Re: The real problem with MedQuist's billing practices

From: Bellatrix Lestrange (bellatrix.lestrange.cmt_at_gmail.com)
Date: 10/06/04 

Date: 6 Oct 2004 06:04:57 -0700

Great post, Sheila. I love it when you cut through the arguments and
tangential issues to bring up points that many overlook.

Why exactly did AAMT abandon the concept of the standardized AAMT line?

MQ has had a huge impact on our profession. Not only did they
systematically buy up as many competing transcription companies as they
could in the 90s, they also cornered the market on much of the
transcription and speech recognition technology; many MTSOs now rely on
licenses of MQ-owned products.

I'm just glad whoever was responsible chose SpeechMachines' product,
DocQscribe (formerly WebCorrect), as their gold standard transcription
platform. The SpeechMachine programmers are brillant -- the platform
works incredibly well and allows MTs to achieve high productivity with
only a modest learning curve. ActiveWords has solved the problem of no
macro capability, leaving only the spellchecker (a licensed product) as
the weakest link in the platform: both the algorithm and the word
lists are far inferior to those found in Stedman's spellchecker.

Sheila, would you explain why your ideal line would be based only on
printed characters? I'll probably agree with you, but I'd like to
understand the reasoning behind it. This is such a button-pushing
issue for MTs: I learned that on my forum a while back when I
explained the little I know about why some services have adopted a
no-spaces line.

Quantcast