Dave, your are correct, Enforced monogamy is an obvious flaw in the
legal system of the western world.
Guido
Guido Dante Corona
IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
Research Division,
Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
talmage@xxxxxxxxxx
Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
12/29/2004 11:54 AM
Please respond to
bksvol-discuss
To
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject
[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
You're just saying that because Kellie said you can be charming. I'm not
sure but I think there may be a law or something that says it's naughty to
marry more than one person.
Dave
At 11:47 PM 12/28/2004, you wrote:
>Now about cleaning and cookery, I would never complain. . . . marriage
>taught me that, at least. . .
>but Bookshare volunteers I haven't married. . . yet, that is. . .
>besides, I love Pratik very much, but only like a brother! As for all
>the ladies. . . well, you know, I just can't marry everyone of you. . .
>just not practical.
>
>
>
>Guido
>
>Guido Dante Corona
>IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
>Research Division,
>Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
>Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
>
>
>
>"siss52" <siss52@xxxxxxx>
>Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>12/28/2004 10:10 PM
>Please respond to
>bksvol-discuss
>
>To
><bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>cc
>Subject
>[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
>
>
>
>
>
>Oh thou high annd mighty one,
>
>This is sent in a spirit of fun just to lighten things up a bit. I know you
>are married because you have told us. Are you this much of a perfectionist
>about your wife's housework and cooking? <<<<lol>>
>
>Happy New Year!
>
>Sue S.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Guido Corona" <guidoc@xxxxxxxxxx>
>To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2004 9:28 PM
>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
>
>
>mary, quite frankly, I could not care less about the submitter rescanning
>the bad copy or preferring to sulk themselves onto eternity.
>This is only a matter of optimal usage of staff and volunteer time, as I
>explained in my note to Cindy.
>If anyone finds a hopeless submission of mine, I trust they will have the
>fortitude to nuke it with the same equanimity that I will experience
>receiving the rejection note. When I was a programmer I was a firm
>believer in egoless programming: If I found a bug in anyone's code, I
>expected it to be fixed. If there were too many bugs, I expected a
>rewrite. And yes, I demanded the same treatment towards my code, except
>that, I usually found my own bugs before anyone else did, and fixed them
>in time.
>
>Guido
>
>
>
>Guido Dante Corona
>IBM Accessibility Center, Austin Tx.
>Research Division,
>Phone: 512. 838. 9735.
>Email: guidoc@xxxxxxxxxxx
>Web: http://www.ibm.com/able
>
>
>
>
>"Mary Otten" <maryotten@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Sent by: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>12/28/2004 08:17 PM
>Please respond to
>bksvol-discuss
>
>
>To
>"bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>cc
>
>Subject
>[bksvol-discuss] Re: txt page breaks redux
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Just some things to ponder before you take the axe to all books with no
>page breaks, regardless of the quality of their text. A lot of people
>expressed the idea that they didn't much care about page breaks, that they
>
>could navigate just fine without them, especially if the book in question
>was your basic novel, very unlikely to be used as a reference book by
>anyone.
>There is an assumption that all the books that are rejected are going to
>be rescanned. For those of you who like to toss off figures about how
>quickly you can scan and prevalidate a book, and who are thus ready to
>help reduce the backlog by rejecting the hapless books with no page breaks
>in them, does that then mean that you're also going to scan replacement
>copies? Or is the assumption that the original submitter will see the
>error of his or her ways and rescan and submit those titles including page
>breaks this time? I find that to be a very dubious assumption.
>Finally, since Marissa said there would be something forthcoming from
>BookShare hq on this topic probably by the end of the week, I think it
>would be better to wait and see what they have to say before a wholesale
>search and destroy operation is begun.
>Remember, the last word we had from Marissa regarding this topic, at
>least as I recalll, was that page breaks alone were not cause for
>rejection; and I believe she also said that one of the members on this
>list who had
>a lot of older scans that may be missing those page breaks should still
>submit them. So if its ok for them to be submitted, then it would seem
>to be not ok to reject based on an absence of page breaks alone.
>Mary
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
