[bisq-network/compensation] For July 2018 (#96)

[BravoIndia]

@HarryMacfinned @ManfredKarrer Thank you for your comments. And my pleasure btw, it's an interesting discussion :)

@HarryMacfinned is dead-on that while there are a number of factors to consider, an unclear rate, even if high, will not help translations. What do you think about setting an approximated bounty for each of the remaining languages @HarryMacfinned? And that will set the rate, subject to DAO vote?
And @ManfredKarrer I basically agree with you completely except for the slight differences in philosophies where I still think of a partial translation as "valuable" in the present, prior to knowing for certain whether it will be completed in the future--though that might just be the wacky Bayesian in me, but I think you'll grant that the incentives are on my side even if they come with at some cost.
Your comments on the whole ecosystem were very insightful. I'm new to Bisq and already love the game theory.

Maybe the best option, at the end of the day, is just to set an objective market-rate range of 0.01 BSQ - 0.1 BSQ range (for example) and then let the other factors (such as region, personal v.s. paid outsourced work, input of transifex admins, etc.) float within that range. Perhaps that's a reasonable price to pay for objectivity in my opinion.

I'd like to hear from the main transifex role-holders as well and what they think regarding some way of narrowing the range of rate subjectivity. @ripcurlx Do you have any input?

And @ManfredKarrer, I'm certainly not opposed to delaying the current requests. I'd be happy to get @initCCG's opinion on this.

-- 
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/bisq-network/compensation/issues/96#issuecomment-408835600
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180730/e598edea/attachment.html>