052C/052D Class Destroyers
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
I've posted a few pieces in Chinese in the past as well, and I've come across many pieces otherwise that I thought might be of interest but which I chose not to post or link here.
My thinking is twofold.
1: if I do post something, I want to provide a decent summary or translation of my own effort.
2: if I am unable to post a decent summary or translation, or if I am unwilling to request others to translate it, then I will not post it.
The big underlying question for both of those two points, is basically whether I myself am able to understand what I am posting. If I am able to understand it, then of course I should provide a summary, because I am able to understand the relevance of why I think it is worth people's time, but also because it would be fairly easy for me to spend a couple of minutes to jot a few points down.
However, if I am unable to understand what I'm posting, then that probably means I'm unable to understand the relevance of the original piece. So if I post a link onto SDF, not only am I inconveniencing others by not providing a summary or a translation, but I am also further making things difficult because I am unable to justify why a link is relevant in the first place and it will be up to the reader to try to do the work themselves to judge if a link is relevant or useful.
Equating posting links and articles written in Chinese to links and articles written in English for this forum simply does not work because the user base here means that it is reasonable to expect that everyone can read English and can easily understand links or articles posted without extra effort. That means English links and articles can be posted in a more casual fashion and people can choose to read them if they want. But Chinese links and articles posted without a decent explanation means it will take people extra effort to try and work out what is even relevant about a link or article, let alone its content. Machine translators for Chinese is not an appropriate answer either because it has yet to reach a level where even normal Chinese articles can be accurately translated to a practical degree (as opposed to say French), let alone understanding Chinese BBS lingo.
So, if a Chinese link or article is posted without even a request for others to translate in the first place, then we are left to wonder whether the OP is even able to understand the article themselves! That means either:
A: they are able to understand and are too lazy to write a few sentences of summary, or,
B: they do not understand what it's about either and is posting it without making a case for why they think it is relevant or why the information is useful
In such a case, then yes, perhaps it is better if the article or link is just not posted to begin with.
Ultimately, you are free to go about how you wish until the moderating team may one day choose to make a judgement on the matter, of course.
But myself and others will continue to believe that providing links and articles without summaries, translations or even requests of translations, is either poor etiquette, not useful, or worse
Everybody tame your pride.
Its not hardline rules of posting info and sources but a more altruistic approach that'll benefit each one of us in the long run.
If somebody finds an article in Chinese and feels it could contain relevant info to a forum thread, then its better to atleast post it first, despite not having proof or understanding of it in English, as it would save us from deprivation of crucial info incase it is discarded for not having a clear meaning.
If somebody is more knowledgable in the language and points out deficiency of evidence or inappropriateness in the respective article, it can always be deleted.
If you dont understand what an underlying article entails, you could simply request for more detailing. If its available, good. If not, there's not much anybody can do about it.
Simply asking for help while reading something that you dont understand has a better chance of getting you the correct info rather than setting rules in stone as to how it should be posted.
Please dont try to use the rules of posting info as leverage to prove oneself right in this debate.
We're here to gather as precise and accurate info about Chinese capabilities as possible.
Any bickering will just get in way of that.
Its not hardline rules of posting info and sources but a more altruistic approach that'll benefit each one of us in the long run.
If somebody finds an article in Chinese and feels it could contain relevant info to a forum thread, then its better to atleast post it first, despite not having proof or understanding of it in English, as it would save us from deprivation of crucial info incase it is discarded for not having a clear meaning.
If somebody is more knowledgable in the language and points out deficiency of evidence or inappropriateness in the respective article, it can always be deleted.
If you dont understand what an underlying article entails, you could simply request for more detailing. If its available, good. If not, there's not much anybody can do about it.
Simply asking for help while reading something that you dont understand has a better chance of getting you the correct info rather than setting rules in stone as to how it should be posted.
Please dont try to use the rules of posting info as leverage to prove oneself right in this debate.
We're here to gather as precise and accurate info about Chinese capabilities as possible.
Any bickering will just get in way of that.
This issue has already come up multiple times before, and like it or not it has become an issue, and a legitimate annoyance.
Now that it's re-emerged again I would prefer to have a moderator to step in to settle it once and for all in one favour or another, so that there won't be room to complain further.
Simply requesting that it be ignored is pushing the buck further down the line.
Well, i hope the moderator rules in favour of scattered/unofficial info with less than perfect metainfo to still be posted to the forum, as lot of speculation about future systems which were put into service have stemmed from concepts/rumours with not so perfect sources.
All in all, an amicable discussion/debate about the posted info would lead to a far better final conclusion/data set than being haughty under the veil of professionalism (not intended for any specific person).
Lol, if a type 052d would have strayed off course as much as this thread, it would have actually collided with a USN destroyer.
Moderators, please step in.
Jura The idiot
General
del
plawolf
Lieutenant General
Just from my own POV, yes, it would be super if every source and link came with a nice executive summary and perfect translation.
However, this is an enthusiast forum, no-one gets paid for posting, and everyone’s time is precious. As such, I think it is also a little much to demand people take time out of their busy lives to translate and summaries an article for you.
Personally, I prefer to have more sources available to look at, rather than have a kind of self-censorship whereby important and interesting pieces of information are not posted here because people don’t want to get grief for not doing a translation if they lack the time and/or language skills/confidence to do a translation and summary.
One person can post a link, that they have spent time and effort to find in the first place, and others who have more time could easily do the translation/summary. To me, that’s a large part of the point for a forum - everyone contribute as they can and are able to.
However, this is an enthusiast forum, no-one gets paid for posting, and everyone’s time is precious. As such, I think it is also a little much to demand people take time out of their busy lives to translate and summaries an article for you.
Personally, I prefer to have more sources available to look at, rather than have a kind of self-censorship whereby important and interesting pieces of information are not posted here because people don’t want to get grief for not doing a translation if they lack the time and/or language skills/confidence to do a translation and summary.
One person can post a link, that they have spent time and effort to find in the first place, and others who have more time could easily do the translation/summary. To me, that’s a large part of the point for a forum - everyone contribute as they can and are able to.
I think the actual numbers matter very much.
The question is who decided that is the right way to look at it. How about this: by not posting a relevant article (without a summary etc.), and assuming nobody else posted it (which is a reasonable assumption), everyone who might have liked to read it and learn of its contents (and who primarily sources their reading from here) will be unable to do so.
For me, this understanding bit is totally meaningless. I really don't feel like I ever have to care about the mental state of a person who posts a link to an article on a forum. If you're talking about me, my understanding is just fine.
Also, for the record, I did note the author and briefly describe the contents of what I posted, which in my opinion gives adequate context for a person to decide if they're interested in reading it.
You're wrong about the quality of machine translation. Everything I read that is originally in Chinese is via machine translation and every Chinese-to-English translation that I've ever posted on SDF was done the same way and in the vast majority of cases, there is demonstrably nothing wrong with them. Also, putting a link into a translator takes negligible effort.
Or the poster simply doesn't think they're obligated to do everything for the readers and thinks they should sometimes make the effort of reading a whole article themselves.
Ultimately, my view of the situation is this. By posting that article, even without a summary or translation, I made a contribution to the forum. The contribution may not be as good as it would have been had I provided a detailed summary or a full human translation, but it's a contribution nonetheless. It should also be judged against the reality of what goes on in this forum, which is that very few people post this kind of material. Were the situation different, where people regularly posted such articles with the summary or translation and my post took away someone's opportunity to do so and lowered the average level of posting, I would have refrained from posting in this manner. Anyone can easily check the record over the past year and note how many (and how often for each person) people have posted content from the likes of yankeesama, fzgfzy, POP3, pb19980515 and so on.
Additionaly, as I've always mantained, anyone is free to provide their own contribution in the form of a summary, full translation or anything else (see here, here and here). That has worked just fine plenty of times (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7), although I note that it was generally not done by the people who like to make helpful suggestions about how I should post.
I've explained why I disagree with these objections. Ultimately, it just seems like choosing to be offended that someone posted only a link.
Ultimately, you've got to give the people what they want (and follow the rules), so going forward I won't be posting any links without a translation, with a machine translation or any links at all. Now that I've adjusted my standpoint, I see the wisdom in latenlazy's proposal on the previous page. If anything, I think it's too lenient on these would-be posters, so I suggest adding a requirement for a submission statement. I think 200 words should do.
I look forward to the golden age of high quality posting on SDF.
As a compromise, I volunteer to provide a brief translated summary of the links you post. I haven't been doing so much lately because of thesis but things are starting to wind down and I should be able to manage. Just tag me every time you post a link and I'll provide a translation ASAP.
This should be an okay compromise satisfying everyone's preferences.