[bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
- From: "siss52" <siss52@xxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 17:26:22 -0500
Sorry, Rui. You started this thread soo you are not in a position to tell
us when to end it. <lol>
Sue S.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rui" <goldWave@xxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 4:55 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
Good Afternoon:
It appears I have hit a nerve with yesterday's post.
To that end, I'm glad.
However now that many people have made their views clear, (one after the
other) let us give Bookshare a chance to respond before going further.
----- 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:
