Thank you for your detailed post about the ongoing discussion. I think for the questionnaire there will never be a perfect solution, as it depends mostly on personal taste. I've already given my opinion several times on the questionnaires, so I won't add my two cents here again. However, I like your approach.

A very challenging question is, which solution might be the best for the amount of rewards for the LMs. To be honest, I haven't been working as an LM until now, but I can imagine very well on how the situation looks like. I often wondered why LMs receive such a low reward and in the end, they have a lot of responsibility and have the knowledge to identify even small errors in a translated text. I think the reward for LMs should depend on the number of words reviewed. Another thing I thought about is to make the reward dependent on how many mistakes they corrected because ultimately that's the real work LMs do. Going a little bit deeper, this potentially could cause that some LMs begin to see errors where there are none, just to push his or her reward. So this wouldn't be a good solution either.

I think the roots of this conflict are underlying in the number of translators. Utopian and DaVinci have often said, that their main goal is to grow, but they have overseen that we can only grow our teams if the reward pool grows. I think we should limit the teams, kick out people how are contributing really bad translations several times and recruit if there is a free spot in a team and not on a regular basis. This would ultimately lead to high quality, which should be in everyone's favor. Thank you for reading.