Reply With QuoteHow in the world do they come up with these? I had one today that was clearly, "hall" they put "hole". I'm not sure how the door opens into the hole.Originally Posted by interneteditor
That is what I thought as well. When I first looked over the 'how to' tab I kept thinking why is this not a :?
That has gotten me a couple of 95s or 96s because I throw in a : without thinking about it, have to get used to using a ; there when I normally never would lol
How in the world do they come up with these? I had one today that was clearly, "hall" they put "hole". I'm not sure how the door opens into the hole.
Also, it's emulsion, not emotion. Those walls don't have feelings.
LOL Yes I had an emotion one too. And someone who appears to be allergic to typing the word "door". I've had at least 4 with a door missing!
Another good one I had today, "glass skirting board". Yeah, what is this, Cinderella's house? GLOSS!
A little common sense goes a long way. I have had some that are missing whole words too.
See, I wouldn't see it as trying to cheat anyone. SpeechInk has been paid to transcribe everything and a confirmation that the tiny bit of audio is blank would be beneficial, in my opinion. Once it's marked as such, it doesn't go back into the "working pool", so to speak. And I know what they're paying for those things - I don't see it as a scam. It would be even better if they would just give you a box to [check] noting No Audio & get paid for it. That's just my view though. Their load times make me unhappy and now I don't blame it on my computer.
...and if you continue to call them idiots, they may not come here for help. And you'd be a great resource for help on these HITs. If they did better, your ratings would stay high because things wouldn't be done incorrectly. Just a thought...
Yes, I am so rude. Sorry for my rantI'd be happy to help the people who need it because the better they understand these HITs the better all our ratings will be!
The loading times are a pain when lots of people are working the HITs but if you get some at a quieter time of day (like my early morning when most US folks are likely asleep) they can fly by.
I personally never submit a blank audio HIT, I would feel downright bad about it, earning money for nothing as it were. Why should the client pay for blank audio? I post a feedback and return it. I think they do need a "this is blank" button so the hit can be submitted without risking being at fault.
I understand a bad day, I really do. You've seen my rants over in the CW threads. Maddening, I tell ya (other people). Why have the client pay for blank audio? Because they've hired a company to transcribe it all.Yes, I am so rude. Sorry for my rant
The loading times are a pain when lots of people are working the HITs but if you get some at a quieter time of day (like my early morning when most US folks are likely asleep) they can fly by.
I personally never submit a blank audio HIT, I would feel downright bad about it, earning money for nothing as it were. Why should the client pay for blank audio? I post a feedback and return it. I think they do need a "this is blank" button so the hit can be submitted without risking being at fault.
I did not feel one bit guilty yesterday when I came across a couple CW jobs where there were only about 50 words spoken in about 2 minutes. I've come across other HITs where there's no audio (30 seconds or less clip) and just put in [no audio], get my 9 and get my bonus. I'm being paid to do the work for someone else. The editor will likely confirm that there's no audio, but when that 30 second clip goes back to the 30-70 minute file -- it's been taken care of.
These companies are probably charging their clients anywhere from $1-4/audio minute. My view is to get your $0.15-.45/audio minute. The client still gets charged for that area that is blank/silent/pause. Now, if we were paid by word or by line, my view would be different. I'd be annoyed to come across blank audio.
I feel your frustration, I really do. I would take so much stinkin time with SpeechInk - even having a British English dictionary up to spell check every single time (faster than referencing the different rules, for me). To have a complete working knowledge of it and to be marked down for doing things correctly - I'd be pretty pissed, like you.
Has SpeechInk ever been good at communicating with you? I didn't have much luck when I worked with them and now I'm spoiled by CW. The thing that really confuses me is that to edit those jobs - don't you have to have a high rating for those types of HITs? I got lucky one night and bumped mine up to 99 but I have absolutely no confidence in my ability to edit the ones done by others. It would take me too long (not familiar enough with spellings, which words are brands, etc.). I know my limits for the speed required to feel like it's worth it.
Posting Permissions
