Apply *Ignore User* Option to eBook Uploads?

[Prestidigitweeze]

Checking eBook uploads can be misleading because certain people upload an insane amount of pulp every day in multiple formats.

The result is that more sparing titles uploaded by perfectionists are often drowned in the deluge. Fewer people see the more periodically uploaded work than should.

To ensure that that doesn't happen, one solution might be to make ignore functions work with ebook uploads. That way, if one wants to ignore a specific user's uploads, one can.

Currently, there seems not to be a way to use the ignore user filter for ebook uploads.

Another solution might be to restrict ebook uploads to six every three hours: Three formats for two books.

[Billi]

The feature "ignore user" works in the ebook upload section but I agree with you that it is not very helpful there as the number of posts stays the same.

One (partial) workaround is to search for ebooks via the button in the upper blue ribbon of this site. You can't filter there but you can sort for uploader and combine this sorting mechanism with genre, so for instance to have all "Philosophy" books sorted by their uploader.

Maybe this is a problem for the general search function where you can search for posts/threads by a special member but not exclude him/her.

(In general, I think we shouldn't be too nose-up and welcome these books too.)

[GrannyGrump]

I agree that there needs to be a more efficient way to filter newly uploaded books. I confess that I don't know what that method might be, but it certainly is frustrating the way it stands now.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Billi

(In general, I think we shouldn't be too nose-up and welcome these books too.)

It isn't a question of putting one's nose in the air and disparaging certain kinds of content. It's a question of the e-book feed's being drowned in the deluge of one person's output -- as many as thirty uploads a day every single day.

Every e-book should be "welcomed" in the sense of having the chance to be seen.

At a public reading by several different writers, each is allotted a certain amount of time so that the other writers will have the opportunity to be heard. Why shouldn't MR's feed of ebooks be set up that way, too?

Perhaps everyone who creates e-books should have an allotted number of uploads per day (let's say ten -- five e-books in two different formats) so that, every single day, the feed doesn't come to represent one person's contribution alone, and others who contribute have a fair chance of having their work seen while it's fresh.

People shouldn't have to use a search engine to find a book that was uploaded today simply because one uploader chooses not to give other contributors any space on the front page.

Besides which, in terms of content, it doesn't matter what sort of book is being uploaded. No one who creates, edits and publishes ten to fifteen books in multiple formats every day can be paying much attention to the quality of the text and format, let alone checking either one for errors.

[DaleDe]

I wonder if it would be possible to add an option to the advanced search option that might be useful for any number of reasons but also for this purpose. The advanced option search has a drop down for searching for posts and threads by a particular user. I wonder is a third option could be added to have it ignore a particular user from the search results. If this could be done would it solve the problem?

Dale

[Doitsu]

It's relatively easy to hide posts by certain users if you use Firefox with the Greasemonkey extension or Chrome with the TamperMonkey extension. Simply create a new Greasemonkey script, paste the following code, change the name of the user(s) to be hidden and you're done:

// ==UserScript==
// @name        Hide MR uploads
// @namespace   Mobileread
// @description Hides certain user uploads
// @include     https://www.mobileread.com/forums/*
// ==/UserScript==

h3 = document.getElementsByTagName("h3");
if (h3.item(0).childNodes[0].innerHTML == "E-Book Index") {

    trs = document.getElementsByTagName("tr");
    for (i = 0; i < trs.length; i++) {
        if (/Doitsu/.test(trs.item(i).innerHTML)) {
            trs.item(i).parentNode.removeChild(trs.item(i));
            i--;
        }
    }
}

As it is right now, my (very simple) script will hide all uploads by me. You can of course easily modify the script to hide other users or multiple users:

/user1|user2|user3/

Disclaimer: Since I'm not a programmer the script is most likely not very efficient, but it works for me.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Doitsu

It's relatively easy to hide posts by certain users if you use Firefox with the Greasemonkey extension or Chrome with the TamperMonkey extension.

Doitsu:

Thanks so much for the script. I'll try it when I get home from work.

Question: Have you tried your script in the e-book uploads section and the MR Library? Most people are able to use the Ignore User function elsewhere on the site. The library and e-book feeds are the only places that seem to defeat it.

[Doitsu]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Question: Have you tried your script in the e-book uploads section and the MR Library?

Yes, I specifically designed it for the MR Library to hide books by a frequent uploader. For example, if you select the ePubs Book subforum it'll physically remove all rows with the specified user name in it from the HTML code, leaving you with just the books uploaded by other users, which makes browsing the ePub forum for new uploads a lot easier.

(It won't work with search results, though.)

[Prestidigitweeze]

Perfect. Thanks!

[GrannyGrump]

I guess us folks who use Opera (or worse, are stuck with Internet Explorer) just have to go whistle.

Ah, well. Life does go on.

[Doitsu]

Originally Posted by grannyGrumpy

I guess us folks who use Opera (or worse, are stuck with Internet Explorer) just have to go whistle.

According to this website, you can also use user scripts with Opera. Try pasting my JavaScript code into a text file, save it with a .user.js extension and then follow the instructions in the article.

BTW, there's user script repository at Userscripts.org with lots of useful ready-made scripts. I find Scrub Google Redirect Links very useful, which allows you to directly copy file links from Google search results.
I also use a user script to change the font color of a website from a hip but hard to read light grey to a plain old black. There are endless possibilities for website customization for users with basic CSS and JavaScript skills.

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by grannyGrumpy

I guess us folks who use Opera (or worse, are stuck with Internet Explorer) just have to go whistle.

Doitsu's script might help me --and for that I'm grateful -- but it can't solve the greater issue of fairness to other uploaders.

Most people who create e-books for the Patricia Clark Memorial Library will still see their work hidden and displaced by the onslaught of a single person.

That doesn't seem fair to me. No uploader should be rendered invisible to casual readers of the library feed.

I believe that MR should adopt a solution which is fairer to the other people who create and upload books. Imagine taking weeks to perfect an e-book and uploading it proudly, only to have it drowned utterly in a rush of hasty uploads so that fewer MR readers will ever see it at all, let alone download and enjoy it.

The same thoughtlessness that fuels hasty conversions can inform an uploader's treatment of other uploaders which is impolite at best and, at worst, a way to increase the odds their work will be ignored.

That's why I think there should be a limit as to how many e-books a person can upload per day.

Here's my suggestion for Mobile Read:

Perhaps everyone who creates e-books should have an allotted number of uploads per day (let's say ten -- five e-books in two different formats) so that daily feeds and recent upload lists won't represent a single person's contribution alone, and others who contribute have a fair chance of having their work seen while it's fresh.

[Doitsu]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

That's why I think there should be a limit as to how many e-books a person can upload per day.

+1

IMHO, one or two book uploads (in any number of formats) per user per week should be sufficient, because quality uploaders rarely upload more than that.

@Prestidigitweeze: Why don't you create a public poll to find out how many uploads per day/week MR users are OK with?

[Prestidigitweeze]

Originally Posted by Doitsu

+1

IMHO, one or two book uploads (in any number of formats) per user per week should be sufficient, because quality uploaders rarely upload more than that.

@Prestidigitweeze: Why don't you create a public poll to find out how many uploads per day/week MR users are OK with?

That's a great idea, Doitsu! I'll do that when I get home from work (unless someone else decides to do it first).

[DoctorOhh]

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

Most people who create e-books for the Patricia Clark Memorial Library will still see their work hidden and displaced by the onslaught of a single person.

No ones efforts are hidden and displaced. Their efforts are in the library exactly where the uploader intended.

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

That doesn't seem fair to me. No uploader should be rendered invisible to casual readers of the library feed.

What doesn't seem fair, the fact their books end up in the library as expected? No one is rendered invisible.

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

I believe that MR should adopt a solution which is fairer to the other people who create and upload books. Imagine taking weeks to perfect an e-book and uploading it proudly, only to have it drowned utterly in a rush of hasty uploads so that fewer MR readers will ever see it at all, let alone download and enjoy it.

What are you talking about, there is no problem in need of a solution. Folks formatting books for the library are not seeking glory at the front of the feed. They do the work to share with the community and build up the library.

I can't understand the mindset that is upset because, someone who has the time, is taking it upon themselves to convert and upload many books. Their ability to contribute to the community is an asset to this community not some scourge that needs to be sanctioned or ridiculed.

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

The same thoughtlessness that fuels hasty conversions can inform an uploader's treatment of other uploaders which is impolite at best and, at worst, a way to increase the odds their work will be ignored.

Hasty conversions???? thoughtlessness???? impolite???? The only thoughtless, impolite member I see is not the individual sacrificing their time and uploading books for all to share.

As for hasty conversions... I assume you are referring to the contributor that has uploaded the most books to the library. His conversions are not hasty. I recall the hundreds of questions he asked in these forums while putting in the hard work to learn how to convert / create books with reasonable quality.

I just reviewed half a dozen of the books at random. They all have a TOC, are well formatted, and vary in length. Exactly what is there to complain about?

Originally Posted by Prestidigitweeze

That's why I think there should be a limit as to how many e-books a person can upload per day.

Asking for a way to restrict books you see in the feed is reasonable but restricting how many well formatted books a person can upload is ......

Originally Posted by Doitsu

IMHO, one or two book uploads (in any number of formats) per user per week should be sufficient, because quality uploaders rarely upload more than that.

Since the most prolific up-loader is a quality up-loader I fail to see your reasoning.