[bksvol-discuss] Re: books I validated today
- From: Laura Ann Grymes <agapepetsitting@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:09:29 -0600
I agree monica.
I work hard and do many validations during times that I have extra time.
Many of the validations come into the collection as excellent but
some do as good.
It depends on how much time I have as to how many books I validate.
I feel taking some books I would not normally read for one broadens
my horizons of learning and for another reason also adds books
someone spent time scanning to the collection.
I try to focus at these times on scholarly books and books that would
benefit students because there is a great need to have books
available to them and encourage them to succeed.
Does this mean I should impose the no good or fair books and deny
someone who spent time scanning the books the chance to add books to
the collection.
Or deny those books which have great info but come back good even
with a rank spelling to not go into the collection.
No, sometimes cookbooks and other books along those lines come in as
good and that is the best they can be....should we deny access to these books.
I don't think so.
I for one want to have access to these books and am glad bookshare is here.
I appreciate all the work the scanners and validattors do toward
building the collection.
I do all the requirements for validation that book share has posted
and then some.
I work hard on my validations and try to work to see others scans
added to the system in as prompt a manner as possible.
I have read books of good quality and they are definitly readable.
I think as validators we are to do as book share ask and make sure
the copyright, author, title is correct and the book has all the
pages and is mostly a clean scan.
I work hard on my scanning and books I submit and am constantly
learning how to make them more excellent.
I think discussing here only allowing excellent text quality into the
collection and the biases that are expressed sometimes can discourage
new volunteers before they even get started.
I think if we intimidate them we will find we have fewer validattors
and discourage some volunteers who will learn as they go to do an
excellent job of validating.
I want to point out here like Monica that Validating does not make us
proof readers.
Those of you who do read the entire book by braille displays and
can and want to proof a book is wonderful but I don't think making
the ones of us who use speech to validate and in some cases those who
are not braille users or do not have the equiptment of expensive
braille displays and so on should be made to feel they don't do as
good a job as braille users is ashame.
I hope some of you will consider this and appreciate you all and your
striving for excellence in your volunteering.
I just don't want to see new people or existing people with limited
experience or equipment discouraged from volunteering.
And at the same time yes I think we should do the best job we can and
be careful and wise as we scan and validate.
Please consider these thoughts and realize I appreciate you all and
am so thankful to now be a part of this list.
I have learned a lot and am constantly improving my scans and valadations
Thank you
Laura Ann
At 02:30 AM 11/1/2006, you wrote:
I can see how using Braille would point out the flaws in a
book. Speech is far more forgiving in that department. That said,
I believe that submitters have the right to have their books
processed in a timely fashion if they comply with Bookshare's
submission requirements. Since Bookshare allows good rated
submissions to be accepted, it leaves validaters with the critical
choice of determining the fate of those books. I understand your
commitment to quality. The thing is that if we were honest with
ourselves, how many of us are interested enough in corporate
finance to validate books about it? Is the submitter of such a
book worthy of less attention because he has chosen a subject that
doesn't capture our interest? Our volunteer base is small compared
to the membership base. Is it fair to them that we keep books in
pergatory for a year or more because we have stringent standards
beyond those of Bookshare itself and impose those standards on
books in the step 1 area? To say that one should only validate
what one likes in order to produce maximum quality imposes a tacit
policy of censorship, skewing the content of the collection toward
books validaters enjoy. This undercuts the will and efforts of the
submitters and possibly that of the Bookshare membership as well if
they have requested that certain titles be scanned. Further, I
would submit that many Bookshare users would prefer to have access
to a book rated good and to have the choice of whether or not they
will read it. To me, this position against submission of books
rated as good is objectionable, and I am beginning to feel
frustrated when the same people bring up this issue from time to
time but do little to present a practical solution that would
protect the interests of submitters.
Our over all trend is toward scans rated as excellent, and that is
a wonderful thing. Some of our submitters are getting credits that
they actually earned last year, and I think that is a good thing
too. I would like to see more people celebrating the fact that
these books have been dealt with and that our step 1 queue is much
smaller and more current. I would also like to see people with an
eye for detail pitch in and help process these older books, whether
that means fixing them up or rejecting them if they do not meet
Bookshare's requirements.
Monica Willyard
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.
Other related posts:
