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 

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

You might want to worry about it on here if you ever want to pick up any extra work.

I know I'm not the only reporter that looks at the style of posts from scopists for typos, misspellings, etc. if I'm ever going to use them on my own work.  That's the best indicator of what you'll end up with when you get your transcript back.  You may want to reconsider that decision. 

[Judy]

True.  For everybody on this site, every post is a potential hidden interview.  If somebody can't get past errors in posts, how will they ever give you the paying gig?  Going to the various boards and finding posts from scopists I'm considering hiring is a great +/- process.  

Query the scopists that put out pristine, pro-reporter (no reporter bashing!) posts on one of the other sites and you'll find that they get to pretty much hand-pick their clients.  They're at the top of their game because they know error-free, positive posting is part of their job.

[Keith Rowan II]

I didn't really read the whole thread, and I don't have an opinion about whether ex-reporters make good scopists or not.  But I can definitely tell you that colloquy is a common reporter word and is spelled just like that.  I can also tell you that I find it very annoying when unnecessary words are repeatedly capped.  If I was trying to sell my self as a scopist on any reporter site, my posts would certainly look a little different, as some have said. 

Any scopist, especially one who is a reporter, should know how meticulous reporters are and how meticulous they would want their scopist to be. 

[Judy]

Kelli P.,

Not to beat a dead horse, but I think the comments regarding proofing posts applies to scopists/proofreaders that are advertising their services and yet their posts have errors.  Reporters looking to hire somebody to help prepare their transcripts are going to quickly dismiss potential candidates when they have error-filled posts, whether it's the phone's fault or not.  As I said, every post is a potential interview and you should always, always, always post with that in mind.

[Quyen]

I read posts from scopists/proofers on here, and if I see errors, I think to myself, "Nope, that's not the one for me."  Biggest pet peeve is missing punctuation, particularly run-on sentences.  I figure, if they're too lazy, careless, whatever, on here, that is the same care they would give to my work.

Judy is exactly right:  Every post on here is a potential job interview.

Btw, this site IS different.  I feel there are a lot of quality reporters/people on here who really care about their work/profession -- and that's a good thing.  There is nothing wrong with people expressing their opinions, whether good, bad or ugly.  Like I always say:  If you don't like what you see, change the channel.  Free, unrestrained speech is highly encouraged.

[Kelli Combs (admin)]

I also have the problem that they will say, "Well, when I was a reporter I would do it this way."  I'd say, "Well, try to remember I'm paying you to do it the way I want, not the way you want." 

You're right, Rhonda, they think their way is the only correct way.  I get tired of arguing about it.

[Judy]

Ohhh, now that's what chaps my hide, when they do things their way instead of my way (whose name is on that cert?).

When I write dates, almost always I write it so that the final comma comes after the year (January 1, 2001,).  This has been argued to death and people are fierce about their opinions, but the experts say the final comma is correct.  I had an ex-reporter remove them all from my transcript (an expedite! that she was late getting back to me!!).

When they say "correct" or "right" at the end of the question, my software has been trained by me to put a comma before the word.  Another issue that reporters are fierce with their opinion -- semi or comma? -- but my preference is a comma.  I had another ex-reporter change them all to semis.

It's not like I gave either of these gals a 100% unpunctuated transcript and gave them free reign to do as they pleased.  It's not like I only wrote the final comma after the year and ", right/correct" a small percentage of the time.  These were issues that, if they had bothered to take notice, were my preferences... that they chose to ignore.

I also had a job I gave to yet another ex-reporter to scope.  It was a realtime video depo (200+ pages), which I told her beforehand.  Her reply, "What's 'realtime'?"  I should have really pulled it at that point because it was a complete and utter misery.  Her excuse was her kids on why my job was late.  Every single day -- at least that's what it seemed -- I'd get an e-mail from her about how it wasn't going well because one of the kids did this, that, or the other, but she was able to work on it for a few hours at night after everybody went to bed.  No wonder it was late.

I gave yet another ex-reporter an expedited video job that I wanted scoped to full audio.  I told her this days in advance of the job.  After I sent her the file, she came back and said that she didn't know how to make her audio work and had to wait until her husband got home from work so that he could look at it.  She seriously had no clue.  Why exactly was she taking an assignment that she didn't have the tools to complete?

Here's my last story, and it's about a gal that isn't an ex-reporter, but her goal is to become a voicewriter.  I gave her a handful of jobs.  Her method was to scope 100% of her jobs to audio.  Fine by me.  She'd return the jobs with all small verbal diarrhea utterances, half words, double "okays" at the beginning of the question, blah, blah, blah typed in by her.  I told her that wasn't necessary and don't do it, that it just made the transcript a mess (sorry verbatim police).  She told me that was how she did it and she couldn't (I personally think wouldn't) change.  She told me I could remove them during proofreading.  Okey-dokey.

These are some of the reasons I tell reporters to check out scopists' posts, find out their preferences before you give them work, because virtually always their preferences will end up in your transcript.  Time is money in our profession... do you really want to spend the time to remove/change their preferences that don't match yours?  It makes it so much easier to get the final product out the door when everybody is on the same page from the get-go.

[Janet]

" I told her that wasn't necessary and don't do it, that it just made the transcript a mess (sorry verbatim police)."

 

I'm with you, Judy.  I don't like a stuttering mess of a transcript.   Arrest me too.

[Carol A.]

I'm with both of you.  I don't like a stuttering mess of a transcript either.  I was taught to clean up attorneys to a certain extent. 

[Judy]

Sad to say, but, no, I don't think the operative term is "ex."  I've read plenty of posts from current reporters that I don't agree with their style and wouldn't approach them to scope one of my transcripts.  Just because somebody calls themself a "reporter" doesn't mean they have the requisite skill to hire out as a professional scopist/proofreader.  There are lots of reporters out there that don't know what they don't know and scope and proofread their own transcripts.  Just because they scope and proofread their own transcripts doesn't make them qualified to scope/proofread mine.

Which actually brings up another issue.  Why do reporting students they think they have the skill to scope/proofread just because they started reporting school?  Sometimes that's all you see in their ad as far as their qualifications ("reporting student" or "former reporting student").  Interesting?  Maybe.  But certainly not a usable reference.

The ex-reporter that asked what realtime was, she quit reporting to have her, I think, third kid (and I believe she was pregnant with the fourth).  At that time, they were all small (less than about six years old).  That happened somewhere between six and eight years ago.  I can only date it to when I had my office at a specific location.  I remember vividly my surroundings when this was going on (the pacing from one room to the next), and I left there six years ago.  She lived/reported in a state that has NO certifications, so the possibility she was one of "those" reporters (got to 140 and surreptitiously pounded on her writer and then went back home to essentially transcribe from her tape recorder) is, I guess, a possibility.

Caveat emptor:  "Reporters" come in all shapes, sizes, skill level, and training.  That goes for all scopists/proofreaders too.  Bottom line, do your homework and find out if you're a good fit with each other before you get stuck sending them a check for work that doesn't meet your expectation.

[Judy]

You're funny.  I like you.  Unfortunately, you're on CC and I'm Eclipse.  And I think we agree on a lot of punctuation issues, but -- also unfortunately -- I'm not generating more pages than one person can handle right now (maybe if I'd stop posting!), and my #1 gal has fully retired from reporting and is now working pretty much full-time scoping/proofreading (see, I DO! trust some "ex-reporters," Christi and my #1).   I'd definitely hire Christi if my page count warrants it.

 

p.s.  the "reporter" from a non-certified state was/is from Florida.

[Judy]

:)