It seems to me we've had a lot of great suggestions come in recently as to what might make Step 1 more manageable. I just wanted to synthesize some of them into one e-mail. 1. When validators release a book, make it possible for the validator who is releasing the book to comment, so that they might articulate why they're sending it back to step 1. "Not something I want to read... Not enough time to validate." etc. I think this would be first thing I'd implement. Another comment someone might write might be: "Missing pages 23-24. Submitted by bookshare volunteer, so I can't track them down. Can someone else get the book and add the missing pages? Otherwise it's a great scan and all clean." Comments like these are specific, and they'd give books with one or two missing pages a chance to be added to the collection as opposed to being rejected because someone can't get the book or because the original submitter can't be reached. 2. Make it possible for a validator to upload their version of the file they've been working on back to Step 1. This way, they could release the book after doing something to it, and in the comments field mentioned above, they could write in what they did so the next validator would know. This would also make it possible for someone who had OpenBook, for example, to download an .ark book, convert it, and upload the converted .rtf file back to Step 1 for another validator. 3. Resolve the infamous BookShare volunteer. Either assign a number to each volunteer who submits a book, or, better yet, require that submitters provide an e-mail address so that validators can get a hold of them. This doesn't mean their names have to show up under the submission field once the book is approved, but I think they should show up with e-mail addresses on the Step 1 page. 4. This is a suggestion that I haven't seen mentioned, but it's something I employ on good or fair books that I download to validate, or on books whose submitters I don't know At this point, so far as I know, the person submitting a book has to decide what quality that book has. This means that someone can submit something of excellent quality and inadvertently rate it fair. It also means that someone can think their submission is perfectly awesome and give it an excellent rating when indeed it should have been rated fair. So, I do the following. A. Download the book. B. Go to step 2 and upload it. C. After uploading the book, the page appears that lists things like categories, and book quality. But now, the file has been run through BookShare's spell-checking tools and it has a quality rating that I consider more realistic. Often I find this rating to be different than the rating the original submitter gave, and it gives me a clearer starting point when I begin validation. For example, if BookShare's tools rate it fair but the submitter thought it was excellent, then why is that? Are there lots of foreign language words? Is it really just a rotten scan? What's the deal? 5. I applaud the person who suggested spending more time validating and less time writing messages to this list that have nothing or little to do with improving BookShare and its collection. Is it really necessary for people to articulate what they're currently validating, or what books they've just uploaded for approval? Is it possible for people to write "me too" and "Thank you" to the person you want to agree with or thank instead of sending the one-liner to the list? I appreciate the community, but the hundreds of messages that go through this list are overwhelming. That's all I can think of for now. Happy validating, happy submitting, and happy holidays to everyone. Satauna sthowery@xxxxxxx To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 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.