[bksvol-discuss] Re: renewing books you're validating
- From: "Jake Brownell" <jabrown@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2005 11:35:30 -0500
Alrighty, I am thinking I should set Outlook to grab my mail more
often....two messages saying the same thing...I hate that, but at least it
is acceptable being sent five mins apart....
Jake
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Pietruk" <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, July 17, 2005 11:29 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: renewing books you're validating
> Jill
>
> Whether the official time is 1 week or 2 isn't the problem.
> Frankly, unless a book were a real treasure, an important or significant
> work, or a rare book -- spending 1 week, say nothing of 2, would imply
> that everyone would be better off with a rescan.
> Part of the problem in extending a 1 week to a 2 week holding time is that
> there are people who download, and then never release a book they have
> chosen not to validate for whatever reason.
> There is nothing wrong with someone grabbing something andthe then
> deciding not to validate.
> But they ought to have the courtesy of getting the book back in
> circulation.
>
> There is a reason that validating earns 20% of the credit of a submission.
> And as I have said above, if you have to do that much work to the book, it
> may well be something best turned down.
> And if you have no time at the oment to validate, then one might best take
> a vacation from validating.
> The goal is to get books into the hands of users as quickly as possible;
> extending validating times defeats that goal and encourages slow
> validating.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.0/50 - Release Date: 7/16/2005
>
>
Other related posts:
