[bksvol-discuss] Re: Pearl by Tabitha King
- From: Rogerbailey81@xxxxxxx
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 22:35:52 EDT
No! Perfectionism is good to have as long as it is worth it. There comes a
point, though, that the point of diminishing returns is reached. I would prefer
to have a million and one dollars in the bank than a million, but if I am
ever lucky enough to have that million I am not going to put forth any special
effort to get that extra dollar. In a message dated 8/7/2008 7:21:02 P.M.
Pacific Daylight Time, ckarnos@xxxxxxxxx writes:
Hi gang,
Just to set the record straight, probably 80% of the books that I approve
with an excellent rating have got a few junk characters or scannos in them.
But
since the vast majority of pages are fine, I let the errors go. Amber just
re-edited and re-uploaded Pearl to the approval queue. The book is much
better, it doesn't have nearly the number of junk characters that it did
before,
but because Amber wanted to be told if there were any other junk characters,
I'm going through the book with a fine-tooth comb, looking for any and all
errors. I'm on page 86 out of 350 and I have found 13 errors so far. Most of
them are trivial, but since she wanted to know, I'm doing this for her. If I
return all books that have any errors at all in them, I'd be returning 80% of
the approved books for more editing. Do you all want this? Do you want 100%
perfect books? I try to make the bestsellers perfect, but I'm a deranged
perfectionist, as we all know.
How's this for a compromise? If you're happy with me letting some errors go
through with your books, no need to say anything. If you want me to return
your books for more editing if I find over,... let's say 10, errors, then tell
me you want me to do a super-check of your books. It will require lots more
work on both your part and on my part, so think carefully before you sign up
for this.
[I have to say at this point that there are several validators who always
upload books with fewer than 10 errors. Whenever I see their names, I breathe
a
sigh of relief because I know their books will have no junk characters, no
scannos, no missing pages, no duplicate pages, no unwieldy font sizes, no
weird formatting, no messed-up fractions or charts or maps, just page after
page
of beautiful text. Dave Russell, Marilyn Beasley, our summer intern Shuqiao
Song, the tag team of Louise Gourdoux and Jim Baugh - and I'm sure there are
others who I can't think of right now. They all do beautiful work.]
Carrie
----- Original Message ----
From: Ann McCay <annmccay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, August 8, 2008 10:34:51 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Pearl by Tabitha King
I would have wanted, as a submitter, to be told, and I'd certainly have
wanted to fix the book. I would have been upset if I were not given that
option
and everybody else's weight into not having the submitter have the option to
work with the problem was what had been done.
____________________________________
From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Carrie Karnos
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 5:22 PM
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Pearl by Tabitha King
Hi Sue,
When I return a book for more editing, I have 2 options. I can return the
book that the original person submitted, or I can return the validated copy.
99% of the time I return the validated copy, retaining all the changes that
the
validator made. Only when the validator deletes all the page breaks in a
book (as happened last week) or when the validator deletes some pages or
something drastic like that, do I return the original book from the submitter.
Given
that I can retain all the validation changes, would you like me to return
the book for more editing?
Looks like there are 2 votes for more editing, and no votes for the other
options. This means I should be even more fussy than I already am. That's fine
with me, I would rather allow only well-validated books into the collection,
but I'm afraid that the volunteer group will start a mutiny if I return 3 out
of every 10 books in the approval queue instead of 1 out of every 10 books
like I do now (I'm guessing at these numbers - I haven't kept track, to be
honest). Okay, unless I hear otherwise, I will go into super-fussy mode :-)
Carrie
----- Original Message ----
From: siss52 <siss52@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, August 8, 2008 8:48:41 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Pearl by Tabitha King
Hi Carrie,
I woould vote against returning it for more editing since the copy kicked
back would be the submitter's work only, not the book after validation.
Therefore, may I make another suggestion? Could you return the book to Step
1 in the RTF file that was uploaded to the approval queue, with a comment
telling what is wrong and requesting more editing?
Just my thoughts,
Sue S.
----- Original Message -----
From: _Carrie Karnos_ (mailto:ckarnos@xxxxxxxxx)
To: _bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx)
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 5:10 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Pearl by Tabitha King
I changed the book rating from excellent to good when I approved it because
there are some junk characters on some pages (like the very last page in the
book). If there were just a few junk characters, I'd leave it as excellent.
If there were loads, I'd return it for more editing. This book was right on
the fence. So my question to the group is: what do you want me to do when a
book has some junk characters, more than a few but less than loads? The
choices
are:
1) leave it as excellent
2) return it for more editing
3) change the rating to good
Have I missed another option?
What's your vote?
Thanks! Carrie
----- Original Message ----
From: Amber Wallenstein <amber.wallens@xxxxxxxxx>
To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Friday, August 8, 2008 8:03:40 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Pearl by Tabitha King
Hi all:
Did anyone on this list validate Pearl by Tabitha King? I worked really
hard on it, and I noticed it had a "good" rating, instead of an "excellent"
rating. Does anyone know why? I always want to improve my scans and I'm
baffled
why this gets a "good" rating. It has a lot of dialogue but that's all I can
think of.
Thanks.
Amber
Book blog:
_http://community.livejournal.com/book_cuddler/_
(http://community.livejournal.com/book_cuddler/)
I have accepted a seat in the House of Representatives, and thereby have
consented to my own ruin, to your ruin, and to the ruin of our children. I give
you this warning that you may prepare your mind for your fate.
John Adams
E-Mail: _amber.wallens@xxxxxxxxxx (mailto:amber.wallens@xxxxxxxxx)
__________ NOD32 3338 (20080807) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
_http://www.eset.com_ (http://www.eset.com/)
**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?
Read reviews on AOL Autos.
(http://autos.aol.com/cars-BMW-128-2008/expert-review?ncid=aolaut00050000000017
)
Other related posts:
