Need a scopist

[Diana Guzman]

Hello,

 

I'm in need of a scopist.  I've got CaseCAT 4.  I have got two jobs that I need help with.  They're both PI depos.  They are messy though.  They were all talking over each other.  Please e-mai your rates and turnaround time.  My e-mail address is [e-mail]

 

 

Thanks,

 

Diana Guzman, CSR 13373 

[Janet]

 

Hi Diana,

 

I'm not sure if you've joined the Catalyst Scopists Send Work Request group.  Here's a link to the group if you'd like to join:

 

http://csrnation.ning.com/group/catalystscopistsendworkrequest

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

No offense, but ex-reporters make the worst scopists I've ever come across.  Not quite sure why that is.

[Martha R]

That can't really be true.  Just must be your experience.  It doesn't make sense.   Is it because they don't have an eye for detail and that's why they quit being reporters in the first place?     I'm sure somebody will take offense at that comment.  Start ducking now, Kelli!

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

Martha, you're probably right; I'm going to upset a few people.  This has been my experience.  I sort of just thought they couldn't handle it as a reporter so decided to become a scopist.  You never know.  I just run the other way when someone tells me they are an ex-reporter turned scopist.  Had about a dozen bad experiences with this situation. 

 

Some reporters are great.  Deborah Meyer (full-time reporter) scoped a job for me when she was slow and she was wonderful.  Renee Baker, ex-reporter, I used once and she was fine.  All others, NOT!!

[Judy]

I agree with Kelli C.  Just because the scopist/proofreader is a reporter/ex-reporter does not mean they'll be a good scopist/proofreader, just like somebody with an English degree isn't necessarily going to know how to punctuate a reporter's transcript correctly.  I've had more horror stories than success stories with ex-reporters (although my scopist/proofreader is an ex-reporter and I think she's just wonderful!)

I think it's very important to read -- really read with a proofreading eye -- e-mails and board postings from scopists/proofreaders to see if their style of punctuation jives with yours.  I generally don't like to go the route of "I'll adapt to your style."  Sooner or later, their style will come out in your transcript.  As long as your styles match from the get-go, you shouldn't have a problem.  If you see missing/extra apostrophes/dashes/slashes/nish caps in e-mails/postings, you'll probably end up having to fix them in your transcript.  Who needs that? 

[Judy]

Kelli P., I certainly am not giving every reporter that scopes a bad rap.  Heck, my favorite scopist/proofreader is an ex-reporter.  But, I will admit, she was also my favorite independent contract reporter to hire when I had the chance.  I always knew she would give me a beautiful product, just like she does now scoping/proofing.

I'm saying being a reporter/ex-reporter doesn't necessarily make one any more/less qualified than, say, scopists that have been scoping for the same period that the reporter was reporting.  One would like to hope the time spent reporting gave them the necessary skills to be a competent scopist, but that's not necessarily true.

AND, by doing your due diligence sorting out potential "new" scopists by figuring out their style, you may be able to weed out some less-than-satisfying working relationships.  You're right, I have never used some of them, just like I haven't used some scopists that went to scoping school or scopists that transitioned from transcription -- and I never will -- because their style doesn't match mine.  If you can find matching styles, it makes everybody's job a lot easier and much more satisfying.

 

 

[Judy]

"unless you are given a reason to."

I couldn't agree more.

 

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

BTW, it should be "judge a book by its cover" not it's cover.  Just saying.....

[Judy]

Oh, don't get me started!

[Rhonda Hall Breuwet, RDR CRR CLR]

and it is "reporter," not "Reporter"; "colloquy," not "collequy."

I think the problem sometimes with using an ex or current reporter is because they, many times, think that because they WERE/ARE a reporter, then they are right and do things the way they want them done.  I've seen many transcripts with horrible punctuation, spelling, grammar, whatever; I certainly would not want that reporter doing my scoping.

[Deborah M.]

Hey, thanks, Kelli!  I just saw this.  You were great too!

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

Kelli P, I only mention it because it seems like scopists always seem to mention they're an ex-reporter like they get some extra brownie points or something for it.  That's the only reason.  I shouldn't lump everyone in the same category.  All I'm saying is when I hear that, it means nothing to me.  I think all are entitled to their opinion. 

How boring this website would be if everyone were afraid to post how they feel on a subject for fear it will "offend" someone.  Please!!