[bksvol-discuss] Re: Dead horse

  • From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 09:11:15 -1000

Hmmmm,  so Rui, is Dead Horse where bookshare plans to send you, where
there's no more stripper, for sure?  LOL!

Charlene


-----Original Message-----
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rui
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 5:28 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Dead horse


Good morning:

I have brought out the dead horse so we  can finish beating on it. Later
on today I will have a fat lady singing on my website. As i'm sticking a
fork in the stripper discussion, I hope that bookshare has 
taken notice (and i believe they have)

p.s. speaking of deadhorse.

Deadhorse, Alaska, 99734. It's hard to imagine when you arrive in
Deadhorse 
in the winter, but a few dozen people actually live in this town that
lies 
on the Arctic
Ocean, at the terminus of the remote gravel track euphemistically called
the 
Dalton Highway. The rest -- thousands at a time -- work two weeks on and
two weeks off supporting the oil field developments known as Prudhoe
Bay.


The Coldfoot complex, the northernmost truck stop in the United States,
has 
facilities for truckers and tourists alike, with a homey restaurant,
post 
office,
a small gift shop that sells gold-nugget jewelry, and general store
called 
"7-Eleven Below". Arctic Acres Inn provides basic lodging, with three
small motels that have a total of 200 beds along with an RV park with
hookups, 
picnic tables, a dump station, shower and a laundry facility. (This is a

great
summer description-in the winter, it's a snow-encrusted camp with
icicles 
that look like they wouldn't melt until August.) While there, we downed
some homey food, filled our fuel tanks with gas, and came to a consensus
that 
"Cold foot" was aptly named, but because of our amply-heated Volvo V70s,
we 
continued
our pilgrimage toward the town with a name even more ominous-"Dead
horse"!

Turning north from Coldfoot, a haunting message was posted along the 
roadway: The next available services are 244 miles to the north, it
read. 
Although
the region is basically uninhabited, Wiseman is 15 miles up the road
from 
Coldfoot, where the 2000 census counted 21 people. Undaunted, we drove
up 
Chandalar
Shelf and through Atigun Pass, where the highway crosses the Continental

Divide. The pass had been closed for twelve hours due to an avalanche, a

frequent
occurrence in the winter, so we held our breath and glided the XC70 over
its 
winding track with ease, struck by the immensity of this white land and
its beauty. Traveling down over the rugged peaks of the Brooks Range,
out onto the 
treeless plains of the North Slope, we finally drove into Deadhorse / 
Prudhoe Bay,
and felt like we were at the top of the world. In the good weather,
there 
can be an abundance of wildlife: moose, caribou, Dall sheep, bear,
swans, 
geese,
ducks, other waterfowl and eagles, along with snowshoe hares, Arctic
ground 
squirrels, and even occasionally Musk Ox. We were not in good weather, 
however,
arriving in a "white out" with a temperature of 51 below zero, and we
saw 
only one Ptarmigan, the Alaskan state bird, and a couple of caribou.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Sharon Jackson" <dolly1025@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 11:08 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?


> It is very frustrating not having this vital information especially 
> for
> referencing.  I have just completed my masters degree and know all too

> well how much hassel it can be to find page numbers and other vital 
> information. The textbooks and reference material need this
information.
>
> Sharon
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paula and James Muysenberg" <outofsightlife@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 11:28 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
>
>
>> Hi, Scott,
>>
>>    I can understand that the headings could get in the way of someone

>> reading purely for pleasure. I'm concerned, though, about students 
>> and researchers, for whom page numbers can be crucial. Right now, the

>> stripper removes those, and they are only available if you use the 
>> DAISY format. Braille users usually have no way of determining the 
>> corresponding print page, if they need to follow along in class or 
>> site a reference in a paper.
>> I'm not currently a student, but if I were, it would be frustrating
to 
>> have
>> access to the book, but not the page numbers--and in some cases, not
even
>> the chapter titles.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Paula
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Scott Blanks" <scottsjb@xxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 5:58 PM
>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
>>
>>
>>> Let me speak first as a reader of Bookshare books. I mostly read
>>> fiction,
>>> with the occasional pop culture book thrown in for variety. I read 
>>> almost
>>> all these books in Braille. I don't want to see repeated text such
as 
>>> page
>>> numbers, author/title info, etc. If people want to be able to see
that
>> info,
>>> there should be an option to include or exclude this from your book.

>>> Chapters and other major headings should be included of course, and 
>>> I believe that problem will be addressed.
>>>
>>> As a validator, I can't think of a good enough reason at this point 
>>> to
>> stop
>>> submitting books and validating them. That includes the stripper 
>>> issue.
>>> If
>>> we stop submitting or validating works, we're hurting a much larger 
>>> group
>> of
>>> people than ourselves. The ultimate purpose of Bookshare is to give
>>> access
>>> to books. There are still many books rated fair on the website, and
in 
>>> the
>>> past I'm sure there were a much higher percentage of "fair" books
>> submitted
>>> to the site, but we wouldn't have wanted those books held back from
>>> being
>>> available just because they were poorly scanned. I don't want people
>>> deprived of books just because of a missing chapter heading, or
because
>>> there aren't page numbers included.
>>>
>>> Let's take things slow and easy folks.
>>>
>>> Scott
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
>>> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:28 PM
>>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Where are those contrarians?
>>>
>>>
>>> > Hello:
>>> >
>>> > I would like to here from people who disagree with me. Let me know

>>> > why you think the current setup makes sense.
>>> >
>>> > I do not mean for people to play devil's advocate with this. I'm 
>>> > asking if anyone seriously disagrees with the centiments expressed

>>> > over the last 30 hours.
>>> >
>>> > (There is a method to my madness)
>>> >
>>> > -- Rui (who is probably liked at Benetech right now as much as the
>> plague)
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
>>> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:26 PM
>>> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Dear Charlyn and Bookshare community,
>>> >>
>>> >> I think a petition is an excellent idea.  Charlyn, would you like

>>> >> to
>> put
>>> >> it
>>> >> together?  Rui, would you put it on the Bookshare Scans site?
>>> >>
>>> >> I also think we should select a day to make phone calls and send
>>> >> emails
>>> >> to
>>> >> the Bookshare staff calling on them to turn off the stripper.
How
>> about
>>> >> Thursday, July 28, one week after this most recent stripper
>>> >> discussion
>>> >> began.
>>> >>
>>> >> We need to take in the fact that, as Bookshare volunteers and 
>>> >> users,
>>> >> we
>>> >> must
>>> >> have direct say on policy issues.  Right now this list is
virtually 
>>> >> the
>>> >> only
>>> >> vehicle we have for reaching the staff, and it is clearly 
>>> >> ineffective.
>>> >> The
>>> >> stripper issue highlights a need for a more formalized means of
>>> >> communication.  Maybe we should develop an advisory committee
which 
>>> >> can
>>> >> bring concerns to the staff and have a real voice in
policymaking.
>>> >>
>>> >> As blind people, most of us have grown up with the sense that 
>>> >> we're
>> lucky
>>> >> to
>>> >> get whatever reading matter is offered to us.  We had better be 
>>> >> appreciative and not complain.  On the title page of every book 
>>> >> from the National Library
>>> >> Service we read that the book has been produced for the blind and
>>> >> physically
>>> >> handicapped "with the kind permission of the publisher."  That
line
>> about
>>> >> "the kind permission" says so much!  Do sighted people need 
>>> >> anyone's
>> kind
>>> >> permission in order to read?  I AM in fact extraordinarily 
>>> >> grateful
>>> >> to
>>> >> the
>>> >> volunteers and others who have spent countless hours putting
books 
>>> >> into
>>> >> Braille and recorded formats for us, and to those who have worked
to
>>> >> change
>>> >> copyright laws and make our special-format books possible!  Most
of 
>>> >> us
>>> >> would
>>> >> not be literate, educated, contributing members of society
without
>> their
>>> >> help!  But I think that our lifelong dependence upon others to
>>> >> provide
>> us
>>> >> with books, and the constant feeling that we must be grateful and
>>> >> that
>> we
>>> >> can't expect too much, do take a toll.
>>> >>
>>> >> Bookshare is different.  Bookshare is a program which is not only

>>> >> FOR
>> us,
>>> >> but BY us.  We, the volunteers, determine what books go into the 
>>> >> collection, and we ourselves make them available.  We are not 
>>> >> "only volunteers" who
>>> >> have
>>> >> no right to determine policy.  We are the backbone of the program
- a
>>> >> program which is created to meet our needs and those of other
blind 
>>> >> and
>>> >> print-disabled people.  The Bookshare staff are not users of 
>>> >> Bookshare
>>> >> materials.  They do not live with the inaccessibility of print;
they
>>> >> don't
>>> >> experience our issues from the inside.  It is absolutely
essential 
>>> >> that
>>> >> they
>>> >> listen to what we have to say.
>>> >>
>>> >> Bookshare is an incredible program, and I believe in it utterly.

>>> >> It
>> has
>>> >> the
>>> >> potential to narrow the print gap for us as no other program ever

>>> >> has before.  But we need to take a stand and insist that it be 
>>> >> the quality program we all deserve.
>>> >>
>>> >> Debbie
>>> >>
>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> >> From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:11 AM
>>> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> Maybe we could put together a pteition of some sort and put a 
>>> >>> notice
>> on
>>> >>> the volunteer website as well to see if we could get enough 
>>> >>> people
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> sign it to send to bookshare requesting them to stop using the
>> program.
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> -----Original Message-----
>>> >>> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pam 
>>> >>> Quinn
>>> >>> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:02 PM
>>> >>> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> We take pride in our submissions and I just don't think a lot of

>>> >>> the bookshare staff understands how angry and frustrated we are 
>>> >>> when we
>> see
>>> >>> that our submissions have been mangled. And for what? I just 
>>> >>> don't
>>> >>> get
>>> >>> it. Why do they insist on holding on to that useless program
that
>> nobody
>>> >>> wants? Seems to me if anything, dropping it would mean one less 
>>> >>> step
>> and
>>> >>> less work in putting the books on the site.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> I use chapter headings for my breaking points in .mp3 files too,
>>> >>> when
>>> >>> I'm lucky enough to have them.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> It might not be our decision and they might not want to listen 
>>> >>> to
>>> >>> us,
>>> >>> but that would be unfortunate, because the volunteers and 
>>> >>> subscribers
>>> >>> have a major role in determining the future of bookshare.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Pam
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Original message:
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >I have seriously considered not submitting some books I have
>>> >>> >scanned
>>> >>> >just
>>> >>> >because I thought they would be of little use after the
stripper
>>> >>> finished
>>> >>> >with them.  I put a lot of work in to what I submit and it is
>>> >>> >really
>>> >>> >upsetting to see the final result when my original looked so
nice,
>> and
>>> >>> that
>>> >>> >is only a volunteer's view.  I also am upset by the messes that

>>> >>> >I
>> come
>>> >>> >accross when I am reading, even for pleasure.  I use the 
>>> >>> >chapter
>>> >>> headings
>>> >>> >as my MP3 creation breaking points, so if they aren't there I 
>>> >>> >have
>>> >>> >a
>>> >>> big
>>> >>> >mess!
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >I don't really like throwing fits, and I won't on this list 
>>> >>> >because
>> it
>>> >>> >seems to serve little purpose, but the fits are completely
>>> >>> >justified.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >If i submitted a book in DAISY and BRF format instead of in RTF
>>> >>> >would
>>> >>> >the
>>> >>> >normal automated processes be skipped?  That is the only thing
I 
>>> >>> >can
>>> >>> think
>>> >>> >of to rescue books where the headers, headings, and page 
>>> >>> >numbers
>>> >>> >are
>>> >>> >invaluable.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >Sarah Van Oosterwijck
>>> >>> >Assistive Technology Trainer 
>>> >>> >http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
>>> >>> >----- Original Message -----
>>> >>> >From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
>>> >>> >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >>> >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:10 PM
>>> >>> >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Hear, hear!  I agree 200%!
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> We have been telling the Bookshare staff about our concerns,
>> politely
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >> but firmly, literally for years.  Despite all the talk, 
>>> >>> >> nothing
>>> >>> >> has
>>> >>> >> changed. I am beginning to think we need to take stronger
action.
>> We
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >> ARE volunteers.
>>> >>> >> We do not have to contribute the thousands of hours we put 
>>> >>> >> into
>> this
>>> >>> >> program.  And Bookshare cannot survive without us.  Do we 
>>> >>> >> need to
>> say
>>> >>> we
>>> >>> >> will have to stop scanning and validating until we know that
>> someone
>>> >>> out
>>> >>> >> there is really listening to us, and taking action?  It 
>>> >>> >> should
>>> >>> >> not
>>> >>> have
>>> >>> >> to
>>> >>> >> come down to threats and strikes, but many of us are at our 
>>> >>> >> wit's
>>> >>> end.
>>> >>> >> What
>>> >>> >> is it going to take to turn off the stripper and stop 
>>> >>> >> mangling
>>> >>> >> the
>>> >>> books
>>> >>> >> we
>>> >>> >> work so hard to make available?
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Debbie
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> >>> >> From: "Rui" <goldwave@xxxxxxx>
>>> >>> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >>> >> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:16 AM
>>> >>> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>> Good Afternoon:
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> At the bookshare users meeting at NFB, I made it very clear 
>>> >>> >>> to
>>> >>> >>> Jim
>>> >>> >>> (like
>>> >>> >> he didn't know already) the issues with the stripper and why 
>>> >>> >> i
>> think
>>> >>> >> it should be removed.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> The whole concept of the stripper bothers me, not just the 
>>> >>> >>> fact
>>> >>> >>> it
>>> >>> >>> does
>>> >>> >> more than it's supposed too.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Its very reason for being agrivates me.
>>> >>> >>> Regular print books have headers, some have footers, that is
>>> >>> >>> part
>> of
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> a
>>> >>> >> print book.
>>> >>> >>> If we want digital copies of print books then, take the good
>>> >>> >>> with
>>> >>> >>> the
>>> >>> >>> bad.
>>> >>> >>> Do not sanitize the book to make it more access technology
>> friendly.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> The
>>> >>> >> very fact that is accessible already does that.
>>> >>> >>> If i don't want to read the headers, i can strip them out 
>>> >>> >>> myself
>> or
>>> >>> >>> use
>>> >>> >>> my
>>> >>> >> own automated tool to do so.
>>> >>> >>> However,  If by chance I do want them there, I simply do not

>>> >>> >>> get that
>>> >>> >> option with Bookshare!!!
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Words do not do justice to how much this issue ticks me off.
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> Bottomline, this process does not serve the community that 
>>> >>> >>> it
>>> >>> >>> was
>>> >>> >>> designed
>>> >>> >> to assist.
>>> >>> >>> -- Rui
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > From: Mike Pietruk <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> >>> >>> > Date: 2005/07/21 Thu AM 11:00:39 EDT
>>> >>> >>> > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>> >>> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > Pam
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> > agreed!  It's inconsistent and unpredictable.  And the
>>> >>> >>> > problems
>>> >>> >>> > relative
>>> >>> >>> > to it have been discussed repeatedly.
>>> >>> >>> > The Powers-that-be are all too aware of the damage the 
>>> >>> >>> > stripper
>>> >>> has
>>> >>> >> caused
>>> >>> >>> > but seem to have shoved it on the back burner probably due

>>> >>> >>> > to
>> more
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >>> > pressing issues to deal with. It is a shame that it cannot

>>> >>> >>> > be dealt with; but Marissa, prior to her leaving, pretty 
>>> >>> >>> > much outlined where it stands. So I wouldn't expect much 
>>> >>> >>> > change regarding the stripper as any change would require 
>>> >>> >>> > some sort of policy change plus programmer action. 
>>> >>> >>> > Conceptually, the stripper
>>> >>> >>> > makes sense; practically, it has been a
>>> >>> >> dismal
>>> >>> >>> > failure breading as much (or perhaps even more) than it 
>>> >>> >>> > has repaired. It's not our decision as we are volunteers, 
>>> >>> >>> > not decision-makers.
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>> >
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> --
>>> >>> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> >>> >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>> >>> >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date:
>>> >>> 7/19/2005
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> 





Other related posts: