[bksvol-discuss] Re: hold for revisited

  • From: "groups Warford" <groups_warford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2007 14:42:08 -0500

Hi Lori,
Thank you for your very thoughtful and insightful notes.  As you stated, The
"hold for" really isn't the issue for me; it's how to know if I have done a
good validation and how to improve.
My apologies to all for not having the wherewithal to stay out of a
discussion.  I shouldn't have reacted to a "trigger".  In doing so I feel
that I have alienated people who have given me a lot of support as a new
volunteer.  It's no one's fault that I'm the type of person who wants/needs
some type of measurement that lets me know if I am or am not doing a good
job.  I do most definitely want to do and give my best to Bookshare!  
You thanked me for my direct support to you, and I really appreciate that.
But, you and Mike have always been very supportive of me, and it feels good
when I can give back, even though it was in a very small way, I enjoyed
being able to help, and it was no trouble at all.  There are so many others
who have shown their support, and I really appreciate this.  I'm learning,
but if I can help someone or answer a question, I'm very happy to do so
because this is the way I've been treated on this list and in the room, with
respect.  Hopefully as I continue to learn, I'll b able to be more helpful
to others.
Again, thank you for being able to see parts of both sides of issues and put
them into perspective.  I appreciate that more than I can say!
To all on the list, I'm definitely putting this topic not just to bed but
underneath the bed, as far under as I can shove it!  Again, my apologies for
overreacting, and I do appreciate the support I have received.
I'll be back on list in a couple of days so everyone take care!
Again, Lori, THANK YOU!
Cindy 4

"Success is loving life and daring to live it".
- Maya Angelou


From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lori Castner
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 1:08 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: hold for revisited

Hi, After reading Monica's post, I want to be sure that people understand
that I do not feel that there is any discrimination among bookshare
volunteers.  However, also n response to Monica's comments, it is not always
easy for a new volunteer, employee, any group member, to become part of a
network, and I do think that essentially validating is an individual
project--which is essentially good for me as I tend to be a loner.  But that
being said, it is not always easy to know the best way to get feedback on
These comments have little to do with the hold for issue.
Cat Lover Lori

----- Original Message ----- 
From: Lori Castner <mailto:loralee.castner@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 9:33 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: hold for revisited

Cindy, I very much agree with your points  I think that in some ways new
validators are really on their own; of course, we have the manual and
information from this list, but when we validate a book we just have to hope
it will come out well.
I submitted a book a while back and requested on this list that if someone
on the list took the book to validate that I would appreciate feedback about
my submission; I did all the things to the book that I would do when
validating it.  I hoped that sort of feedback would confirm the success of
what I am doing.  That book is still out for validation--which is fine--but
don't know if I will ever hear.
I think that this discussion gives us an opportunity to share our views, but
really it won't change anything.
Also, I have very much appreciated the support that you have given directly
to me.
Cat Lover Lori

----- Original Message ----- 
From: groups Warford <mailto:groups_warford@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>  
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 5:44 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: hold for revisited

Hi Monica,
I do understand your points as far as percentages go.  However, I do
respectfully disagree.  What I and other new members of the rowing club have
to fight is the perception that we couldn't row well and basically never
will be able to row well.  This perception was held by the long-term members
and unfortunately by the Executive Director at the time.  So, for example, I
was told that I couldn't row in windy conditions without ever having been
tested to see if that were true.  It turned out that I am one of the better
people in rowing in windy conditions because I'm not afraid of the water,
and being blind, the waves that are kicked up aren't an added distraction
the way they are for a sighted person.  We had one guy join the club and won
a silver medal at the Southeast regional championships.  However, none of
the long-term members thought he could.  And, even when he did, he was
looked at as a threat (this part, the threat, is not like Bookshare).  So,
basically the rowing club had no way for someone to prove and improve their
skill level so that a long-term member would know the newer people could b
So, what I'm feeling here from this discussion is that I, as a new
validator, don't know how to win people's trust.  What do I need to do to
show that I can or can't handle a book with scripture and so on?  It's very
subjective.  As far as a submitter and a validator who are used to working
with each other being able to talk in the room or on the phone or via Skype,
what prevents a new validator from being able to do the same if given the
Honestly, I really don't know who puts "hold for" a lot, and I never thought
and still don't think of you as doing so.  However, Dave's message did, as I
said, strike a chord and I felt much like I do with the rowing club.
Everything is subjective and how do I improve and how do others know I have
I mean this very respectfully, and I expect our opinions will never mesh.
That's fine with me; just please don't take my opinions personally and I
will try to follow my own advice.
Thanks for taking the time to write,.  I always learn from your insights and
experience, and I thank you very much for that!
Cindy 4

From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Monica Willyard
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2007 6:43 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: hold for revisited

Hi, Cindy. I do understand what you are saying. I think there is a big
difference in what's happening here and in your rowing club. Here's why.
There are literally over 400 books which do not have a hold on them that a
new volunteer is welcome to work on. The holds make up a fairly small
portion of the step 1 list at any given time. Right now, there are 431 books
on step 1. There are 10 books with holds on them. That's less than two
percent of the total of books available for validation. I could understand
your concerns if we were seeing over a hundred holds on step 1 and new
volunteers could only work on the textbooks floating around on step 1. Most
of us who submit books actually upload quite a lot of books without holds.
For example, three of the last five books I've submitted haven't had any
holds on them. The other two books had holds because the books were needed
in a time-sensitive manner, one for a book club and one because it's a
Christmas book. When we have the opportunity to work with someone on a
specific project, I think we should have the freedom to choose to work as we
see fit. We can do the hold thing, or we could just call a person on the
phone and upload our book while we're talking so they can grab it
immediately. The result would be the same, though you wouldn't see "hold
for" on the website. It would just take something that's done openly and
push it underground, emphasizing the kind of cliquish behavior Dave wrote
about in his post. I can't speak for anyone else here. I'd rather see the
holds done openly so we all know what's going on and who is doing what. I
don't think this is an issue unless the holds reach the thirty percent level
or more, or if they are used to prevent someone from validating at all. I
just don't see that happening.

Monica Willyard

groups Warford wrote: 

Hi Dave,

I usually don't really enjoy controversy, but this strikes a chord with me.

In a lot of ways I agree with you.


Other related posts: