[bksvol-discuss] Re: reading in mp3Re: Re: question: Re: page breaks

  • From: "Silvara" <silvara@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 11 Dec 2004 22:56:15 -0500

Yet those "romance books" are very readable even with their errors. Have you read them yourself? I for one enjoy reading romance novels and don't believe I should have to decode the novel. That's not enjoyable, that's stressful. Just because this is not a text book don't I deserve a quality book? some of these books are not readable. In many cases there are pages that are merged together so that you read half a sentence from 1 page and half from another. I don't consider this readable. I felt bad rejecting books and in 1 case I scanned the book myself and got a flawless scan. So it wasn't the book that caused the errors. It was lack of effort. And for the record I will continue to reject such books if I feel that they are not readable and don't want to spend many hours fixing them .


Grace
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Pietruk" <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 9:24 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: reading in mp3Re: Re: question: Re: page breaks



Prat

Yet those "romance books" are very readable even with their errors.  Now,
if they were science or history text with dates, formulae and assorted
other data, that would be a different story.
What truly would be gained by declining those submissions given that they
are light pleasure reading and little more.
Yes, if you can figure out how the submitter could improve the quality
without much cost or pain, you'd have some rationale.
My hunch is that individual is doing those books for herself first and
foremost; and thereafter sharing.

I am all for quality improvement, teaching improved scanning techniques;
but I cannot favor that at the expense of less material being available.
I understand where you and Guido are coming from, but I don't see why
Jesse's standards of acceptance from last August are suddenly not
acceptible.
This is an instance where it is not broken, so why fix it.
The solution isn't eliminating those contributions; it is making certain
that the downloaders understand the limitations of those submissions and,
based on that, can make an informed decision of whether or not to retrieve
those books.

We'll have to agree to disagree as I doubt
either side will give in to the other.  And beyond that, it not our
decision anyway!





Other related posts: