[bisq-network/compensation] For July 2018 (#95)

[BravoIndia]

@HarryMacfinned Seconded.

@ripcurlx to expand on my opinion as to why words on transifex should considered delivered, when only development work that is shipped in a release is compensated, I'll paste my comments from #96 :

> By limiting contribution requests to only completed languages you're severely limiting the incentives for individuals to work on languages which are presently at a low level of completion, and that's unfortunate. Transifex already provides a very reliable metric to evaluate productivity (string count / word count), and in principle, partial translations can be released and provide value [they are not the same as, say, partial code]. I think a partial translation is more analogous to an 0.x release update, and certainly no one would say that compensation for development work can't be requested until the 1.0 release.
> Furthermore, for a p2p decentralized exchange like Bisq, translation can provide immense value expanding the userbase toward those who need it most. Why would we seek to limit the incentives to progress toward that? Just like placing a 100,000 BSQ minimum on compensation requests would limit the amount of contributors, or when the government requires a heavy regulatory burden of small businesses it limits entrepreneurship--so will this limit the actual translation being done. And though I understand that the reality is Bisq won't release a partial translation--it's not as though the people here don't understand that partial translation work can easily and often is built on--especially if people are incentivized to do so throughout and not just toward the end.

A partial translation is, in principle, valuable. Just like code on a 0.x release is valuable, even though it's not on the 1.0 release yet. It is not partial in the same sense as 'partial code' is partial. 
Also, we know that we want the translation work for the languages that are open on transifex--it's not like code for features we're not sure whether we want in. And unlike code, once it's translated correctly (for the most part) it's translated--there's basically just one way to do it right, whereas with code even if a feature we want is implemented, it might be done too badly to be included in the release.

@ManfredKarrer raised some very interesting concerns in the other thread (#95), answering as to how some translation work might not be worth the cost. And he's right that that's a possibility. But in the case of the languages currently open on transifex, by paying a standard market-rate for translation I think it's overwhelmingly the case that Bisq will get a substantial bang for their buck, considering how cheap it is to acquire and how effective having the software in the local-language is for market penetration.

I mean, how many private companies wanting to expand internationally would not pay like $10,000 for their software to be translated into 3 languages? 
And that's more than $0.25 per word, let alone $1,000 for 3 languages..

I think allowing compensation requests for partial translations, and paying a decent rate is the right move. And that incentivizing more translation work should be the higher priority.

-- 
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/95#issuecomment-408845754
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bisq.network/pipermail/bisq-github/attachments/20180730/f1772101/attachment-0001.html>