[bksvol-discuss] A Backward Step for Proofreaders?

Hello Folks,

I haven't checked in any books yet because I don't have any checked out for 
proofreading at the moment. However, I listened today as Lissi checked in two 
books she had on her checked out list.

It's possible that we may have missed it, but we did not find any of the 
quality information that I found when I submitted a book today. Not only did we 
not find the info about page breaks and page numbers, but we did not even find 
the quality analysis that we former validators used to get. We both found this 
to be very odd.

I do not know whether this is a bug, or intentional, but if the latter, I am 
very curious as to the reason behind it.

By the way, there doesn't seem to be an option for changing the number of pages 
given on the form. What if a submitter misses a few pages, or adds a few 
duplicates? What's a proofreader to do?

It would be really cool if the proofreader could compare their quality analysis 
with that of the book when it was submitted. It would show what a difference a 
conscientious proofreader can, and often does, make to the quality of a book. 

But that is something for the wish list of future enhancements. At the moment, 
all in all, as far as the actual check in process goes, it appears that not 
only do proofreaders get less book info than submitters now get, but they get 
less information than they used to have when preparing books for the Admin 
Queue. I don't understand it, and I admit to feeling a bit sad as I write this. 
This information is just as important to proofreaders as it is to submitters. 
Perhaps more so, because the book is closer to the Admin Queue at that point 
and proofreaders are supposed to be the ones doing the final checks of these 
things to ensure the highest quality for our readers.

We didn't even find an acknowledgement of her time and effort,  as we 
validators used to see, nor of the fact that her books were added to the Admin 
Queue when the check in process was completed. The only way she could be sure 
they were gone was to check the number of books on her list to see if it had 
changed.

As I said, we may possibly have missed some or all of these things, tooling 
around as we were on a new site; and I would be very happy to be shown to be 
wrong about any of this. But if my information is correct, then it is 
unfortunate. I hope it is only a temporary working out of the kinks of the new 
site.

Evan

Other related posts: