[bksvol-discuss] Re: please more submits so I can proof read

There might actually be legitimate reasons for jiffy proofreading sometimes, 
or perhaps I need to come up with another term for what I have in mind. I can 
think of three times that I did it. One time it was a book for young children, 
very young children. It really did take me only a few minutes to proofread 
the problem and solution for Big Bird. The other two times I found a book on 
the 
download list that Carrie had bounced back a long time ago with a note to 
make a minor correction and then she would approve it. Well, the former 
proofreader had not bothered to make the correction and a lot of time had 
passed, so I 
just made the correction and uploaded without reading it. I think that was 
legitimate.

                  "Philosophers have merely interpreted the world in various 
ways; the point is to change it." Karl Marx     

table with 2 columns and 6 rows
Subj: 
[bksvol-discuss] Re: please more submits so I can proof read   
Date: 
3/15/2009 9:36:00 PM Eastern Daylight Time  
From: 
denisecwagner@xxxxxxxxxxx  
Reply-to: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Sent from the Internet 
(Details) 
table end

And please forgive me for forgetting who had this idea, but I think the more 
quality reports that get reported for these jiffy readers, the more likely
we will have a case for Bookshare to hold these skaters responsible for 
shoddy work.  On the other hand, if a person is a jiffy reader, and the job is
quality and no report can be filed, I don't think we have a problem or reason 
to complain.  Of course, since I'm not a member I can't file any, but I think
it's a great idea.  Get the shoddy work on record, then have Bookshare 
investigate and maybe eventually reprimand or prevent these sub-par proofers 
from
submitting anything (if they are sub-par). 

I would only caution against one thing -- making sure the jiffy reader is 
truly just skating and not a newbie and ignorant of the duties and 
expectations. 

Boy, I'm spouting my mouth alot today -- I need a hobby *chuckle*. 

Denise

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx
Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2009 9:25 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: please more submits so I can proof read

She either respects the holds or she is too out of it to realize that she 
could get away with not respecting them. Either way, though, that is why I think
that your idea of a hold for code would work. It is a shame too, because, if 
you will recall, I was one of those who was complaining about all the holds
because they are so frustrating for those of us who are browsing for 
something to proofread that is up for grabs and I am sure that this proposal 
will
just increase the frustration for a new proofreader who may be perfectly 
conscientious and for even long time proofreaders who are not on this list, but
what else is to be done? It is just basically unfair for jiffy proofreaders 
to deplete the download list like that. 

                "Philosophers have merely interpreted the world in various 
ways; the point is to change it." Karl Marx     

table with 2 columns and 6 rows
Subj: 
[bksvol-discuss] Re: please more submits so I can proof read   
Date: 
3/15/2009 8:42:07 PM Eastern Daylight Time  
From: 
mirxtech@xxxxxxxxx  
Reply-to: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
To: 
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Sent from the Internet 
(Details) 
table end

I used to love the system where a person could just browse the step 1 list 
and choose a book but that doesn't seem to be working anymore, so I would 
prefer,
too, to have a specific person I could do a "hold for" when I submit. But not 
every book seems to have an interested proofreader. That's the only reason
I was thinking that if you did a "hold for Reader" that at least a person who 
is going to read it would take it. I see that the 20 minute proofreader 
doesn't
take the books I put up with holds, so at least that person respects the 
holds. 

Of course, it may not work and if it does work it may not work for long. 

Everyone who knows me knows I do NOT read every word of every book I submit. 
I do check the scan as it OCRs and I do page through the file but I know 
that's
not enough to catch every error and there is no good way for Bookshare to say 
you haven't spent enough time working on this proofread because then the
person could just hang onto the file for a couple more hours and then upload 
it anyway. 

Without the requirement that you have to read the proofread, I don't think 
there is a good solution but maybe we can come up with something, anything,
as
a work around?

-- 
Jamie in Michigan
Currently Reading: Lost: The Search for Six of Six Million by Daniel 
Mendelsohn
www.michrxtech.com/books.html

**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220439616x1201372437/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww
.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3D
febemailfooterNO62) 


**************
A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See 
yours in just 2 easy steps! 
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1220439616x1201372437/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3F
sc%3D668072%26hmpgID%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

Other related posts: