[bksvol-discuss] Re: Long validation list

  • From: "Gary Petraccaro" <garyp130@xxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 06:11:54 -0500

I was able to get Diamond Solitaire to 99.5 percent before clean-up just by doing a careful scan. It's almost finished now, just awaiting a check of italics because I'm getting some false positives. Wish I could lessen these. <sigh>

----- Original Message ----- From: "Monica Willyard" <rhyami@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Long validation list

Judy and others, please, pretty please, reject books that are unreadable
like the ones you describe. It is so frustrating to take a book from
step 1 and find out that it's messed up beyond repair. Even worse is
when several people have taken it before and just put it back because
another volunteer has to take it and run into the same problem. You are
right that rescanning actually takes less time. I can scan an average
paperback in about an hour and a half. Thick textbooks take longer, of
course. If a book is going to take 10 or 15 hours just to make it
somewhat legible, my vote is to reject it and let someone else rescan
it. I don't expect perfection from anyone, and God knows I'm far from
perfect. My early scans are pretty messy. Still, someone had the good
sense to reject a couple of them and offered to teach me how to get
decent scans. Getting the rejection notices didn't feel so good, but
they did make me start asking what I was doing wrong. That was the right
question to ask, and I got help. My scans began to improve, and I will
always be grateful to those volunteers who mentored me. I don't think we
help anyone by just returning messed up books to step 1 or letting them
pass into the system. The submitter won't learn anything from the
experience, and someone else will end up having to clean up the mess later.

Monica Willyard

Judy s. wrote:
Another thing I've found on the validation list are many books that
are listed as 'fair.'  For me, as a validator, they are not worth the
hours and hours of time it would take to try to turn into something
that is just acceptable.  I'm guessing it would be much faster to have
those rescanned than have a validator try to fix them, from what I've

Judy s.


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.17.1/1182 - Release Date: 12/12/2007 11:29 AM

To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
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: