----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx>Kim Friedman
To: <mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 19, 2009 3:10 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: my two cents worth so far on
proofreadingRE: Re: questions please and thank you delete if don't like
how I write.
Hi, Gwen, so far I'm doing stuff I like. I've been hesitant of doing a
lot of proofreading because of all those downloaded files on my
BrailleNote that I haven't read yet for my own amusement. So here I am
with one more book. What is this? I have to proofread a book with a
deadline hanging over my head in order to get the job done? (disgusted
feeling) Actually, I know those other books are there for me, but so far
I haven't proofread anything I hate. After all I agreed to do it, and if
one agrees to something, one should stick it out and finish what one
starts, unless one tells the other person: "I don't want to read any more
of this book." I'm thinking if I fell asleep every time I tried to go
through the thing, I'd release it, hoping somebody else will give it a
good going-over. If I hated it, I probably wouldn't be reading it in the
first place. (The only times one is stuck with that is if one is doing a
class assignment and the turgid thing is the required book or article.
Regards, the still inexperienced but progressing Kim.
----------
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwen tweedy
Sent: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 5:07 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: my two cents worth so far on
proofreadingRE: Re: questions please and thank you delete if don't like
how I write.
I think this is good.
I think a scanner ought to know what is going on at all times if
possible. Sometimes it's just the not knowing that can be frustrating.
I don't care how long a book takes as long as I know what is happening
and what I can do to make it better.
Contrary to what a lot of people have gathered, I'd rather be told about
my book than be left hanging, that drives me crazy to be left hanging.
I'd rather have a flat out rejection than the hanging or even if somebody
can't do it for whatever reason, say so, don't let me go on my book
months later and find them just sitting there just because somebody
couldn't tell me, reject it get it o ut of the way, but I'd rather not be
left hanging nor my books be left hanging.
Working on them is one thing, but taking them, and never letting me know
why they were put back,
if I were a proofer I wouldn't do that.
I'd let you know such and so was wrong, right now I couldn't do it, gonna
let somebody else take it any reason will do, but limbo I can't handle.
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx>Kim Friedman
To: <mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:54 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] my two cents worth so far on proofreadingRE:
Re: questions please and thank you delete if don't like how I write.
Hi, Lynn, Gwen, and anybody else who reads this, I know I don't have a
lot of experience, but one thing I didn't do on my last book was use the
spell-checker. I don't know why that was, but I thought I'd listen to
the text and follow along using my BrailleNote. One thing I decided to
do was be cautious in what I did. What I decided to do was take note of
names, words, etc. and if I saw a word spelled the same way more than
once and if I could conclude that the spelling was what was supposed to
be there, I wouldn't mess with it. This is especially true when you're
reading science fiction or fantasy literature. Proper names, names for
things, plants, etc. were bound to be out of the common way and the
computer wouldn't know about that. I think there's where it helps for
the proofreader to write the submitter to verify if the surmise is
correct. Maybe my way is slower, but I think I prefer to read every word
of a text and communicate with a submitter to make sure that what I'm
reading is what is supposed to be in the text. Regards, a cautious Kim
Friedman.
----------
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Lynn I
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:49 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: questions please and thank you delete if
don't like how I write.
Hi Gwen!
In answer to your first question, initially people could scan and
proofread their own books. However, I think the policy of having someone
else proofread is a good one. I sometimes tend to be a contextual
reader. I believe having someone else proofread allows for an
opportunity to catch things I did not. *smile*
My only negative experience with this policy has been when a proofreader
relied on spell check and changed spellings of proper names and some
terms that were intended to be spelled as they were.
Blessings.
Lynnsky
----------
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwen tweedy
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 8:47 AM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] questions please and thank you delete if don't
like how I write.
I'm wondering if there are people who have no trouble submitting books
their books are always excepted no matter what.
Why couldn't they be allowed to scan and proof their own books if they
so desired?
Question 2:
Why can't a scanner at least be allowed to clear their book lists so
they can start over with no books pending?
Thanks
Gwen
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.707 / Virus Database: 270.14.68/2507 - Release Date:
11/16/09 13:53:00
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4615 (20091117) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4616 (20091117) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4621 (20091119) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
__________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus
signature database 4621 (20091119) __________
The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
<http://www.eset.com>http://www.eset.com
