Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10] >
Plus features: Announcing the SecurePRO™ program
Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
Mirko Mainardi
Mirko Mainardi  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 22:12
Member
English to Italian
Principle 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 sume I (and those living in Western Europe) don't even buy food for 3 days.



Speaking for myself (obviously), it's a matter of principle. As I wrote before (also quoting Jared's words), we were explicitly told there would be no visible differentiation between the two tiers, while now it's there. I already see a problem with that, you don't, ok...

Secondly, even if that was not an issue (and I think it is), what you suggest is that, in order not to risk being suddenly seen as a "2nd class" and/or "not safe/secure" member by potential clients, I should just shut up and pay more, even though my identity is already verified, I already have feedback, etc. and even though I don't really have any use for (yet) another CAT tool, videos, etc. (which supposedly is the main reason why you're paying more). Does that really make any sense?

Thirdly, the details about what was going to happen exactly have been withheld when the new tier was presented and during the subscription campaign, while we were told what I quoted above (although the various features have been in the works for a long time, based on what Henry wrote here and elsewhere).


Jean-Pierre Crespo
 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 21:12
Member (2008)
Italian to English
That's the idea Dec 12, 2016

Mirko Mainardi wrote:

....., in order not to risk being suddenly seen as a "2nd class" and/or "not safe/secure" member by potential clients, I should just shut up and pay more....


That's the idea. It's standard marketing practice to offer customers a "choice" so that they feel they are in control (of paying more).


 
Fiona Grace Peterson
Fiona Grace Peterson  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 22:12
Italian to English
@Angie Dec 12, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:

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?



Because I don't see the point of paying an extra fifty dollars for services that don't remotely interest me. In the true spirit of consumerism, ProZ has rolled out this new package and has convinced us that we need everything it contains. Apart from the fact that this is simply a DECLARATION on the part of those who have opted-in - Proz does not actually check these declarations correspond to what an LSP actually offers.

Angie Garbarino wrote:
It is a very small difference


You're right. But I don't think anyone here is taking issue with the cost. What they ARE taking issue with is ProZ subtly twisting peoples' arms to get them to spend more, with the implication that they do not have sufficient security mechanisms in place and are somehow "lesser" professionals than those who have simply spent more.


Jean-Pierre Crespo
 
Georgie Scott
Georgie Scott  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 22:12
French to English
+ ...
Seconded Dec 12, 2016

Mirko Mainardi wrote:

Angie Garbarino wrote:

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



Speaking for myself (obviously), it's a matter of principle. As I wrote before (also quoting Jared's words), we were explicitly told there would be no visible differentiation between the two tiers, while now it's there. I already see a problem with that, you don't, ok...

Secondly, even if that was not an issue (and I think it is), what you suggest is that, in order not to risk being suddenly seen as a "2nd class" and/or "not safe/secure" member by potential clients, I should just shut up and pay more, even though my identity is already verified, I already have feedback, etc. and even though I don't really have any use for (yet) another CAT tool, videos, etc. (which supposedly is the main reason why you're paying more). Does that really make any sense?

Thirdly, the details about what was going to happen exactly have been withheld when the new tier was presented and during the subscription campaign, while we were told what I quoted above (although the various features have been in the works for a long time, based on what Henry wrote here and elsewhere).


Also, 40 dollars is not an insignificant sum of money.


 
Angie Garbarino
Angie Garbarino  Identity Verified
Local time: 22:12
Member (2003)
French to Italian
+ ...
Ok I shared my opinion Dec 12, 2016

That's all,

Also 40 dollars in not an insignificant sum of money

If 40 dollars PER YEAR is not an insignificant sum for any of you, then I apologize.



[Edited at 2016-12-12 15:41 GMT]


 
writeaway
writeaway  Identity Verified
French to English
+ ...
Scared of being included, not of being excluded Dec 12, 2016

Proz is a commercial, for-profit website open to any and all. It sells services, products etc. On a the-more-you-pay, the-more-you-get basis. Just like any business/going concern.
We've seen the "PRO" product, where those who pay (and are deemed to be acceptable site citizens) are allowed to sport the Proz "PRO" badge. It has no official recognition off the site but allows people with it to stand out on various lists (the red P is hard to miss). They also have other perks, like access to t
... See more
Proz is a commercial, for-profit website open to any and all. It sells services, products etc. On a the-more-you-pay, the-more-you-get basis. Just like any business/going concern.
We've seen the "PRO" product, where those who pay (and are deemed to be acceptable site citizens) are allowed to sport the Proz "PRO" badge. It has no official recognition off the site but allows people with it to stand out on various lists (the red P is hard to miss). They also have other perks, like access to the members-only PRO forum, where they are treated as valued members. That's fine - it's business and businesses need to attract and hang onto customers.
BUT
Imo, this latest "offer" goes way beyond anything that goes with a commercial website. By what authority does Proz feel they are entitled to sell/offer security of any kind, to post our names, phone numbers, nationalities etc. For whom? I find this abusive and extremely invasive. Proz is going to verify citizenship? How -by everyone dutifully and cheerfully sending in copies of their passports/birth certificates? And Proz plans to store all this personal data where? Or will it just be sold on or used to attract advertisers? All this has little or nothing to do with translation but a lot to do with keeping a file on customers: loyal, more loyal and most loyal of all.
This is fine for those who want to join and revel in being part of it all, but I agree with others who want to opt out but without being stigmatized for doing so. I've been on Proz since 2002, have paid for membership since 2003 but I am definitely not buying into any of this.
Collapse


Jean-Pierre Crespo
 
Angie Garbarino
Angie Garbarino  Identity Verified
Local time: 22:12
Member (2003)
French to Italian
+ ...
mmm do you use paypal? Dec 12, 2016

writeaway wrote:
Proz is going to verify citizenship? How -by everyone dutifully and cheerfully sending in copies of their passports/birth certificates? And Proz plans to store all this personal data where? Or will it just be sold on or used to attract advertisers?


Paypal verifies, address, citizenship and so on.. by sending passports etc. Can you specify what is the difference if any?

I perceive this feature as protective, not invasive.

BTW do you really think that your data are safe nowadays?



[Edited at 2016-12-12 15:48 GMT]


 
Georgie Scott
Georgie Scott  Identity Verified
France
Local time: 22:12
French to English
+ ...
Even PER YEAR Dec 12, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:

That's all,

Also 40 dollars in not an insignificant sum of money

If 40 dollars PER YEAR is not an insignificant sum for any of you, then I apologize.



[Edited at 2016-12-12 15:41 GMT]


I understood your post and the Proz terms and conditions the first time.

Proz membership is just one of many things I pay for on a yearly basis.

And 40 dollars will always be a lot to pay for something I consider useless and don't believe in.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 17:12
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
The Standard package is a valid choice! Dec 12, 2016

Fiona Grace Peterson wrote:

I don't see the point of paying an extra fifty dollars for services that don't remotely interest me...

... I don't think anyone here is taking issue with the cost. What they ARE taking issue with is ProZ subtly twisting peoples' arms to get them to spend more...

Hi Fiona. Thanks again for your membership, which, let there be no mistake: we value! Without you all as members, there is no ProZ.com!

Now, here is what I would like to say to you and others in your position:

You are not interested in SecurePRO. No problem!

Apart from the SecurePRO program, it may be that you have looked in detail at each of the items in the Plus package and decided that nothing else in it sounds that interesting, either. You have considered the Plus video library, the CafeTran CAT tool, integration of real-time communications (priority messages and the "call me" button), dynamic widgets for inclusion in personal websites, the development work and partnership we have entered into to generate external opportunities for interpreters, "ProZ Talks", and the features yet to be released (such as TM-Town membership). You may have looked at all of this, and none of it interests you.

Guess what? We have no problem with that! Not only do we have no problem with your choice, giving you this choice was the whole point of the way we have split the services out into two packages.

You see, each of these new Plus services costs money. They did not fit into the standard package, given the price. So we made a new, more expensive package, but ONLY FOR THOSE INTERESTED IN THESE SERVICES.

What we see is that about one-third of those joining for the first time, or coming up for renewal, are choosing the Plus package. This is more than I expected. So I am already happy with the way it has turned out.

So no twisting of arms. Far from it. In fact, we reduced the price of the Standard package. That's not what you would do if you wanted to encourage people to choose the other package.

In short, we are delighted to have you as a member, no matter which package you choose. For us, a member is a member is a member.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 17:12
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Responses to Mirko Dec 12, 2016

Mirko Mainardi wrote:
Differentiation

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)

What Jared said was true then, and it is true now.

Can you tell which people in this thread selected the Plus package, and which selected the Standard? I can't. (Except by inference from their postings.) Neither can a client. Can't tell here, can't tell in the directory.

Same with the SecurePRO cards. Anyone can have one, there is no difference there.

So what is the "differentiation", exactly, that you are upset about?

Is it that a Plus subscriber gets to make use of a third-party service to obtain verification of certain identity-related information? They have paid an extra fee, in part to cover the fees charged by those services. You may not want the Plus package, but do you begrudge others the right to choose to pay for this sort of service, which some clients may appreciate and make use of?

Is it that a person who has purchased the Plus package may be more likely to be found by a client who is searching by a field that could have been verified under such circumstances? If it is that, my question to you would be: how can we accommodate the interests of those who see value in providing a bit more data in their profile, and those who choose to search by that data, without having that sort of differentiation? Do you have a way?

This is why the party analogy is relevant. It is one thing to choose not to go. ("No problem.") It is another to demand no one know you didn't go. ("Hah, wish we could.") And it is still another thing to demand that the party be cancelled altogether. ("Sorry, no.")

While I perfectly understand the fact you're trying to entice as many users as possible to transition to the more expensive "plus" tier

It is true that we're trying to build tremendous value into the Plus package. I might even accept "entice". But we are definitely not trying to "coerce".

If it matters, I consider it likely that we will lose money on Plus subscriptions entered into at $149 or even $159, whereas we earn money on Standard packages, even at the recently-reduced price.

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

Are you sure it is "no problem at all" to you? It seems to me that there is a logical disconnect. You don't mind they having access to additional features, but you do mind if they use them and doing so has an effect in the real world.

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...

And that is where the problem comes in. Read what Jared wrote. Read what I am writing now. We are not coercing, not twisting arms. We are, however, offering a new service. These are not imaginary services, but real services, with real effects.

No one ever said that becoming a Plus subscriber would have no effect. That wouldn't make any sense. There is a difference between Plus subscribers and those who are not Plus subscribers: Plus subscribers have access to Plus-only services, some of which it will stand to reason, they will use. So in that sense, there IS AND MUST BE a "divide".

Do you have a problem with a Plus subscriber receiving a call from a potential client? Do you have a problem with a Plus subscriber using CafeTran to work more efficiently? Do you have a problem with a Plus subscriber learning something from a ProZ Talk? All of this could in theory make them more competitive and therefore affect you indirectly.

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...).

This observation is insightful. Indeed, the fact that verification can be done once and then relied on for some period of time (not infinite, but anyway) is significant; this should factor into the thinking. But you find it "difficult to fathom" why there would be a new service option, with higher costs? Really? I can help you there, it is quite simple. Imagine that you want to introduce the services that we have introduced in the Plus package, including this one. Go get quotes for real-time telephony, a full-featured desktop CAT tool, verification of identities, verification of businesses, commissions to video creators, other costs, and of course most significantly, the development costs to implement all of this and maintain it over time. Just picture getting those bills and having to pay for them. Can you fathom it now? Necessity is the mother of invention!

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...)

This is a great question, and it really gets to the heart of the matter. We have not discussed this internally. Just thinking about it now, I tend to think that we would/should continue to show the verification for as long as it is pertinent. (At some point certain data, like home address, can become outdated.) That is, provided we can afford to do that. I would not anticipate a problem there, because once you have the data and the scale the server costs are not too bad (although you might be surprised how many members it takes to just cover our two data center and systems administrators), but to be on the safe side I would acknowledge that there does have to be an underlying business model. Some of you know that the ATA, for example (last I knew, anyway), would not verify the credentials of a person who had passed their test but is no longer a paying member. Maybe they have to. I would like to think we could do better than that, though.

Now, with all due respect, Mirko, you have made repeated statements referring to the fact that I have not personally responded to your postings. Please understand that I can not and will not be responding to every posting. Furthermore, I did ask at the start of this thread that those participating in this thread limit themselves to one or two postings. This is so that no one person drowns out other discussion. I would appreciate your consideration of that request.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 17:12
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Tom Dec 12, 2016

Tom in London wrote:
That's the idea. It's standard marketing practice to offer customers a "choice" so that they feel they are in control (of paying more).

The other possibility, of course, is that you are actually offering options.

I think restaurants do that.


 
writeaway
writeaway  Identity Verified
French to English
+ ...
Paypal is governed by banking laws Dec 12, 2016

Angie Garbarino wrote:

writeaway wrote:
Proz is going to verify citizenship? How -by everyone dutifully and cheerfully sending in copies of their passports/birth certificates? And Proz plans to store all this personal data where? Or will it just be sold on or used to attract advertisers?


Paypal verifies, address, citizenship and so on.. by sending passports etc. Can you specify what is the difference if any?

I perceive this feature as protective, not invasive.

BTW do you really think that your data are safe nowadays?



[Edited at 2016-12-12 15:48 GMT]
'

Afaik, Paypal only requested my bank details and my name. And a phone number for security. But Paypal is governed by banking laws and it is hardly the same thing as a commercial website like Proz, which is governed by......?
Everywhere can be hacked nowadays so I agree, data is not safe anywhere. But if I play in busy traffic, chances are I'll get hit by a vehicle. But if I don't do that, those chances decrease quite a bit. It's still a free market system. The "offer" is there for those who want it but no one should be forced into taking it or be stigmatized in any way for turning it down.


 
sindy cremer
sindy cremer
Member (2008)
English to Dutch
+ ...
@ Henry Dec 12, 2016

According to the video, the purpose of the programme is to “better assure confidentiality in translation.” Call me a skeptic, but I sincerely doubt that PROZ is going to be able to give that assurance. A third-party verifier may be able to verify some personal details, but Henry, how are you going to verify that the statements on the flip-side of the SecurePRO™ card are actually true, and even if they are true, that they are being upheld? We know for a fact that you haven’t been able to ... See more
According to the video, the purpose of the programme is to “better assure confidentiality in translation.” Call me a skeptic, but I sincerely doubt that PROZ is going to be able to give that assurance. A third-party verifier may be able to verify some personal details, but Henry, how are you going to verify that the statements on the flip-side of the SecurePRO™ card are actually true, and even if they are true, that they are being upheld? We know for a fact that you haven’t been able to provide such assurance for native language, specialisation, background, etc. Why would this be any different for the SecurePRO™ card?

I am also wondering why PROZ makes such a claim, even though it is not an accredited institution? I mean, you already overstepped your authority by issuing Ps, but this is actually about a serious topic such as confidentiality. Can you state that you are not overstepping your boundaries as a website of translators here?

I must admit that I was appalled by how little concrete information you were able to give in your video presentation about a programme that has already gone live. That you were not able to say anything about the verification process, what companies you are looking at for its implementation, how you will be guaranteeing security of the data, etc. etc. Plenty of promises, but as it stands, your ‘SecurePRO™ card’ is no more than a badge that anyone could fabricate and as such it is of no interest to me. I find it kind of frightening that someone would actually attach the words ‘assurance’ and ‘protection’ to it and that apparently plenty of your members feel the need for a card issued by a non-accredited social network service to add credibility in terms of their capability to handle someone else’s confidential documents, but hey, to each his own. However, as a paying member of your site I urge you to ensure that in no way will my reputation be affected by the fact that I choose not to subscribe to your SecurePRO™ programme. I also want the assurance that PROZ.com will not use MY profile page for promoting your new programmes, Plus members, SecurePRO™ subscribers, etc. The unwanted link at the bottom of the page referring to P'd colleagues is bad enough.

Thank you for your time, Henry.


[Edited at 2016-12-12 21:42 GMT]
Collapse


 
Toon Theuwis (X)
Toon Theuwis (X)  Identity Verified
Belgium
Local time: 22:12
English to Dutch
+ ...
Introducing the Basic Form of Courtesy Plus Program Dec 12, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

You have considered the Plus video library, the CafeTran CAT tool, integration of real-time communications (priority messages and the "call me" button), dynamic widgets for inclusion in personal websites, the development work and partnership we have entered into to generate external opportunities for interpreters, "ProZ Talks", and the features yet to be released (such as TM-Town membership). You may have looked at all of this, and none of it interests you.

Guess what? We have no problem with that!



I'm sorry I'm jumping in this thread here. I find the tone in the above quote brutal and disrespectful, though it claims not to be. The reasoning you are using here is also known as the straw man fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man). So it's not polite and it's a false argument.


 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 21:12
Member (2008)
Italian to English
Confidentiality Dec 12, 2016

Sindy Cremer wrote:


According to the video, the purpose of the programme is to “better assure confidentiality in translation.” Call me a skeptic, but I sincerely doubt that PROZ is going to be able to give that assurance.


I have been working for many years in a relationship of total confidentiality and professionalism with all of my clients. They know that. I would prefer Proz to stay out of it.

[Edited at 2016-12-12 21:18 GMT]


 
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 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 »
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 »