Which "local languages" are top priority and why?

I understand that there is a valid threat that volunteering translators that not is able to benefit from the share might stop translating if others are payed for the same work. My idea is however to provide information about what different methods would cost and then leave for others to decide wether to preceede along any of these lines. I think the recommendation document could list a number of alternatives and expected costs together with a warning about the potential threat that volunteering translators will quit if others are payed for the same work.

Is there a difference in the likelyhood for volunteering translators to quit depending on the method? The first method would probably mean that a few translators is choosen and payed for doing the work, very likely discouraging volunteering translators to continue their work. But would not the bounty rallies and pay per message methods be open to anyone to benefit from?

I have also worried about the risk of geting non sense results if no validation is performed. How do you solve this in your bounty rallies? Is this not considered a problem because you have to have a translator privileges to be able to translate?

I also wonder if you think that the bounty rallies are likely to be less and less effective in terms of messages/dollar because the farther the process is taken, the less "easy" messages is left to be translated?

I think the idea to crowd source is realy good. Could we have a three step process:

1. A global crowd source campain encouraging people to join in localization. Including site notices and whatever can be imagined.
2. When the localization work starts to fall of, encourage people to continue and attract new translators by running bounty rallies and using a pay per translation system.
3. Finally, for the messages left that doesn't get translated. Decide whether any of the remaining messages are worth translating and hire translators for this work.

Could the translatewiki.net site be customized to allow for all these possible stages? For example enabeling translators to add a pay pal account and automating transactions to translators?

Is there a difference in the likelyhood for volunteering translators to quit depending on the method?

More professionals equals fewer to no volunteer translators on those particular language, I would guess.

Would not the bounty rallies and pay per message methods be open to anyone to benefit from?

Even pay per message would require some commitment from the translator, IMNSHO, with regards to time and volume to keep things manageable.

Rallies are likely to be less and less effective [..]. How do you solve this in your bounty rallies?

I don't as long as the results are still satisfying; I partially steer the results in the rules by demanding some groups to be translated before others, and in the currently running rally by adding a bonus to the two top contributors. If the results would be expected too low in the current form, or if the latest rally does not render sufficient result, I would think up a way to get better results next time - basically train and error.

Is this not considered a problem because you have to have a translator privileges to be able to translate?

We give out translator privileges very easily and assume good faith until proven otherwise; it works quite well, indeed. When in doubt, we seek confirmation or another translator for the same language will notify staff, and we will take corrective measures.

Would the less "easy" messages be left untranslated?

See previous thoughts on steering and commitments in time and volume, but it is a threat, though minor.

Possibilities for customising the site?

Everything is possible; I would however request some WMF developer help and support on getting it done, as the WMF already has a lot of infrastructure in this area.

Thanks alot for the information!

I drafted a reccomendation based on this at Localisation, please take a look at it as I reffer some estimating to you.