[bksvol-discuss] changing subject line
- From: Cindy <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 18:03:30 -0800 (PST)
Bud, you are absolutely correct. I try to remember and
have been pretty good at it but not always.
But I had to laugh (and then cough, because of my cold
-- not fair of you --grin) because your post was under
the subject heading of txt page breaks redux. You
forgot to follow your own advice (smile).
Cindy
-- bud schwab <budschwab@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Let's change the subject line so we know whether to
> read it or delete
> it. This is getting to be a very busy, and I know
> important, list but
> dozens and dozens come through with the same subject
> line and pretty soon
> the subject line has nothing to do with the actual
> subject.
> Thanks for letting me get that off my chest.
>
> Bud Schwab
> At 10:19 AM 12/29/2004, you wrote:
>
> >Dave, your are correct, Enforced monogamy is an
> obvious flaw in the
> >legal system of the western world.
> >
> >Guido
> >
> >Guido Dante Corona
> >IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
> >Research Division,
> >Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
> >Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> >Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
> >
> >
> >
> >talmage@xxxxxxxxxx
> >Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >12/29/2004 11:54 AM
> >Please respond to
> >bksvol-discuss
> >
> >To
> >bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >cc
> >Subject
> >[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >You're just saying that because Kellie said you can
> be charming. I'm not
> >sure but I think there may be a law or something
> that says it's naughty to
> >marry more than one person.
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >At 11:47 PM 12/28/2004, you wrote:
> >
> > >Now about cleaning and cookery, I would never
> complain. . . . marriage
> > >taught me that, at least. . .
> > >but Bookshare volunteers I haven't married. . .
> yet, that is. . .
> > >besides, I love Pratik very much, but only like
> a brother! As for all
> > >the ladies. . . well, you know, I just can't
> marry everyone of you. . .
> > >just not practical.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Guido
> > >
> > >Guido Dante Corona
> > >IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
> > >Research Division,
> > >Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
> > >Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"siss52" <siss52@xxxxxxx>
> > >Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >
> > >12/28/2004 10:10 PM
> > >Please respond to
> > >bksvol-discuss
> > >
> > >To
> > ><bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >cc
> > >Subject
> > >[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Oh thou high annd mighty one,
> > >
> > >This is sent in a spirit of fun just to lighten
> things up a bit. I know you
> > >are married because you have told us. Are you
> this much of a perfectionist
> > >about your wife's housework and cooking?
> <<<<lol>>
> > >
> > >Happy New Year!
> > >
> > >Sue S.
> > >
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "Guido Corona" <guidoc@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:28 PM
> > >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks
> redux
> > >
> > >
> > >mary, quite frankly, I could not care less about
> the submitter rescanning
> > >the bad copy or preferring to sulk themselves
> onto eternity.
> > >This is only a matter of optimal usage of staff
> and volunteer time, as I
> > >explained in my note to Cindy.
> > >If anyone finds a hopeless submission of mine, I
> trust they will have the
> > >fortitude to nuke it with the same equanimity
> that I will experience
> > >receiving the rejection note. When I was a
> programmer I was a firm
> > >believer in egoless programming: If I found a
> bug in anyone's code, I
> > >expected it to be fixed. If there were too many
> bugs, I expected a
> > >rewrite. And yes, I demanded the same treatment
> towards my code, except
> > >that, I usually found my own bugs before anyone
> else did, and fixed them
> > >in time.
> > >
> > >Guido
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Guido Dante Corona
> > >IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
> > >Research Division,
> > >Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
> > >Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> > >Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >"Mary Otten" <maryotten@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > >12/28/2004 08:17 PM
> > >Please respond to
> > >bksvol-discuss
> > >
> > >
> > >To
> > >"bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx"
> <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >cc
> > >
> > >Subject
> > >[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >Just some things to ponder before you take the
> axe to all books with no
> > >page breaks, regardless of the quality of their
> text. A lot of people
> > >expressed the idea that they didn't much care
> about page breaks, that they
> > >
> > >could navigate just fine without them, especially
> if the book in question
> > >was your basic novel, very unlikely to be used as
> a reference book by
> > >anyone.
> > >There is an assumption that all the books that
> are rejected are going to
> > >be rescanned. For those of you who like to toss
> off figures about how
> > >quickly you can scan and prevalidate a book, and
> who are thus ready to
> > >help reduce the backlog by rejecting the hapless
> books with no page breaks
> > >in them, does that then mean that you're also
> going to scan replacement
> > >copies? Or is the assumption that the original
> submitter will see the
> > >error of his or her ways and rescan and submit
> those titles including page
> > >breaks this time? I find that to be a very
> dubious assumption.
> > >Finally, since Marissa said there would be
> something forthcoming from
> > >BookShare hq on this topic probably by the end of
> the week, I think it
> > >would be better to wait and see what they have to
> say before a wholesale
> > >search and destroy operation is begun.
> > >Remember, the last word we had from Marissa
> regarding this topic, at
> > >least as I recalll, was that page breaks alone
> were not cause for
> > >rejection; and I believe she also said that one
> of the members on this
> > >list who had
> > >a lot of older scans that may be missing those
> page breaks should still
> > >submit them. So if its ok for them to be
> submitted, then it would seem
> > >to be not ok to reject based on an absence of
> page breaks alone.
> > >Mary
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> Bud Schwab
> W 6 Z Y P
> Malibu, California
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Other related posts:
