[bksvol-discuss] Re: An alternative to validating fair quality submissions

  • From: "Donna Smith" <donnafsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2008 12:05:43 -0500

Good points all!  The volunteer manual states:


Validators may recommend that a book be rejected for one of the following

List of 5 items

. Book does not meet the

Requirements Which Books Must Meet Before Being Added to the Collection

. Book is of Poor scan-quality

. Book is not in the file format specified on the form.

. Book is already in the collection, and the existing copy does not need to
be replaced.

. Book is a duplicate of a submission by the same volunteer.

list end


I browsed around through the manual, but didn't find any definition of "poor
quality.  Can anyone shed clarity on this?


I also understand about the credit thing.  If a person can only maintain
their subscription to BookShare by submitting sloppy scans, then I wouldn't
want to deny them their subscription.  (I know.It's my bleeding heart


So here's an alternative to the alternative:  Those of us who wish to
replace a fair quality submission with a better scan, should download the
fair quality offering, validate it for administrative approval as a fair
quality book which would give the original scanner the credits, and then
submit a BSO version of the same book as a replacement for the one just
added to the collection.  This creates a little extra work, but not as much
as trying to clean up a bad scan.  It would also move some of those books
which have been hanging around the step one page because no one wants to
touch them.  


There must be a solution!



Other related posts: