[bksvol-discuss] Re: Dealing With Chronic Problem Submitters (was Re: 2 Mystery Rejections)
- From: "robert tweedy" <roberttweedy@xxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 06:39:58 -0600
I said this before, folks who just scan and don't even attempt to clean up
their books shouldn't get their books in the collection and we waste valuable
time on them.
Skype contact bobwichitaks phone 316-524-5454
----- Original Message -----
From: Monica Willyard
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 5:25 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Dealing With Chronic Problem Submitters (was Re: 2
Mystery Rejections)
Cindy, if my memory serves me correctly, these two mysteries were not scanned
by Louise's friend. Whether or not it's the same person, talking about the
woman you've mentioned by name on a list where she isn't even present to
explain her actions seems like gossip to me. I'm sure you don't mean it that
way, and I know you're frustrated with this person. I am too. I'd love to
change the situation somehow. I just don't think this is the way to accomplish
it in the long term. A direct approach to deal with the problem at the root
seems more effective to me. I think having ongoing issues with a specific
submitter should be addressed to Bookshare directly and in writing so that it's
put into their issue tracking system.
My concern is that mentioning poor submitters by name on the list will
contribute to an atmosphere of gossip, making it almost impossible for a person
to have a change of heart down the road. I'm also concerned that people may not
speak up to get help with their scans for fear of being labeled a poor
submitter. I don't know if you know this, but what we say on this list is
published on Google and is archived by both Google and Freelists for the
forseeable future. What we post on a bad day doesn't just go away. I can find
things I've written online from all the way back to 1992, some of them not so
flattering. The archives of this list are a great asset to Bookshare and to new
volunteers. What we say here can help people as they learn how to work with
books, and I think that's important. We can do a lot of personal harm to
someone though if we label them negatively in a public setting. We can't just
take it back if their behavior changes in the future. What we say could be read
5, 10, or even 50 years from now thanks to the power of the internet. Try doing
a Google search for some of the people who post on here often, and you'll see
what I mean.
Now, for the fix. Yes, I do think there is one. Bookshare itself should be
taking care of issues regarding ongoing poor performance, and I would urge
anyone who has problems to write to Bookshare for help. In fact, documentation
of this issue may be what the staff needs to justify taking action here. If
each of us who regularly experiences trouble with a submitter writes to
Bookshare, they will have to listen. I don't mean a problem scan here and there
or scans by new volunteers. Those of you who validate know that we have just 3
or 4 people who consistently put very poor scans into the system, and they've
been doing it for years. If each of us who has dealt with these chronic issues
addresses Bookshare for help, they will see that we're not willing to slog
through the garbage anymore. So as I see it, we use a two-prong strategy.
First, write a polite but direct letter stating that as a volunteer, you are
unwilling to continue to process scans from the chronically poor submitter,
mentioning them by name to Bookshare. Describe the state of the scans you have
personally witnessed so they will understand why this is an issue. Ask
Bookshare politely to take steps to address this ongoing and chronic situation.
Being polite and professional is a very important part of making this strategy
work.
Then completely stop working on scans by these specific people. Do nothing.
No rejecting, no cleaning, no downloading at all. Let them fall down to the
bottom of the step 1 page so Bookshare can see them in a cluster. Do nothing
with them until Bookshare makes up its mind to take action on them. Encourage
new volunteers to work on books rated excellent at first since that works best
for them anyway. Carry on validating books that interest you as you normally
do, passing over these problem scans. Resist the temptation to tidy up a bit
for now. Yes, this does mean that we'll have some messed up books on step 1 for
a little while. It'll be sort of like filling a trash can to the point that
someone finally decides it's full enough that they'd better carry the trash bag
out to the dumpster. If a trash bag is only half full, it's easier to put off
dealing with its contents. When it's full, you really have to do something
about it.
Pretty soon, one of two things will start happening. Either Bookshare will
take some action as a result of our letters, or the submitters will begin
asking Bookshare support why none of their books are coming through. Either
way, we're out of it. Bookshare will have to make a decision on those books,
not us. Our decision is already made. We've decided not to give consistently
sloppy submitters the gift of our time and attention. We're choosing to use our
resources productively, to help new submitters, scan our own books, and to
validate books that can actually be approved into the collection without
retyping the entire book.
What do you all think? Is it worth a try?
Monica Willyard
Grandma Cindy wrote:
Maybe it's about time we stopped being so careful and
not mentioning that person's name. Maybe if we
identify her she'll get embarrassed and
reform--although I don't think she's on the list. What
do some of her friends who are on this list think?
G.Cindy
Other related posts:
