|
Again the idea is not about reviewing rather it is about auditing for copyediting.
There would be a strandard with rules like:
-stuff in quote is exempt
-discloser of the type of English
-discloser of the style if it is a book base of using English in a different say poetic form with a discripetion
-a percentage sample at random
If you cannot write a rule that has an answer yes or no the rule should not be used in the audit.
Subjectivity is the enemy of auditing and the differenance between a review and an audit.
A branch to this would be to get a book into the right gennera. Or possibly to read the whole book to see if the struture works. But really there are limits to how to objectively look at the quality of any work of art. However, by making a system of defining what a reader can expect from an ebook more readers will be likely to take risks on indipendants. This is what Smashwords does with it permium ebooks on a limited scale.
The big guys love the fact there is no structure telling reader where to find quality work in the turbid water of the internet's ebook market. They can sell more of the same without encouraging diversity by keeping the doors of quality locked.
I would rather have a known standard that I could participate in even at a price if it meant reader would know my product had been inspected by inspector #5 and that means it is not going to be riddled with mistakes. If we don't make the structure someone else will.
Have fun, Jan
|