[bksvol-discuss] Re: reading in mp3Re: Re: question: Re: page breaks
- From: "Kenneth A. Cross" <crossk@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2004 19:37:02 -0500
I think it is very unkind and ungentlemanly to refer to someone who submits
a book to BookShare as a culprit. The work of a submitter, (not a culprit
if you please), is reviewed by someone else and approved by staff as well.
I beg you, and beg others to ask you as well, to treat submitters with the
respect any volunteer deserves. Failure to do so will result in many
volunteers either not submitting or doing so anonymously, either of which
would be counter-productive.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pratik Patel" <pratikp1@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 11:36 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: reading in mp3Re: Re: question: Re: page
breaks
> Mike,
>
> I hope you've never tried reading those books in braille. Even if you
have,
> your speech understanding and/or braille understanding are such that you
may
> be able to decode meaning out of that type of rubbish. By definition
these
> romance books are supposed to be simple to read. I might as well read a
> Philip Roth or a Toni Morrison Novel at that rate. A reading service that
> cannot provide the type of reading pleasure without headaches of decoding
> attempts needs to reconsider its mission. Bookshare is providing books
for
> those who do not otherwise have access to such material. That does not
mean
> that bookshare should be held to different quality standards. Even if
> submitters are using out-of-date pieces of software, the type of quality
> apparent in some of these selections is, in my opinion, unacceptable. For
> this particular culprit, it's even more amazing that he/she fails to
> provide even the barest detail about the selection. I've never found the
> categories filled in, the short sinnapsis field says "harloquin Romance,"
> and the long sinapsis field is left empty. At this stage of Bookshare's
> development, if there isn't some type of quality control imposed, you are
> likely to have an unmanageable system with chaos.
>
> Sorry for the rant, folks.
>
> Prat
>
> Pratik Patel
> Interim Director
> Office of Special Services
> Queens College
> Director
> CUNY Assistive Technology Services
> The City University of New York
> ppatel@xxxxxx
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Mike Pietruk
> Sent: Saturday, December 11, 2004 9:24 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 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:
