[bksvol-discuss] Re: bookshare seems to be interested in quantity

  • From: "Evan Reese" <mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:22:40 -0700

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 base
this 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.

Other related posts: