.
40 dollars per year? With this sum I (and those living in Western Europe) don't even buy food for 3 days.


Have a nice day!

Edited for typo

[Edited at 2016-12-12 13:56 GMT]

If the additional amount were 400 or 4000 bucks per year, I would understand what the fuss is all about ...


 
Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >


To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator:


You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request »

Plus features: Announcing the SecurePRO™ program






Trados Business Manager Lite
Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio

Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.

More info »
CafeTran Espresso
You've never met a CAT tool this clever!

Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer. Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools. Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free

Buy now! »