[bksvol-discuss] Re: should validators be required to read through the whole book?
- From: Cindy <popularplace@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 19:45:09 -0700 (PDT)
I don't know how many sighted people are validating.
Carrie does some, I know, and there's me. I've asked,
just for interest's sake, but it seems to me that
Carrie and I are the only sighted people on this list,
and I don't know how many sighted volunteers there are
off list.
I, and I think Carrie, too, read everything
carefully--well, almost everything. I will admit that
I lost patience with Medieval Italy and with
Archaelogy of the Land of the Bible, and just checked
the pagination and skimmed the pages, correcting what
my eyes noticed. There was one novel I started to do
treat the same way, but I got somewhat interested and
went back and validated it carefully.
I personally think it's more important for sighted
volunteers to read carefully and correct as they go,
because there are errors that K1000 ranked spelling
won't catch, like workds missing from sentences,
homonyms, etc.
Cindy R
--- Allison Mervis <allisonfm@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I always tend to read the entire book because as a
> totally blind person, I
> want to check very carefully for errors that might
> encumber me as a reader.
> However, a sighted person can more easily skim the
> book for blatant errors,
> so often, reading the entire thing might not be
> necessary. Just my two cents
> worth.
> Allison
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On
> Behalf Of k4zq
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 8:49 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: should validators be
> required to read through
> the whole book?
>
>
> Evan,
>
> Your second point is more cogent. What I meant was
> exactly as you put it.
>
> A validator doesn't necessarily have to read the
> entire book, however, he
> (or she) should either reject a poor scan, or fix it
> up.
>
> You said that, didn't you?
>
> Peace,
>
> Ernie
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Evan Reese" <mentat1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 8:18 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: should validators be
> required to read through
> the whole book?
>
>
> > True, but I think that puts too much onus on the
> validator when it
> > should
> > be on the submitter. Submitters get five times as
> much credit per book as
>
> > validators do, and while many validators are not
> in it for the money, they
>
> > certainly shouldn't be held responsible for
> poor-quality books getting
> > into the collection because they didn't read
> through and fix them up.
> > Perhaps they should be held responsible for a
> poor-quality book getting
> > into the collection because they didn't reject it,
> so your point two below
>
> > is valid. You don't need to read through a whole
> book to recognize a poor
> > scan and reject it. If you are saying that a
> person shouldn't be
> > validating because he/she didn't read through a
> poor scan and fix it up,
> > then I would disagree with that. On the other
> hand, if you are saying
> > that a person shouldn't be validating because they
> didn't reject a
> > poor-quality book because they didn't take the
> time to at least do enough
> > checking to determine the scan quality and reject
> it, then I would agree
> > with that.
> >
> > By the way, I noticed that you no longer have the
> word Peace at the
> > bottom
> > of your messages. Have you given up on that?
> <grin>
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "k4zq" <k4zq@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 1:41 PM
> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: should validators be
> required to read
> > through the whole book?
> >
> >
> >> Of course, it would be on the honor system.
> However, if an extremely
> >> poor quality book was submitted, one could
> conclude one of two things:
> >>
> >> 1 The validator didn't read the book,
> >>
> >> and, 2: this particular person shouldn't be
> validating anyway.
> >>
> >> Ernie
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "E." <thoth93@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2006 2:29 PM
> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] should validators be
> required to read through
> >> the whole book?
> >>
> >>
> >>> There is no way of knowing if a validator reads
> through the whole
> >>> book.
> >>> So I cannot understand how this could be made a
> requirement.
> >>>
> >>> E.
> >>>
> >>> To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email
> to
> >>> bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>> put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the
> subject line. To get a
> >>> list
> >>> of available commands, put the word 'help' by
> itself in the subject
> >>> line.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> No virus found in this incoming message.
> >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> >>> Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425
> - Release Date:
> >>> 8/22/2006
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >> To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email
> to
> >> bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the
> subject line. To get a
> >> list
> >> of available commands, put the word 'help' by
> itself in the subject line.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email
> to
> > bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the
> subject line. To get a
> > list
> > of available commands, put the word 'help' by
> itself in the subject line.
> >
> >
> > --
> > No virus found in this incoming message.
> > Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> > Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.5/425 -
> Release Date: 8/22/2006
> >
> >
>
> To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
> bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject
> line. To get a list of
> available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in
> the subject line.
>
> To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
> bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject
> line. To get a list of available commands, put the
> word 'help' by itself in the subject line.
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to
bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of
available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.
Other related posts:
