They could do some kind of automated analysis similar to that which is done
on Step Two. I think that may be what she is refering to. It is true that
books with a lot of proper names and foreign words and such might be judged
lower-quality than they actually were by this method, but as I think Tom
said, even with those sorts of things, the accuracy rating is still pretty
high if the overall text quality is good. If something like what is done on
Step Two were done on submission, a cutoff could be assigned below which
books would not make it to Step One.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Cindy" <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 5:51 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: bookshare seems to be interested in quantity
E,
I don't think bookshare checks books that are submitted. They go instantly onto the download shelf, and aren't checked by an administrator until uploaded after valdation--and then, I think, Gustavo only checks the copyright info. That's the impression I get, anyway, given the fact that books in the collection have pages missing or garbled, etc. It would take him too long to check through the book. That's what we validators are for. So unless we reject a book, it's going to be accepted by bookshare. I don't see how they can know what's poor quality.
Cindy
- I basethis suspicion on the fact that bookshare still permits submits of poor quality books rather than raising the bar, thereby making less work for validators and improving the quality of bookshare's collection. Bookshare for now seems to want to keep the bar low and strive for quantity.
E. At 07:15 AM 9/26/2006, you wrote:
>Hi Monica, > >I do understand that some people validate for credits, and there's nothing >at all wrong with that. On the other hand, many of the people on this list, >yourself included, strike me as dedicated, and willing to do a good job for >Bookshare at the same time. Originally, Evan I think it was, said that by >offering more money, people would just rush through their validations to get >the credits. Although this may be true for some, I still find it hard to >believe that most volunteers would do that. Didn't someone say that only >seven people paid for their memberships through their volunteer efforts? > >On the other hand, I'd rather see the pay scale changed entirely. Perhaps >$2 for submissions, and $1 for validation, would balance the scales more >equably. > >This would balance so that 25 submissions, or 50 validations, would pay for >a renewal of membership. > >And if offering more for validations would cause people to race through a >validation, offering less would seem to encourage people to race even >faster. After all, if I'll only make fifty cents per validation, that means >I'll have to validate 100 books to get through the renewal process. Better >validate real fast! > >-----Original Message----- >From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Monica Willyard >Sent: Monday, September 25, 2006 10:50 PM >To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: a sort of raise for validators > >Hi, Cindy. I have a scanner and use Openbook to scan. What I was trying to >say is that without credits, I wouldn't do much on the validating side of >things. As it is, I do validation both for the credit and because we have a >pretty hefty step 1 page right now. Lora was talking about not validating >for credits, and that is what I was responding to. (smile) > >Monica Willyard > >On Monday 9/25/2006 11:34 PM, you wrote: > >Monica, > > > >One gets so much more monetary credit for scanning, and all you'd > >really have to do after a scan is to check the copyright page and put > >the right info in the submission form; go through the book and be sure > >no pages have been omitted (we've all done that, and double-scanned a > >page, too); and delete junk characters; and run a spell-check. So you > >validate because you don't have a scanner? I think some can be had > >relatively inexpensively and it might pay you n the long run. > > > >I don't blame you at all for validating for the credits. I probably > >would work for the credits, too. I admit that in my lifetime I have > >volunteered my time and efforts rather than donated money, not only > >because I feel I'm being useful but because I don't have that much > >money to donate. smile > > > >Cindy > > 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. > > 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.
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.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
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.
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.