[bksvol-discuss] Re: In-house volunteers and validations
- From: Tracy Carcione <carcione@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 10:02:07 -0500
Nnoooo! Don't zap old submissions! I've been tackling some of the old
Japan-related stuff, but it takes a good bit of work, so it's slow. But
it's interesting, and uncommon, so I think they're worth it.
Tracy
At 10:45 PM 2/10/05 -0800, you wrote:
>Sue,
>
>The meeting is actually tomorrow. We have several other targets we're
trying to meet, including over a 1000 books submitted by a university that
need to be processed, and 200 Spanish books that need our attention. We can
certainly stop flooding the download page with what we've processed in-house
and validate those in the office.
>
>I hate to say this, but since I've been here (long enough), the step one
page has fluctuate between 200 and 500 books awaiting validtion. The
backlog on the approvals is a reflection of being understaffed, but the
download page is relatively normal. . .just on the high end. I'm going
through and zapping some of the really old submissions that haven't been
touched in say, a year. Other than that, it's up to you as volunteers to
figure out how much time and attention you want to spend on your validations.
>
>Thanks,
>Marissa
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of siss52
>Sent: Thu 2/10/2005 9:20 PM
>To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Cc:
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: More Awards for Bookshare?
>
>Marissa SAID last week they were having a meeting this week and she would
>ask about in-house vols helping with validations.. How about it, Marissa?
>
>Sue S.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Mary Otten" <maryotten@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 9:24 PM
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: More Awards for Bookshare?
>
>
>I guess I'm somewhere in the middle on this discussion. Because of the heavy
>validation backlog, I'd like it a lot if some of the in house volunteers
>would be interested, if they could pitch in on the validation side, since
>it clearly generally involves a whole lot more time than what was initially
>envisioned. On the other hand, I do like the idea of special projects, like
>Pulitzers or Newberries etc, rather than just pumping out the latest book
>of interest this month, which nobody will remember a year from now. It seems
>to me that many best sellers and book of the month selections will take care
>of themselves, because they are of immediate popular interest,
>so they are more likely to be picked up by an existing member and scanned.
>Of course, for the big long block busters of mega-interest, like Harry
>Potter or the Clinton autobiography, the in house volunteers did do
>those. I also appreciate the in house volunteers taking a shot at more
>difficult titles, like cookbooks, which are really difficult to do well if
>you can't see the original copy. I wonder if it would be worth it to see if
>in house
>volunteers might be interested also in validating some of the more difficult
>titles, such as the nonfictions that contain notes, maps and the like, which
>can really benefit from somebody following with the printed copy.
>Mary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Attachment Converted: C:\panix\mime\winmail3.dat
>
Other related posts:
