Quote:
Originally Posted by eschwartz
You just couldn't help yourself, could you?  |
I'm ssssssssssoooooooooooooooooooooooo sorry! I want you to know that I fought the urge for...gosh, at least half-a-second.
Quote:
|
Well, I have no problem with people reporting errors. But I think to be fair, Amazon has to be balanced about it too. If one or two people report errors, don't pull the book without manual review.
|
Amen, brother.
Quote:
Error reporting is a valuable tool, but any tool can and usually is abused.
Ideally, such reports would be available to the publishers, who would have the opportunity to include the fixes in the next revision of the book at their leisure. And it would be left to them to decide whether the issue is bad enough to make them worried about sales.
Reports should be balanced against the number of sales, and trigger manual review when there can be doubt of the authenticity.
|
THIS. ^ I could really get behind that. Why NOT do it that way? Wouldn't that save Amazon scads of human resources time? Gather upemailed comments about each book, and send them out at the end of the year, or whenever. This piecemealing is just annoying as hell. WORSE, it can be repeated!
I am most emphatically not on the side of those who publish illiterate gobbledygook, but man, leave those books which are 99.5% perfect
bloody alone. It's become blatantly obvious, from the success of pure drivel, some with pretty egregious grammar and typographical mistakes, that readers don't really object THAT much.
I vote for the eschwartz methodology. :-)
Hitch