[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by notimp

@eschwartz: I was refering to this instance of what at least for the person experiencing it - looked like selective censorship: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...&postcount=410

If you'd care to explain what happened there, I'd be all ears. But also - this was one stray sentence addressing some of the community culture in here.

edit: I just realized, that this seems to be a reference to another (Amazon owned) forum ( https://kdp.amazon.com/community/cat...a?categoryID=4 ) censoring the discussion about the .kfx format - if this is the case, please accept my apologies - it was not my intention, to misrepresent mobilereads policies. And thank you for putting this right. As someone who wasnt aware that this Amazon platform existed (if you dind't either, you havent missed much.. ) - I blame it on missing context in this specific case.

If I had known - that Amazon itself has shown signs of actively censoring all discussion about their .kfx file format - I wouldn't have played it as a backhanded byline against interests in here - I would have started the argument with this peculiar fact - front and center.

Glad you confirmed your source -- and that we have nothing to do with it.
FWIW -- I have no idea why Amazon is censoring the discussion on their publishing support forums. It seems counterproductive to their interests, honestly.
@Hitch was rather blown away by the absurdity -- she runs an ebook formatting/etcetera company and sometimes gets to talk to important Amazon people.

- The point here is, that none of the Amazon press releases in the recent past followed the Cluetrain Manifesto rules of addressing the public but were basically marketing making up new storylines. None of you probably has spoken with an actual product engineer for a while - after the LED hype in this industry came "dust and water proof" and contrast numbers that were inflated by "doubling the blackness of black", Amazon literally has tried to remove the ability to produce books from the public sphere - they have introduced a content delivery default that hurts this scene as well as the public at large (and we all agree on that) - yet this "Amazon is looking out for its customer" - principle lingers on... My argument is, that this is brand loyalty and nothing more.

Amidst the confused rambling, you made the claim that "Amazon literally has tried to remove the ability to produce books from the public sphere".
You have tried that one before.
It is still wrong.

Dreadfully wrong.

Amazon has not so much as inserted a paper wall in front of anyone's ability to produce books in the public sphere.

You can publish commercially at Amazon, Kobo, B&N, Apple, Smashwords, Google Play, and many other places. Project Gutenberg continues and flourishes.
The means of production even for Amazon haven't changed. The means of downloading has -- on certain devices using certain download methods.

That isn't a change in production, it is a change in distribution.
And the distribution is backwards-compatible too -- you can still do everything according to the old methods.

I have pointed this out before, you ignored me then and you'll ignore this too, but I will say it anyway.

and by not being more vigilant and frankly more critical about industry moves in the past - this community has missed a trick or two. When people in here were arguing, that minimal boarder sizes (the way Amazon chooses them for you) are "good for the customer" - because they make content more readable - they chose to ignore that line length (characters per line) on 6" eReaders is well below the paperback standard, therefore impacting readability at large. Amazon here is counting on people actively being more impressed by seeing a layout that resembles that of a paperback - than them actually counting the length of a line that can be displayed on their Kindles. Or showing any understanding for the concept of adaptability that has to be in place for bigger font sizes.

Also - again, it was a feature we once had - and when Amazon took it away - people in here tend to celebrate it as a "consumer friendly" move first - and only later think about the actual implications. The same goes for counterarguing against criticism brought forward by your community about new format standards - in a way that goes like this "I don't think Amazons intent was to worsen your reading experience, ..." - when the actual argument brought forward was that they exactly did that - and context about their "intent" is just the roundabout way of moderating the discussion into "we all have to make compromises" territory.

If a new problem is evaluated - maybe, just maybe don't have your first reaction be to shut the discussion about it down as quickly as possible.

I'm not naming names - but, If you wan't to, just read trough the .kfx thread and you will find the instances.

Line height/length/borders/assorted typography is a deeply personal sort of thing, it seems.
Many people care. Many people don't.

"ignore that line length (characters per line) on 6" eReaders is well below the paperback standard, therefore impacting readability at large" -- there are people who literally give thanks to G-d Almighty that ereaders empower them to have shorter lines, bigger fonts, wider spacing than the paperback standard, and after a lifetime of suffering with paper they can finally enjoy reading again.
There are opinions that say lines should only be so long and not longer, or readability suffers.

Quite frankly, there are enough opinions that no two people need ever agree, and many of which are diametrically opposite each other.
Claiming that Amazon has objectively worsened the reading experience smacks of such sheer arrogant notimp-centrism that I am lost for words.

edit: A community where you only "whisper" that Amazon is actively censoring discussion around their main file format on their Kindles - but the actual fact is never seen as something worthy of a discussion - or being worth taking an actual stance against. So which is it? You didn't know, you didn't care - or you dind't want to?

"Amazon would never..." doesnt work as a "catchphrase" anymore, in many aspects.

Never what? Do something stupid which very few people care about because their forums aren't that busy to begin with?
And none of them can figure out why Amazon is censoring the discussion anyway.