Dangerously e-books: How do I know if my ebooks have been altered?

[soulfuldog]

Hear hear, seems an awful lot of fuss over something that someone has put work into to provide for free. Ok he should have noted the change, but you are free to take or leave the ebook, its public domain and carries no guarantees?

[John F]

In the hope that something will be done, I think shalym has some excellent ideas. My opinions.

Originally Posted by shalym

So what should be done with someone who doesn't follow the guidelines, then? Since you and Catlady both agree that it is a grievous crime, should the offender be banned from the forum?

If they show continued non-compliance, than yes.

A mod should than go through all their contributions, and modify the first post, in bold and big letters, saying that the poster isn't following the guidelines.

If someones doesn't follow the guidelines for general posts, they get banned (after warnings). Why not for uploads?

... Should he be banned from uploading? ...

they would be
banned, so uploading wouldn't be possible.

... Or...should someone who is very very worried about it maybe do something to fix the problem? Something like maybe posting about the issue in the thread related to the uploaded book file? ...

The thread should be reported, and a mod should edit the first post saying that the contribution is under review.

... Or possibly creating a corrected version of the file and uploading it to the library and posting that your version is definitively based on what you hope is the definitive print version?

The important thing, IMO, is that the first post indicates the type of the contribution. If necessary, the mod does this.

The important thing for me is that I know what is being contributed in the first post. I don't care if there are modifications, I just want to know they exist.

Until this happens, the MR library is just another source; below PG, and the same as all the others.

[issybird]

Originally Posted by shalym

So what should be done with someone who doesn't follow the guidelines, then?

Guidelines would help. I am confident of good motives on the part of uploaders, so if it's a case of didn't think, either in terms of making changes or not noting, they could fix it. Nothing to be done about willful violators, but in fact I don't see that as a serious issue. I think in the rare cases where this kind of thing happens, all the uploader needs is the mental nudge.

Since you and Catlady both agree that it is a grievous crime, should the offender be banned from the forum? Should he be banned from uploading? Should he be drawn and quartered?

I think the hyperbole and acrimony are unwarranted, frankly. Let's keep this to calm, considered and rational.

Or...should someone who is very very worried about it maybe do something to fix the problem? Something like maybe posting about the issue in the thread related to the uploaded book file? Or possibly creating a corrected version of the file and uploading it to the library and posting that your version is definitively based on what you hope is the definitive print version?

The problem is that minor changes could easily not be detected, but the reader prefers not to read a work that's been altered. And let's be realistic; someone who is reading an MR download could easily not have the time or skills to create and upload his/her own version. If they were going to do that, they wouldn't be reading the MR library version.

As for Catlady's question about criticizing polititians:Expressing an opinion is one thing...that is NOT what you are doing. You are demanding that changes be made. In that case, then yes--if someone is that adamant that change needs to happen, then yes...the best way to ensure that the change actually happens is to run for office herself, or at least work to get a favored politician elected. In other words, actions speak louder than words. If all you can do is complain about something, all you are is a complainer, and really truly not worth listening to.

Catlady is deploring having the text of a classic altered without explanation and suggesting that guidelines be implemented. Seems like a decent way to try for a change to me.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by shalym

So what should be done with someone who doesn't follow the guidelines, then? Since you and Catlady both agree that it is a grievous crime, should the offender be banned from the forum? Should he be banned from uploading? Should he be drawn and quartered? Or...should someone who is very very worried about it maybe do something to fix the problem? Something like maybe posting about the issue in the thread related to the uploaded book file? Or possibly creating a corrected version of the file and uploading it to the library and posting that your version is definitively based on what you hope is the definitive print version?

Clearly, all culprits should be shot at dawn. Come on, don't you think you're overdramatizing, just a tad?

Let's review, shall we? The problem is DELIBERATE changes to text not being clearly noted. This means the uploader has made a choice. AlexBell, for example, knows he made the choice. If someone had read his upload and been previously familiar with the work, enough to notice the change from "gay" to "light-hearted" (before he told us about it), and contacted him, what would have been the response? He would, I believe, have said what he said in this thread--he thought he was improving the text for the modern reader.

An uploader who has made a deliberate choice is unlikely to go back and undo it. This is entirely different from someone reporting a typo, which presumably an uploader might fix.

But HarryT thinks I am supposed to go and find typos in all the MR library, even though my concern isn't typos, but deliberate changes to text. I am sure he is quite aware of conflating two different issues, so the reason he continues to do it is puzzling.

How it would hurt anyone to include some guidelines about uploads is also puzzling. Of course it would not solve the problem entirely, but they would act as a reminder, at least. Material is removed for copyright violation; why shouldn't it be removed if someone reports that an upload has deviated from the source text without such deviations being clearly noted? Is that so off-the-wall and absurd to contemplate?

ETA: First of course, the uploader should have the opportunity to note the deviations clearly in the text.

As for Catlady's question about criticizing polititians:Expressing an opinion is one thing...that is NOT what you are doing. You are demanding that changes be made. In that case, then yes--if someone is that adamant that change needs to happen, then yes...the best way to ensure that the change actually happens is to run for office herself, or at least work to get a favored politician elected. In other words, actions speak louder than words. If all you can do is complain about something, all you are is a complainer, and really truly not worth listening to.

Where did I make any demands? I expressed my opinion and I made suggestions. Where are the demands?

The library here is suspect, and most people apparently don't care one bit that it is. I stopped using it long ago. I would think that those who do use it, and especially those who upload to it, would care the most about trying to ensure that its contents are accurate, but that doesn't seem to be the case. And that's another puzzle.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Yes, of course it is. That's what the word "editing" means.

Editing is done before publication, not after. As you well know.

[speakingtohe]

Pretty sure if someone submitted a set of comprehensive, reasonable and understandable guidelines to a moderator they would be implemented. Wouldn't know how to start myself.

Or perhaps a thread that people could comment on discrepancies. I suspect it would not have many entries, or a lot for one book, but could be wrong there.

At MR I think you get far more than you pay for, both forums and library, and no one has suffered any actual damage from an uploaded MR library book. Can't say the same for many books that have been published in paper or electronically with their original content intact.

Helen

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Clearly, all culprits should be shot at dawn. Come on, don't you think you're overdramatizing, just a tad?

Let's review, shall we? The problem is DELIBERATE changes to text not being clearly noted. This means the uploader has made a choice. AlexBell, for example, knows he made the choice. If someone had read his upload and been previously familiar with the work, enough to notice the change from "gay" to "light-hearted" (before he told us about it), and contacted him, what would have been the response? He would, I believe, have said what he said in this thread--he thought he was improving the text for the modern reader.

An uploader who has made a deliberate choice is unlikely to go back and undo it. This is entirely different from someone reporting a typo, which presumably an uploader might fix.

But HarryT thinks I am supposed to go and find typos in all the MR library, even though my concern isn't typos, but deliberate changes to text. I am sure he is quite aware of conflating two different issues, so the reason he continues to do it is puzzling.

HarryT does not think you should find all typos in the MR library.

He said, if you are concerned about the issue of deliberate changes, you should proofread and report them on the thread. Proofreading has to do with deviations from the original text -- where does it say anything about the intent behind those changes?

Where did I make any demands? I expressed my opinion and I made suggestions. Where are the demands?

Right, you didn't make "demands", you made "suggestions". I'm sure everyone is tremendously grateful you cleared that one up.

The library here is suspect, and most people apparently don't care one bit that it is. I stopped using it long ago. I would think that those who do use it, and especially those who upload to it, would care the most about trying to ensure that its contents are accurate, but that doesn't seem to be the case. And that's another puzzle.

I hope the door didn't hit you on the way out.

Originally Posted by Catlady

Editing is done before publication, not after. As you well know.

Editing is done whenever it needs to be done. If it is usually done before publication, that is because it is assumed all errors will be caught by then. Why does it matter regardless? An uploader is publishing a new version of the book, isn't he? So it actually IS being done before publication!

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

HarryT does not think you should find all typos in the MR library.

He said, if you are concerned about the issue of deliberate changes, you should proofread and report them on the thread. Proofreading has to do with deviations from the original text -- where does it say anything about the intent behind those changes?

Well, now according to HarryT, all changes are part of the editing process, so I guess nothing is a mistake, only someone's idea of an improvement.

Right, you didn't make "demands", you made "suggestions". I'm sure everyone is tremendously grateful you cleared that one up.

You think those two words mean the same thing? Really?

Editing is done whenever it needs to be done. If it is usually done before publication, that is because it is assumed all errors will be caught by then. Why does it matter regardless? An uploader is publishing a new version of the book, isn't he? So it actually IS being done before publication!

I'm thinking about uploading a new copy of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. In the Constitution, I'm going to leave out the material that's part of the Great Compromise, because it will confuse modern readers, all that three-fifths business. I'm going to leave out the Eighteenth Amendment, because it was later repealed, so again, I don't want to confuse modern readers. I'll fix up the other amendments too--so they're clearer.

In the Declaration, I think I'll change "pursuit of happiness" to "pursuit of money," because I think that's how old TJ should have worded it. I'm going to change "all men are created equal" to "all men and women are created equal," because that's what modern readers are supposed believe. I'm going to leave out all references to "our Creator," because I don't want to offend atheists.

And I'm sure the MR library will be thrilled with this contribution and all my hard work in editing this public domain material.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

I have already stated that I challenge your assumption that that is a problem.

Can you prove to us that nobody else has modified any of the posted eBooks without telling us?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by Catlady

A volunteer proofreader doesn't do any good if the uploader deliberately made a change to text.

Actually, if the proofreader is comparing against a proper version, then the changes will be caught and can then be put right.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

Actually, if the proofreader is comparing against a proper version, then the changes will be caught and can then be put right.

Can't be put right unless the uploader does it--and there's no guarantee he or she will do that, especially if the change is one the uploader deliberately made to "improve" the material.

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Well, now according to HarryT, all changes are part of the editing process, so I guess nothing is a mistake, only someone's idea of an improvement.





You think those two words mean the same thing? Really?




I'm thinking about uploading a new copy of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. In the Constitution, I'm going to leave out the material that's part of the Great Compromise, because it will confuse modern readers, all that three-fifths business. I'm going to leave out the Eighteenth Amendment, because it was later repealed, so again, I don't want to confuse modern readers. I'll fix up the other amendments too--so they're clearer.

In the Declaration, I think I'll change "pursuit of happiness" to "pursuit of money," because I think that's how old TJ should have worded it. I'm going to change "all men are created equal" to "all men and women are created equal," because that's what modern readers are supposed believe. I'm going to leave out all references to "our Creator," because I don't want to offend atheists.

And I'm sure the MR library will be thrilled with this contribution and all my hard work in editing this public domain material.

Fine with me.

I never go to MR/PG when I am looking for truly authoritative sources anyway. (In this case, I'd use Washington as my source.)

But I'd just like to point out that most of the editing you plan on doing is a better fit for the Politics and Religion subforum -- E-Book Uploads is not your soapbox. You may find your thread inexplicably moved...

[shalym]

Originally Posted by Catlady

I'm thinking about uploading a new copy of the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. In the Constitution, I'm going to leave out the material that's part of the Great Compromise, because it will confuse modern readers, all that three-fifths business. I'm going to leave out the Eighteenth Amendment, because it was later repealed, so again, I don't want to confuse modern readers. I'll fix up the other amendments too--so they're clearer.

In the Declaration, I think I'll change "pursuit of happiness" to "pursuit of money," because I think that's how old TJ should have worded it. I'm going to change "all men are created equal" to "all men and women are created equal," because that's what modern readers are supposed believe. I'm going to leave out all references to "our Creator," because I don't want to offend atheists.

And I'm sure the MR library will be thrilled with this contribution and all my hard work in editing this public domain material.

See...that's the thing. You can edit both of those documents all you like, and nobody will stop you...people who care just won't take them as the definitive editions, because the definitive editions are stored in Washington. There is no law against changing those...there isn't even a law against publishing them. They are in the public domain.
It's the same thing with everything in the public domain...people who care will find the definitive edition (and for some PD books, there seems to be controversy over just what IS the definitive edition...the bible is an example that comes to mind)
Really...this strawman has been beaten so badly that there is only straw dust left. We get it. You are horrendously upset over the possibility that someone may edit a book after it is published, and you won't know that it was edited. In the perfect world, all edits of every kind would have a footnote...even if a misspelled word is corrected from first edition to second (to tell the truth, I actually appreciate when that is done). BUT. We don't live in a perfect world. We have to each, personally, do what we can to ensure that our personal world is as close to perfect as we can get it, and that may mean that we have to make compromises in our own personal world. If you want to work on making the whole wide world a little more perfect, then actual action is required. Sitting at a computer and making suggestions on a forum does nothing to change the world. Really...it doesn't. If you want a library where editing isn't allowed, start one. If you want the library on Mobile read made better, then start working on proofing the books against whatever you consider to be the definitive version, and upload the "fixed" versions up to the site.

Shari

[Billi]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Can't be put right unless the uploader does it--and there's no guarantee he or she will do that.

As you have it with regulations and guide lines: where on earth did you find this?

We have enough examples where corrections have been done and uploaded by other members then the original uploader.

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That was not an "error" - it was a deliberate editorial decision. Proof-reading is about finding errors. The fact that you disagree with an editorial decision doesn't make it "wrong". Create some books yourself, and then YOU'LL get to make that decision.

It's a poor decision is what it is. It's someone thinking we are too stupid to realize the meaning of those changed words. We are not stupid and we would understand. So that was a very bad decision on Alex's part as well as being insulting to us.