[bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
- From: "Shelley L. Rhodes" <juddysbuddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2005 10:45:14 -0400
Hey Hope, hang on, there is Nothing as good as chocolate!!!!!!!!
Smile, well perhaps but not in my universe.
Shelley L. Rhodes and Judson, guiding golden
juddysbuddy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Guide Dogs For the Blind Inc.
Graduate Advisory Council
www.guidedogs.com
The vision must be followed by the venture. It is not enough to
stare up the steps - we must step up the stairs.
-- Vance Havner
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hope Hein" <hmhein@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2005 7:25 AM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
I heartily agree.
Although I am new to book share the chapter and page numbers are needed in
school books and books for research. Especially if a blind person is
attending class with sighted people who have the books in print.
I love book share and think it is the best thing since chocolate. Taking
away the stripper would make book share even more wonderful.
LOL
Hope
----- Original Message -----
From: "Janice Carter" <Janice.C@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:48 PM
Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: Where are those contrarians?
> Rui, despite your best efforts, you will always be special to
> Bookshare.org's ongoing growth and development. (Yes, I met Rui in
> person on numerous occasions at the NFB 05 Conference.)
>
> We might ask that you give us a little more time to organize all of the
> great feedback we received at the past few conferences and submit to the
> larger group for additional comments and suggestions as we plan for the
> next year of Bookshare.org.
>
> Janice
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rui
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 3:28 PM
> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Where are those contrarians?
>
> Hello:
>
> I would like to here from people who disagree with me.
> Let me know why you think the current setup makes sense.
>
> I do not mean for people to play devil's advocate with this.
> I'm asking if anyone seriously disagrees with the centiments expressed
> over
> the last 30 hours.
>
> (There is a method to my madness)
>
> -- Rui (who is probably liked at Benetech right now as much as the
> plague)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 6:26 PM
> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>
>
>>
>> Dear Charlyn and Bookshare community,
>>
>> I think a petition is an excellent idea. Charlyn, would you like to
> put
>> it
>> together? Rui, would you put it on the Bookshare Scans site?
>>
>> I also think we should select a day to make phone calls and send
> emails to
>> the Bookshare staff calling on them to turn off the stripper. How
> about
>> Thursday, July 28, one week after this most recent stripper discussion
>> began.
>>
>> We need to take in the fact that, as Bookshare volunteers and users,
> we
>> must
>> have direct say on policy issues. Right now this list is virtually
> the
>> only
>> vehicle we have for reaching the staff, and it is clearly ineffective.
>
>> The
>> stripper issue highlights a need for a more formalized means of
>> communication. Maybe we should develop an advisory committee which
> can
>> bring concerns to the staff and have a real voice in policymaking.
>>
>> As blind people, most of us have grown up with the sense that we're
> lucky
>> to
>> get whatever reading matter is offered to us. We had better be
>> appreciative
>> and not complain. On the title page of every book from the National
>> Library
>> Service we read that the book has been produced for the blind and
>> physically
>> handicapped "with the kind permission of the publisher." That line
> about
>> "the kind permission" says so much! Do sighted people need anyone's
> kind
>> permission in order to read? I AM in fact extraordinarily grateful to
> the
>> volunteers and others who have spent countless hours putting books
> into
>> Braille and recorded formats for us, and to those who have worked to
>> change
>> copyright laws and make our special-format books possible! Most of us
>
>> would
>> not be literate, educated, contributing members of society without
> their
>> help! But I think that our lifelong dependence upon others to provide
> us
>> with books, and the constant feeling that we must be grateful and that
> we
>> can't expect too much, do take a toll.
>>
>> Bookshare is different. Bookshare is a program which is not only FOR
> us,
>> but BY us. We, the volunteers, determine what books go into the
>> collection,
>> and we ourselves make them available. We are not "only volunteers"
> who
>> have
>> no right to determine policy. We are the backbone of the program - a
>> program which is created to meet our needs and those of other blind
> and
>> print-disabled people. The Bookshare staff are not users of Bookshare
>> materials. They do not live with the inaccessibility of print; they
> don't
>> experience our issues from the inside. It is absolutely essential
> that
>> they
>> listen to what we have to say.
>>
>> Bookshare is an incredible program, and I believe in it utterly. It
> has
>> the
>> potential to narrow the print gap for us as no other program ever has
>> before. But we need to take a stand and insist that it be the quality
>> program we all deserve.
>>
>> Debbie
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Charlene" <caota@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 12:11 AM
>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>
>>
>>> Maybe we could put together a pteition of some sort and put a notice
> on
>>> the volunteer website as well to see if we could get enough people to
>>> sign it to send to bookshare requesting them to stop using the
> program.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Pam Quinn
>>> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:02 PM
>>> To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>>
>>>
>>> We take pride in our submissions and I just don't think a lot of the
>>> bookshare staff understands how angry and frustrated we are when we
> see
>>> that our submissions have been mangled. And for what? I just don't
> get
>>> it. Why do they insist on holding on to that useless program that
> nobody
>>> wants? Seems to me if anything, dropping it would mean one less step
> and
>>> less work in putting the books on the site.
>>>
>>> I use chapter headings for my breaking points in .mp3 files too, when
>>> I'm lucky enough to have them.
>>>
>>> It might not be our decision and they might not want to listen to us,
>>> but that would be unfortunate, because the volunteers and subscribers
>>> have a major role in determining the future of bookshare.
>>>
>>> Pam
>>>
>>> Original message:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> >I have seriously considered not submitting some books I have scanned
>>> >just
>>> >because I thought they would be of little use after the stripper
>>> finished
>>> >with them. I put a lot of work in to what I submit and it is really
>>> >upsetting to see the final result when my original looked so nice,
> and
>>> that
>>> >is only a volunteer's view. I also am upset by the messes that I
> come
>>> >accross when I am reading, even for pleasure. I use the chapter
>>> headings
>>> >as my MP3 creation breaking points, so if they aren't there I have a
>>> big
>>> >mess!
>>> >
>>> >I don't really like throwing fits, and I won't on this list because
> it
>>> >seems to serve little purpose, but the fits are completely
> justified.
>>> >
>>> >If i submitted a book in DAISY and BRF format instead of in RTF
> would
>>> >the
>>> >normal automated processes be skipped? That is the only thing I can
>>> think
>>> >of to rescue books where the headers, headings, and page numbers are
>>> >invaluable.
>>> >
>>> >Sarah Van Oosterwijck
>>> >Assistive Technology Trainer http://home.earthlink.net/~netentity
>>> >----- Original Message -----
>>> >From: "Deborah Kent Stein" <dkent5817@xxxxxxx>
>>> >To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 7:10 PM
>>> >Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> Hear, hear! I agree 200%!
>>> >>
>>> >> We have been telling the Bookshare staff about our concerns,
> politely
>>>
>>> >> but firmly, literally for years. Despite all the talk, nothing
> has
>>> >> changed. I am beginning to think we need to take stronger action.
> We
>>>
>>> >> ARE volunteers.
>>> >> We do not have to contribute the thousands of hours we put into
> this
>>> >> program. And Bookshare cannot survive without us. Do we need to
> say
>>> we
>>> >> will have to stop scanning and validating until we know that
> someone
>>> out
>>> >> there is really listening to us, and taking action? It should not
>>> have
>>> >> to
>>> >> come down to threats and strikes, but many of us are at our wit's
>>> end.
>>> >> What
>>> >> is it going to take to turn off the stripper and stop mangling the
>>> books
>>> >> we
>>> >> work so hard to make available?
>>> >>
>>> >> Debbie
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> >> From: "Rui" <goldwave@xxxxxxx>
>>> >> To: <bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> >> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 11:16 AM
>>> >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] stripper and colatteral damage
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>> Good Afternoon:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> At the bookshare users meeting at NFB, I made it very clear to
> Jim
>>> >>> (like
>>> >> he didn't know already) the issues with the stripper and why i
> think
>>> >> it should be removed.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> The whole concept of the stripper bothers me, not just the fact
> it
>>> >>> does
>>> >> more than it's supposed too.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Its very reason for being agrivates me.
>>> >>> Regular print books have headers, some have footers, that is part
> of
>>>
>>> >>> a
>>> >> print book.
>>> >>> If we want digital copies of print books then, take the good with
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> bad.
>>> >>> Do not sanitize the book to make it more access technology
> friendly.
>>>
>>> >>> The
>>> >> very fact that is accessible already does that.
>>> >>> If i don't want to read the headers, i can strip them out myself
> or
>>> >>> use
>>> >>> my
>>> >> own automated tool to do so.
>>> >>> However, If by chance I do want them there, I simply do not get
>>> >>> that
>>> >> option with Bookshare!!!
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Words do not do justice to how much this issue ticks me off.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Bottomline, this process does not serve the community that it was
>>> >>> designed
>>> >> to assist.
>>> >>> -- Rui
>>> >>>
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > From: Mike Pietruk <pietruk@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> >>> > Date: 2005/07/21 Thu AM 11:00:39 EDT
>>> >>> > To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>> >>> > Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: stripper
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > Pam
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > agreed! It's inconsistent and unpredictable. And the problems
>>> >>> > relative
>>> >>> > to it have been discussed repeatedly.
>>> >>> > The Powers-that-be are all too aware of the damage the stripper
>>> has
>>> >> caused
>>> >>> > but seem to have shoved it on the back burner probably due to
> more
>>>
>>> >>> > pressing issues to deal with. It is a shame that it cannot be
>>> >>> > dealt with; but Marissa, prior to her leaving, pretty much
>>> >>> > outlined where it stands. So I wouldn't expect much change
>>> >>> > regarding the stripper as any change would require some sort of
>>> >>> > policy change plus programmer action. Conceptually, the
> stripper
>>> >>> > makes sense; practically, it has been a
>>> >> dismal
>>> >>> > failure breading as much (or perhaps even more) than it has
>>> >>> > repaired. It's not our decision as we are volunteers, not
>>> >>> > decision-makers.
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> --
>>> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>> >> Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>>> >> Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.9.2/52 - Release Date:
>>> 7/19/2005
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
--
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.4/57 - Release Date: 7/22/2005
Other related posts:
