Concerning the questionnaire, I had a very radical solution - but it wasn't accepted.

The basic premise is that translation must be as good as possible.
Clients must get the top quality, no discussion about that.

As all the translations will be perfect when finished - all the translations are equal. Scores will be equal.

As the consequence... Moderators are forced to get the best translators, in order to facilitate their own work.

The level of quality is going up, there are no sparks between translators and moderators as they are collaborators and not rivals. There is no bad blood between the teams concerning the scores *(as all scores are equal). Of course, if translators are bad - they will be replaced.

In the current system, there are several things which are not very logical:

• There is a mistake. Neither moderator nor translator notice the mistake. It's not fixed. Mistake still exists, it's not fixed - but the score is perfect.
• There is a mistake. Either moderator or translator notice the mistake. It's fixed. Mistake no longer exists, it's fixed - but the score is not perfect. It's 8 points lower

Or... We can see that all the parameters concerning quality are telling us that the translation is "so-so", but there is only one error. Ho-how... If it's bad - make it better. Imagine having 200-300 strings, 1 mistake and the quality is "meh... so-so". It's not very logical to me.

I also can't understand how some people are constantly making 10 mistakes per 1000 words. My answer is already 300 words long. Imagine 3-4 errors, made while writing in the native language. How is it possible - I don't understand.