I'll tell yall what, folks--I am absolutely utterly & profoundly astounded at how much cleaning up of this book I'm doing that was rated frickin excellent on step 1! Somehow it just does not seem quite right-- oodles & oodles ofspurious characters, quite a few letters messed up, & I'm rather suspecting even some missing pages, though it's hard to prove cuz the numbers jive but not the text. Another quarter per hour project. Or less--Lol! & I'll tell yall what some more--if I paid for a membership & downloaded this book in the condition it's in now, I would be sooo royally torked! So even those books w/excellent ratings--'taint necessarily so. Bookshare really needs to get a prevalidating tool up & running. Or maybe it's just that I'm a perfectionist & I need to quit worrying about it, do the minimum, & throw it back up w/all the garbage intact. I somehow just cannot bring myself to do it. I really think a prevalidating tool & refusal to accept books (at least for credit) that aren't good (or maybe even excellent) quality would be a real start. As it is now, q&d validators & scanners get credits quickly (so long as the stuff isn't rejected) while those who are careful about their work struggle to get theirs. On 1/14/08, Allison Hilliker <bookshare_girl@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, > > If one does follow Donna's suggestion of submitting excellent copies of fair > quality books on the step one page, I have one request. Please submit your > excellent copy to the step one page before rejecting the fair quality scan. > I say this because I know of scanners who reject books because they say they > will submit a better scan, and then they don't do it. > > Just my thoughts, > > Allison > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Donna Smith" <donnafsmith@xxxxxxxxxxx> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 8:22 AM > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] An alternative to validating fair quality > submissions > > > > Hi all. > > > > > > > > I apologize in advance if this suggestion ruffles feathers, but it is made > > in the spirit of getting excellent quality books into the collection. > > > > > > > > I am one of the volunteers who believes that "validating" a book shouldn't > > involve rewriting it because the scan is poor. There are some books which > > have strange formatting or difficult tables and charts or other things > > that > > typically don't scan well and the only way to get such books into the > > collection is in fact for a very patient validator to go through the whole > > book and fix problematic errors that a rescan won't fix. > > > > > > > > However, there are a lot of books on the step one download page that are > > just straightforward text, fiction or nonfiction, that should scan with no > > problems, but are rated as fair. In my opinion, it is a waste of > > volunteer > > time and effort to have a validator make these scans passable. > > > > > > > > So here's my alternative. If I, or any other scanner, obtains a copy of a > > book that is currently awaiting validation and rated fair, would it be > > appropriate for us to download the fair copy, reject it, and then upload a > > better scan of the same book? > > > > > > > > Thoughts? Ideas? No rotten tomatoes please! > > > > > > > > Donna > > > > > > To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to > bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of > available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line. > > -- Jackie McBride Please join my fight against breast cancer <http://teamacs.acsevents.org/site/TR?px=1790196&pg=personal&fr_id=3489> & Check out my homepage at: www.abletec.serverheaven.net To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.