[bksvol-discuss] Re: Funky change in Roger's emails
- From: Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2009 16:09:01 EST
I was unaware of that. Does anyone know how I can fix it?
"This would be the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion
in it." [ in a letter to Thomas Jefferson] John Adams
The Militant: http://www.themilitant.com Pathfinder Press:
http://www.pathfinderpress.com
Granma International: http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html
_
table with 2 columns and 6 rows
Subj:
[bksvol-discuss] Funky change in Roger's emails
Date:
12/5/2009 3:53:18 PM Eastern Standard Time
From:
cherryjam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Reply-to:
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To:
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent from the Internet
(Details)
table end
Hey Roger,You've got some funky html coding that's been going on for two or
three days in your emails coming to the list. It makes the background black
and the font black, except for your .sig file. So for what it's worth,
they're unreadable by a sighted person like myself. The only way I can read them
is to look at them is by resetting your messages into "text" messages.I'm
using Thunderbird to read email, and I don't know if any of the other sighted
volunteers are experiencing this with your emailsJudy
s.Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx wrote:> That may be the case for you, but for us who do
not have access
to
nor the > skill to use an optacon it does not apply.> > > "This would be
the best of all possible worlds, if there were no religion > in it." [ in a
letter
to Thomas Jefferson] John Adams > > The Militant:
http://www.themilitant.com Pathfinder Press: > http://www.pathfinderpress.com>
Granma
International: http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html> _> >
table with 2 columns and 6 rows> Subj:> [bksvol-discuss] Re: For Gwen and
Robert > Date:> 12/5/2009 2:47:53 AM Eastern Standard Time > From:>
the.bee@xxxxxxxxxxx > Reply-to:> bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > To:>
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Sent from the Internet > (Details)> table end> > Hi Roger!I have been
thinking about this subject.In a way, I think that > scanning is easier,
because,
when I am doing step one of proofreading, I have > the> hard copy in front
of me that I can check with the optacon when there is a > scano I am unsure
of. When I am proofreading others submissions, I don't > have> the hard
copy, so I can only figure out scanos that are obvious or some > from context,
feeling a bit unsure at times.DebbyAt 10:55 PM 11/30/2009, >
rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx> wrote>As a matter of fact, I think proofreading is
easier than
scanning.
> Unless >you are submitting a raw scan it is proofreading with extra work.
>> Nevertheless> Kim, I would urge you to take the plunge and try some >
scanning
too. The > more you learn about scannning the more you learn about >using a
computer in > general.>>>> "I have no country to fight for; my country is
the
earth, and I am a >> citizen of the world." Eugene V. Debs>>
The Militant: > <> http://wwww.themilitant.com>http://www.themilitant.com>
Pathfinder
Press: > <http://www.pathfinderpress.com>> http://www.pathfinderpress.com>
Granma International: ><http://granma.cu/ingles/index.html>>
http://www.granma.cu/ingles/index.html>
> _>>table with 2 columns and 6 rows>Subj:>[bksvol-discuss] Re:
> For Gwen and Robert>Date:>11/30/2009 10:37:56 PM Eastern Standard Time>
From:>>
kimfri11@xxxxxxxxxxx>Reply-to:>bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>To:>>
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent> from the Internet>(Details)>table end>>My
goodness
Gwen, you have nothing > to fear when it comes to proofreading >should you
decide to do it. One thing> I can tell you is that there are >many ways>to
do
it. I have a BrailleNote > mPower and I use it as a Braille display >while
I read a book from the > beginning> to the end. I listen to my screen reader>
read
the text while I follow along > with my fingers using the BrailleNote. >I'd
call it kind of like a feedback> or redundancy thing. Have you seen those>
flour
sifters with double or > triple screens in them? Think of what I do as >if
I were sifting flour because > what> the ears hear the fingers check. I have>
to
make sure that everything is all > present and accounted for, title, >
author bylines, copyright dates, ISbn > numbers,>publishers,> etc. After the
prefatory
material I read every word of the >book. Now I'm > taking in the story (if
I'm reading fiction), I'm checking >to see if>there > are> any errors in the
scan you might have missed. If I find any, I >use the > delete key so I
only get rid of stuff that is extraneous to the text.>I'd write> you and let
you
know what I'm doing. If I come across a bit of >something > in the text I'm
not sure about, I'd email you and ask you about it,>pasting > the> bit of
text
I'm having trouble with in the email to you. You'd >send me the > copy of
what the text should be, and I make sure it's in the file>I'm > working>
with.
One thing I heard right from the start was to have a >copy of the > file
that isn't touched in case I mess up the one I'm working with.>I'm still > in>
the beginning stages of this thing. I don't do anything >fancy. Eventually >
I expect to learn the art of this. What I want to know >is if the>text
makes>
sense. I don't heed the word processing program should it have >grammar >
suggestions for me. If I come across a weird spelling of a word or >name,>I'd
> want> to know how many times it's in the text. I'd probably write you >to
verify > that the word and the way it's spelled is supposed to be in the
text.>My
> philosophy> is to do just enough and err on the side of caution. Some >
people may not > use Braille at all when proofreading while others do. I'm
still>learning
the> ropes, but so far what I've done is in the Bookshare >collection so I
must > be doing something right or at least I hope this is >so. Nobody will>
twist
> your> arm and you can proofread anything that interests you. So far >
everything > has interested me. The very first thing I did was a children's
book,>but
the> others I've done are fiction books for grownups. Regards, Kim.>>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------->>
From:>
bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >>
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of gwen tweedy>Sent:
Monday, November 30, 2009 2:56 PM>
To:>
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: For Gwen and >
Robert>>I too assumed that those books would go very fast simply from things
I>> have read here from time to time.>I think they are getting lost in the >
admin cue now that would be up to him >to correct me if I am wrong.>And
yes
for> me, if I were a proof reader, except for some of the books >he's
helped me > with, I wouldn't read them either I just can't read those >kinds of>
books.>>
As> for my books, I've learned a lot, I feel that even as much as recently >
I > have gotten better, but as for myself, I am keenly aware that my books
might>> be> as fast on the uptake because of my past reputation as a new
scanner.>So I > understand that, and can now deal with that.>If I find that I
am not making> it I promise you, I'll be the first to >leave volunteering
altogether, > because I do not need nor want to be in >the way of>good
reading
material here> bookshare is so famous for.>I promise you, I would not want
anyone putting > up junk from me that would >not be fair to y'all.>Some
things
you can learn,> some things a person can't and if I fail to get >it, then
I'm out of here > lock stock and barrel.>Most here scan and proof
excellently,
and I would no > more > tarnish >that reputation for this whole world.>It
was my hope when I > first put my name up to be a volunteer to put up >
more
of the Christian type of> books, if not Christian wholesome >books those
my>grandma would care to > read.>But that wholly has not happened, from a
number
of factors of my own >> making> the buck stops here as it were.>If I fail
to meet this my personal goal, > that at that time, which could be >today,
tomorrow,
or perhaps never then I > would> bow out and leave it to those>who know
best.>I wish I could proof books, > but I've bungled scans lord knows what I'd
do >to a proof.>Plus there are so > many> rules to proofing my lands I
couldn't keep up with >them all, that is to > hard for me simple mind LOL.>I
most
likely should have just stuck to reading> > it would have been a lot >less
trouble for us all.>You have a wonderful > day,>Gwen>>block quote>-----
Original
Message ----->From:>Monica Willyard>To:>> bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent:> Monday, November 30, 2009 3:26 PM>Subject: [bksvol-discuss] For Gwen and
> Robert>Gwen, you're right. Robert is an experienced and valuable member
of our>> community. Robert, how many books do you have that are waiting to be
>> approved? Are>they on step 1 or in the admin queue?>>Gwen, there are
several > factors> in play regarding Robert's books. I don't >know if you're
aware
of all of > these, so I thought I'd share them. Some of them>can probably
be addressed by> people on this list. Others can't.>>On the staff side,
Carrie
was on > vacation for a week before Thanksgiving. >Also, most of the staff
had some time > off> last week for the holiday. I >have found>that she
generally
approves books > from volunteers within 24 to 48 hours of >their entry into
the admin queue.> Carrie used to be a volunteer just like us,>and she
remembers
the > frustration of waiting and waiting for a book to be >approved. She
has worked with > Robert> as a fellow volunteer as well and knows>of his
skills
and flexible > attitude.>> From here, it looks like the bottleneck right
now is in getting books >> proofread. The number of books on step 1 is piling
up again. Our number > > of active>volunteers and their preferences for
reading determine how fast a > book> is >processed. This factor affects
everyone
who submits books. For awhile > everyone>was worried about not having any
books to work on. Some people quit>> looking for new books on step 1 because
of all of the books with holds on >> them. Now>there are a lot of excellent
books needing a proofreader.>>The > other> factor, on a more personal
level,
is hard for me to explain. >Robert is a > consistent and dedicated
volunteer. I respect him for his >dedication>and > teamwork.> Yet I am hesitant
to
take
his books for a personal reason. >In the past, > Robert has been willing to
scan some adult-rated content for >Bookshare.>It's> my perception that much
of what he scans would be classified as >steamy > romances. I prefer not to
read the steamier books. This isn't about >Robert>or> his skills as a
submitter.
It's about me and what I want to read. I >> generally don't like to draw
attention to this issue since I think it's a >> personal> one>on my part.
Since
I feel uncomfortable asking Robert which books are >> adult, I let others
take his books when he submits. I figured it would >make> him angry>if I
asked
about it. If I am wrong about what Robert submits, I > apologize >and take
full responsibility for not checking out my assumptions > with> him.>>I
think
what I'm saying is that we might do a better job of > communicating >with
each other. I know I need to do that. I didn't know that Robert's>> books
weren't>getting
added to the collection. I also assumed that most > people are more >
comfortable with adult content than I am and that those would> be done
quickly.>I
could be wrong on both counts.>>The last thing I want is > for you or
Robert to feel ignored or >unappreciated. I don't have an > immediate> solution.
I think we could find >ways to work this>out together, with the > help of
the Bookshare community. It would help us >fix the problem if we know>
exactly
what's going on, if the books are on step 1,>or are they getting > lost in
the admin queue.>>Monica Willyard>"The best way to predict the future> is to
create it." -- Peter Drucker>>> --------------------------------------
------------------------------------------>At 10:32 AM 11/30/2009, you wrote:>>
block>
quote>I think a timely manner is the key.>And those who have scanned for >
years and their books are good, and >everyone knows they are good, to me
there>
shouldn't be a delay.>Some books get up there right away, so what is the >
difference in books?> Especially those of like Robert's when his books
have>
been tried and > true for a long time.> Eventually volunteers are gonna >
quit submitting books, because they > aren't getting anywhere. Some books
> stay> up there for a long time.>It's grand for kids books grand for
grants, but > I think they are >forgetting the submitters especially those
hard
working> ones like Bob >who turns in>a quality scan each and every time not
like his > wife who turns no quality >scans LOL.>I understand me, but Bob
that
is > different.>His> should go right away.>Gwen>>----- Original Message
----->From:>robert > tweedy>To:>bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Monday,
November
30, 2009 11:58 AM>> Subject:> [bksvol-discuss] Re: What is the main concern
these days?>>That's fine as > long as our books get into the system on a
timey
matter.>----- Original > Message> ----->From:>Denise Thompson>To:>
bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Tuesday, > December 01, 2009 2:50
PM>Subject:
[bksvol-discuss]
Re: What is the main > concern> these days?>>I think BKS's concern is to do
books that fit their grant > money. >educational which seems to be most
books
for kids and teens in addition> to >text books,>of course. Adult books
don't seem to be educational- > especially those that >have some romance in
them.
Since they have out-sourcers and> do their grant >books>with them as well
as in house, I feel like I need to > continue to scan >adult books for the
rest
of us who aren't students and who> don't want to >read kids>books and teen
books.>Denise>> At 09:32 AM > 11/30/2009, you wrote:>block quote>I've
noticed
a strong emphasis on children's > books> as well. This is >wonderful, so
long as it isn't at the expense of books > for us adults, too.>>Melissa>>
robert
tweedy wrote:>block quote>I am just > wondering> about bookshare policy of
submitted books. Taking a >look at the cue, it > looks like children's books
which is okay but what >about books>that are just> for pleasure.>block
quote end>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.>
block
quote end>block quote end>>block > quote> end>>__________ Information from
ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >> signature database 4650 (20091130)
__________>>The message was checked by ESET> NOD32 Antivirus.>>
http://www.eset.com>>__________ Information from ESET > NOD32 Antivirus,
version of
virus
>signature database 4650 (20091130) > __________>>The> message was checked
by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.>>http://www.eset.com>>> __________ Information from
ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus >signature > database> 4650
(20091130) __________>>The message was checked by ESET NOD32 > Antivirus.>>
http://www.eset.com>>No
virus found in this incoming message.>Checked by> AVG - www.avg.com>
Version: 9.0.709 / Virus Database: 270.14.88/2537 - > Release Date: 11/30/09 >
15:05:00--Enjoy
what you have rather than desiring what > you> don't have. Just dreaming
about nice things is meaningless; it is like > chasing the wind.--Ecclesiastes
6:9 NLTTo unsubscribe from this list send a > blank> Email
tobksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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
tobksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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:
