[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux

  • From: "Gary Petraccaro" <garyp130@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 22:20:00 -0500

Then, if they're so uninterested, save all of us reading these thread, save the volunteers the time wasted on an incompetent job, and save the readers the agony of hope to find a title to be followed by sadness when it turns out that the book is a botched job.

----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Pietruk" <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 29, 2004 4:47 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux



Guido

You are also assuming, and I would suggest erroneously, that the submitter
cares in all cases whether their books is accepted or rejected.
Some folks submit their scans as a courtesy to allow others the benefit of
what they've done for themselves.
Hence, by just rejected their work, you convey no msg other than BookShare
doesn't want it.
Hence, you are not going to improve their efforts as their initial
intention wasn't a BookShare submission but to read it for themselves.
If they consider the book readable for themselves, that is all that
matters to them in this instance.

While I wholeheartedly agree that better quality books are desirable over
worse scanned ones, I also recognize the philosophy upon which BookShare
is based.
I also recognize that something else is at play:  BookShare, due to its
success and growth, is perhaps bursting at its ability to process received
submissions and needs, therefore, to figure out a means of making the
workload managable.
While I do personally nuke books that are of such poor quality making
reading difficult or impossible, I also accept the notion that I also
rather have a poorer quality book than none at all.
And in many cases, nuking a book won't be having it rescanned but gone
forever.







Other related posts: