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

[Dr. Drib]

Moderator Notice

SECOND MODERATOR NOTICE:

A post has now been deleted due to a personal attack.

Please follow these posting guidelines below, or leave this thread.

Please feel free to disagree with a person's opinions, or dispute their facts or data, providing you do so politely. Likewise, please address your criticisms to those opinions, facts and data rather than the person. Refer to the MobileRead Guidelines, specifically the full text of the very first item. When posting, your attention to the Guidelines is required. Name calling ("troll") and insults ("obtuse") are not allowed.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Billi

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.

And where on earth did you find this? Are you telling me there are established guidelines for reporting errors and alterations to text, and having the uploaded file changed?

So why hasn't AlexBell's upload been changed?

[eschwartz]

@Dr. Drib,

Sorry, I was just feeling really annoyed at having my posts be misinterpreted yet again, and I guess I overreacted. I'll try again.

Originally Posted by JSWolf

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

If you reread my post you responded to, you will notice that I never insinuated any such thing. In fact, I have never and will never say any such thing.

I will be more than happy to debate with you and (try to) prove anything whatsoever, so long as it is actually something I said.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by shalym

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

Oh please. I'll put whipping the MR library into shape on my to-do list, right after I solve the problems in the Middle East and the Ukraine, and do something about world hunger.

In what universe do you live that one cannot talk about a perceived problem unless he or see can personally implement a solution?

And where in the world did you get the idea that I have said a single word about legality?

[JSWolf]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

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

It is a problem since we know that at least one eBook has been modified without us knowing. We were not expecting this and now that we know it's been done, the question remains, how many more have been altered without telling us? Now that we know there is one altered eBook, we then question how many more are there? It now causes suspicion where suspicion didn't previously exist. That does make it a problem.

[Dr. Drib]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

@Dr. Drib,

Sorry, I was just feeling really annoyed at having my posts be misinterpreted yet again, and I guess I overreacted. I'll try again.



If you reread my post you responded to, you will notice that I never insinuated any such thing. In fact, I have never and will never say any such thing.

I will be more than happy to debate with you and (try to) prove anything whatsoever, so long as it is actually something I said.

Thank you.

Let's all take a deep breath and 'argue' rationally, so the thread can continue........as well as one that is stimulating, frustrating, and rewarding as opinions are expressed and shared.


Don
(Moderator)

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

It is a problem since we know that at least one eBook has been modified without us knowing. We were not expecting this and now that we know it's been done, the question remains, how many more have been altered without telling us? Now that we know there is one altered eBook, we then question how many more are there? It now causes suspicion where suspicion didn't previously exist. That does make it a problem.

But if I don't regard any of that as being problematic... hence my post... since I truly would be fine if every single one of them had been altered... since I cannot possibly be "suspicious" of anyone for doing something that I truly don't care about...

[Billi]

Originally Posted by Catlady

And where on earth did you find this? Are you telling me there are established guidelines for reporting errors and alterations to text, and having the uploaded file changed?

Yes, at least for the German uploads we have an established behaviour and I can't imagine that this is done otherwise with the English books.
You contact the uploader via pm and send him a list with your corrections.
The uploader includes this corrections into his book and uploads a new version, normally with a thank you to the member who provided the corrections.
If the original uploader doesn't react you're free to open a new thread and upload your own version.

So why hasn't AlexBell's upload been changed?

Maybe no one asked him. Or maybe although we wouldn't have done these changes ourselves we nevertheless respect his work and see it as a different version???

[sun surfer]

You know, sometimes I have what I would consider silly worries about something that I don't trouble others with, because I don't think that they're important enough. Now, I might rethink that as my silly worries, combined with an eye-catching grammatically incorrect title, could create a 30+ pages thread with deep philosophical hand-wringing and divisions. But far be it from me to stay out of this row, so I'll jump in (with a rather long post - sorry! - to sum up my feelings on it all at once).

I think, as has been pointed out, that the large majority of us are basically on the same page regarding "editorial decision" changes to classic texts being uploaded to the MR library - we don't like it. The split seems to be from what should be done about it. Some prefer a "steady as she goes" approach; it's not that big of a deal and most of the major uploaders put a lot of time and detail into their work and things have worked fine the way they are for a long time now. Others prefer to have some new guideline or rule added advising either against arbitrary changes by the uploader to the text or at the least urging the uploader to clearly note any such changes.

Personally I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I really don't think it's that big of a deal (for the majority of uploads) and I can't be bothered to put too much concern into it, hoping for the best with any text I read. But on the other hand, Catlady does raise some valid points, and the revelation by Alex Bell did shock me I must admit. While I can't be bothered to care too much about any changes to texts that might have been made, I am one of those people who prefer to have nothing at all altered from the original text unless clearly stated, and this will make me not trust any uploads by him. I don't even like "to-day" to become "today" - I mean, what's the point? "To-day" is still just as readable and when one knows that a text has been altered to "today" instead, it makes one wonder what else might be altered in the text. And something like changing "gay" to "light-hearted" seems incredibly heavy-handed and oppressive to me. It's not only condescending, with the uploader assuming the authority to decide what would be preferable for us to read, but it's almost offensive really.

I sounded rather vehement at the end of the last paragraph, didn't I? So how can I be somewhere in the middle on this? Let me explain it by relating another experience I had. I once read an expose article on a restaurant I'd eaten at detailing some really nasty things that went on in the kitchen area, which of course led me to never eat there again. Of course it may have been an outlier, but I began to think about it awhile later, wondering, if the "leak" hadn't come about the restaurant, would I have continued to eat there and unknowingly enjoyed it? Yes, probably. But not only that, but why should I assume that this is the only one? The "leak" insinuated that bad things had happened at other restaurant kitchens they'd worked at as well, and I've read other things about restaurant kitchen horror stories at different places that I've never eaten at, so what if nasty things happening in restaurant kitchens are much more common and widespread than I might've thought?

It's enough, once you think on it for awhile and read up on it, to make one want to never eat in any restaurant again. So at some point, I gave up worrying about it, thinking life's too short and besides I like eating at restaurants. See no evil, hear no evil. As long as I didn't know about it, I decided to just put out of my mind any thoughts about what nasty things could be happening in the kitchen of whatever restaurant I'm eating at. That's not to say that there shouldn't be standards or that someone shouldn't care about those things, but that I didn't want to be the one doing it as it would take up a lot of time and worry in the caring that would also hamper my casual enjoyment. That's also not to say that I didn't take a modicum of precaution, taking the advice of friends and others or checking quick reviews perhaps, but besides that I don't actively seek out negative info about restaurants and instead live in somewhat of an "ignorance is bliss" mindset on the matter, which on most subjects I wouldn't recommend but on this particular one found desirable to alleviate constant worry about the food I'm receiving in a restaurant.

So, for me this (what I consider to be) pragmatic approach applies to the ebook upload debate. I really want perfectly unaltered e-books just like Catlady wants, but I don't want to obsess over it. Unless otherwise warned, I just have to trust that that's mostly what I'm getting and go with it.

As to Harry's and others' suggestion that we who want ebooks unaltered should go to the trouble of helping ourselves, to that I say rubbish. I understand the reasoning but it's not feasible. It'd be like saying if I'm worried about the food in the restaurant I'm eating that I should just open my own restaurant so I can eat there. That's just silly. We are allowed to be concerned about something without having to completely take over the production ourselves. I'd also like to point out that everyone has a different level of skills. Such as Harry - I just do not understand how he manages to closely proofread and format so many books for upload, and have time to read many other books besides. Do you know how long something like proofreading a book would take me? A long, long time. I am a slow reader, and I'm sure I'd be a very, very slow proofreader. It's not feasible even if I wanted to because sometimes it's hard enough for me to make enough time to read the things I want (and I always wish I had more time to read) - to proofread books would basically require me to give up any other reading to have the time for the proofreading and then still it would take me a long time to proofread only one book, not to mention the fact that I have no idea how to "format" or "make" an ebook if I were trying to upload one myself (and experience has taught me that it would take me much longer to learn how to do so than some others would have me believe). No, there are people who are good at and enjoy proofreading and uploading texts for the good of the community and good on them. Many people aren't or can't be like that, but still enjoy the ebooks, and still have the right to hope for quality uploads, which to many mean texts not only well-formatted but also not changed.

I think the problem with some changes to the library rules is that they would be so hard to retro-actively apply. The library is already so large. To require that each book is uploaded with specific info stated or to require that each book is uploaded without changes to the text really just isn't possible. There's too many books already uploaded that would require much too much work to go through and verify (and who'd be willing to do it?) and then even if there were people willing to verify them all, many ebooks might end up being deleted and the library shrunk for possibly small errors that many readers wouldn't mind.

This only leaves one option really - the proposed "guideline" being added. I have to say that I agree with others that this is an eminently reasonable idea. Was there really enough of a problem to warrant it? Who knows. Will it really change much? Who knows. But, I think it would help to assuage some people's fears, but more importantly I think it would contribute to a culture of it being well known that it's preferable not to change texts here. Alex Bell obviously thought it was much more preferable to change texts and not only that but he had supposed that people might agree with him, which they largely didn't. We do not know who else might have thought the same as him or still think the same as him, and they might not have taken notice of this thread.

As it stands uploaders have no guideline on this and thus are left to decide for themselves what is "best" in what they do with the texts before they upload, with no incentive to necessarily even note any changes they've made. I do think a guideline would have an impact, even if it's not wholly visible, of creating the default position for the community that un-altered texts are the preferable way to go with an upload and that any changes should be clearly noted. This subtle influence can be stronger than one imagines. This would mean that any well-meaning uploader that knows the guidelines would have to deliberately decide to go against what they know is the preferred method if they decide to change something in the text, and I think most or even all of the major uploaders wouldn't want to do that, and even if they do they would most likely then clearly note their changes as the guidelines would suggest. I'm writing this on the fly, and so I know it would look very different in a final draft that anyone may make, but a guideline such as this:

Mobileread strongly prefers that uploaders do not make changes to the original text and that, if possible, the edition of the text the upload is based on be noted. However, if any changes to the text are made, they should be clearly noted in the post for the upload with as much detail as possible to the types of changes made.

I'm not sure where this guideline be placed but perhaps somewhere prominent and where the uploader has to see it every time they upload something. If no such guideline is ever added, well, no skin off my back as the saying goes, but I do think that such a guideline would be better for the community in the long run.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by HarryT

So you're perfectly happy to dictate terms to the people who do the work, but not willing to do a stroke of work yourself. Is that a fair summary?

No. Suggesting some new possible rules is not the same as deciding and dictating.

And what is this stupid opinion here that you are not allowed to suggest enhancement if you are not willing to do the work.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by Billi

Yes, at least for the German uploads we have an established behaviour and I can't imagine that this is done otherwise with the English books.
You contact the uploader via pm and send him a list with your corrections.
The uploader includes this corrections into his book and uploads a new version, normally with a thank you to the member who provided the corrections.
If the original uploader doesn't react you're free to open a new thread and upload your own version.


Maybe no one asked him. Or maybe although we wouldn't have done these changes ourselves we nevertheless respect his work and see it as a different version???

You are now saying something different. You said that previously that people other than the uploader could make changes. That's either true or it isn't.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by sun surfer

YAs to Harry's and others' suggestion that we who want ebooks unaltered should go to the trouble of helping ourselves, to that I say rubbish.

I did not say that at all. I said that the vast majority of the books in our library have not been proofread, and that any of our members could help to improve our library by picking a book - any book you fancy - and proofreading it.

It seems to me that there are a great many people willing to complain, but very, very few who are willing to actually help make the library better, and personally I find this somewhat disappointing.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Catlady

You are now saying something different. You said that previously that people other than the uploader could make changes. That's either true or it isn't.

It's perfectly true. Anybody can improve a book and re-upload it. Correcting errors in a book using a tool like Sigel or Calibre's book editor is just like using a word processor.

[Catlady]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's perfectly true. Anybody can improve a book and re-upload it. Correcting errors in a book using a tool like Sigel or Calibre's book editor is just like using a word processor.

Re-upload it under a different name, you mean. As you know, we were talking about making changes to the existing file, NOT creating a new file.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by Catlady

Re-upload it under a different name, you mean. As you know, we were talking about making changes to the existing file, NOT creating a new file.

Re-upload it as a new version in a new thread, yes. There are many examples of this in our library.