Ebook Standards Collective

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by HarryT

That's a different thing entirely. Vernacular dialogue certainly isn't wrong. Quite the opposite, in fact. Having people speak in formal, grammatical English would look artificial and stilted.

I'm not disagreeing; I'm pointing out that the Standards Committee Being Proposed would have to grapple with all this.

To put it another way: we don't have universally flawless -- as in, everyone agrees that they're flawless -- grammar/punctuation/spelling in books now in the traditional publishing industry. Partly because of issues like these. I'm skeptical that an indie standard could evolve, based on all the issues surrounding this.

Or to put another way: in my old English department, there were questions of grammar minutiae that could start fights between tenured professors. (All in good fun, of course.) Grammar standards are complicated and do vary based on location, vernacular, and the point the author is trying to make.

So basically this "standard" would come down to "Bob thinks this meets a standard that Bob made" (where 'Bob' could be a list of names instead of a singular individual). And while that's all fine and good, it doesn't tell the consumer much unless the standard is so widely accepted (or so carefully documented) that it becomes reflexively known. (Like the Oprah Book Club sticker. That would be an example of wide acceptance. But not of careful documentation, iiuc.)

[HarryT]

I was thinking more of cases where a standard could be used to reject books where the author clearly didn't have a clue, rather than disagreements about grammatical minutiae. Eg, look at posts on MR. I would estimate that at least a quarter of the posters here use "its" and "it's" incorrectly, and one might have thought that MR would attract the type of reader who had an above-average exposure to written material!

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I was thinking more of cases where a standard could be used to reject books where the author clearly didn't have a clue, rather than disagreements about grammatical minutiae. Eg, look at posts on MR. I would estimate that at least a quarter of the posters here use "its" and "it's" incorrectly, and one might have thought that MR would attract the type of reader who had an above-average exposure to written material!

Well, that would be easy, but that wouldn't result in a shiny badge for everyone to put on their book, which is what I thought the OP was looking for.

Well, unless the shiny badge just meant "passes a bare minimum". But usually -- not always -- you can tell that from the sample, in my experience.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Well, that would be easy, but that wouldn't result in a shiny badge for everyone to put on their book, which is what I thought the OP was looking for.

I thought it was the opposite - to give the READER an indication that the author met certain minimum standards of literacy . If everyone gets to put the badge on their book, it's not a standard that means anything, is it?

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I thought it was the opposite - to give the READER an indication that the author met certain minimum standards of literacy . If everyone gets to put the badge on their book, it's not a standard that means anything, is it?

That's kind of my point.

A bare minimum standard isn't going to be worth much. Plus the standards committee would be so swamped with submissions that they'd either have to have a huge number of testers (which decreases rigor) or a high price tag for submission (which decreases value).

I mean, I'm an reviewer on Amazon. I get 10-20 review requests from indie authors DAILY. Many of them are even willing to pay for a review, although I don't take money for reviews because I feel it would compromise my ability to review fairly. A standardization board would be facing the same thing, only writ MUCH larger because they'd be The Committee and I'm just some yahoo on Amazon.

One way to mitigate that would be to make the standard stricter, so that works would flunk out faster, ensuring an easier turn-over. Either way, though, I see anything that comes out of this as being high expense, potentially low rigor, and low payoff for both author and reader unless the standard is so widely accepted and so rigorously implemented that it increases sales enough to pay for itself or becomes a financial detriment to NOT have it.

But that's just my opinion.

[Elfwreck]

It's a delightful idea; I don't think it's remotely practical. Which is too bad.

Posit:
1) A "standards collective" group that has several (dozens of?) readers, who are all qualified to judge if a book is "well-written." These people are, hypothetically, capable of telling the difference between bad grammar and vernacular used for effect, and know the difference between its and it's, and will catch run-on sentences and incoherent phrasing even in genres they don't normally read; they won't confuse the stylistic choices of "purple prose" romances for grammar errors.

Not an impossible goal--this group of people--but already, this isn't looking easy.

2) This group of people is fluent enough in ebookery to know the difference between a *writing* error and a *formatting* error. Possibly, they are also trained to catch the latter.

3) A website, hosted by someone(s) with money, wherein they take admissions and read the books and evaluate them. Whether these are whole books or just a single chapter is an optional detail--the point is, they have a place where people send their works in.

4) The Collective reads books, evaluates them (presume, for the sake of discussion, that all their evaluations are spot-on accurate), and pronounces either two or three judgements:

TWO
1) This book did not meet our standards.
2) This book met our standards; it is a Well-Written Ebook.

THREE
1) This book did not meet our standards.
2) This book met our standards; it is a Well-Written Ebook.
3) This book met our standards and was a pleasure to read; it is a Recommended Well-Written Ebook.

------

Again: Assume the judgments are accurate. (Because while they probably won't all be, that's a whole *different* swarm of problems.)

5) The Collective posts its daily/weekly/monthly/whatever list of Books We've Read And How We've Labeled Them to its blog, or archive, or wiki.

5) Author or indie company gets evaluation back. If they get a "Well-Written Ebook" judgement, they slap that phrase on its ad copy, maybe put a banner on their website or a sticker-picture on the front of the ebook (ugh, that'd need to be tiny), and proceed to tell one and all that their book is awesome, and they have proof.

If they get a "did not meet our standards" response, they never mention it again, and possibly spend the next six months bad-mouthing The Collective, insisting they're a pack of illiterate bigots who don't recognize real talent when they see it. (This may also happen with the three-options variant, wherein a publisher expects a "Recommended" label and doesn't get one.)

6) Author on a rampage posts an objection to the Collective's blog post of "Books That Didn't Meet Our Standards." Author insists that Collective is using arbitrary and meaningless "standards," and demands that his excellent work of literary genius be removed from their list, and if they don't, he's going to sue for defamation and cite the difference between Konrath's latest sales and his own as the damages.

... and that's before we get to "how does the public find out what *failed* to meet the standards?" (Because they're not going to leave Amazon on their Kindles and browse to some blog somewhere to check a list before they buy.)

... and if all that worked *excellently well*, and the first attempted lawsuit was thrown out so hard that nobody will try it again for a decade, there's *still* the problem of the thousands of new ebooks every year that the Collective *doesn't* see. Because unless this is a paid group of well-trained reviewers, they're really only going to get to a handful of books. (If the *are* a paid group of well-trained reviewers, they're still not going to get to hundreds every month.)

I *loooove* the idea of a book-reviewing collective, with Official Stamps of Awesomeness, or at least of Competence, to hand out. But I can't think of any way to do it that doesn't come down to "here's our group blog, and the list of books we liked."

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

I mean, I'm an reviewer on Amazon. I get 10-20 review requests from indie authors DAILY. Many of them are even willing to pay for a review, although I don't take money for reviews because I feel it would compromise my ability to review fairly.

It's also against Amazon's rules. It's absolutely forbidden to write reviews on Amazon for any reward except a free copy of the item being reviewed. You'd be doing the writing community a big favour if you were to "name and shame" the corrupt authors who attempt to bribe you in this way.

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's also against Amazon's rules. It's absolutely forbidden to write reviews on Amazon for any reward except a free copy of the item being reviewed. You'd be doing the writing community a big favour if you were to "name and shame" the corrupt authors who attempt to bribe you in this way.

I too have a back list of books to review, (not really interested in them though LOL holding out...) but that is because one specific publisher has asked me to be a reviewer for their books. When I post a review, I am required to put a tag line in the review saying they gave me the book to review. If I was paid (I am not) I would also have to state that under their program. I believe here in America that is actually a law, but I am not sure on that. I comply with out question, cause I think its only fair to the readers to know.

When I review books for anyone else (something I am just now starting) I also disclose that the same way I do for that publisher.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by HarryT

It's also against Amazon's rules. It's absolutely forbidden to write reviews on Amazon for any reward except a free copy of the item being reviewed. You'd be doing the writing community a big favour if you were to "name and shame" the corrupt authors who attempt to bribe you in this way.

Well, while I am a "reviewer on Amazon", I also review on sites that are not opposed to paid reviews as long as they are disclosed as such. So it's more complicated than just Amazon's rules, but I acknowledge I didn't clarify that in my ramble above.

But that is immaterial since I don't accept payment for reviews, and I have no interest in running a vendetta against people who make offers that are in all probability made in good faith. Most of them just realize that they're asking for 8+ hours of a reviewer's life and they're trying to offset that burden.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

I *loooove* the idea of a book-reviewing collective, with Official Stamps of Awesomeness, or at least of Competence, to hand out. But I can't think of any way to do it that doesn't come down to "here's our group blog, and the list of books we liked."

Yep. This is where my mind is, as well. I love the idea; the implementation concept gives me nightmares.

And that's not even getting into the fact that professional people with English degrees can and will vociferously disagree over what is and isn't "bare minimum" good grammar.

And then: a 100,000 word eBook has one error in it. (The Its/It's error.) Is it a "bad" eBook because it has ONE error? Most traditionally published books that I read have at least one error; sometimes more.

The details, I don't even. My head aches just imagining the arguments.

[Freeshadow]

I'd assume such disagreements among specialists in literally every language
It wouldn't be a problem specific to English only.

[VydorScope]

Originally Posted by anamardoll

Yep. This is where my mind is, as well. I love the idea; the implementation concept gives me nightmares.

And that's not even getting into the fact that professional people with English degrees can and will vociferously disagree over what is and isn't "bare minimum" good grammar.

And then: a 100,000 word eBook has one error in it. (The Its/It's error.) Is it a "bad" eBook because it has ONE error? Most traditionally published books that I read have at least one error; sometimes more.

The details, I don't even. My head aches just imagining the arguments.

No to mention that "one error" might not be considered an error to all. The rules are no where near as hard and fast, nor as well accepted as people (esply here) think they are.

[bigjantailor]

You need an auditor's heart... what am I talking about auditor's have no such thing. That is why they are good at their job. Make a standard. Pubish the standard. Follow the standard. Make no exeptions. This is not about reviewing at all.

Have fun, Jan

[DrNefario]

It doesn't seem like it needs to be that complicated, to me. Five people read it, if three or more think it's acceptable, it gets the official seal of approval. If not, the author can fix it up and try again, or agree to disagree. The five judges are random authors from the collective. Of course there will be a few errors (although it won't hurt to find and fix some of them), the reader just wants to know that it's not a total mess. And yes, you can often tell from a sample, but maybe the badge of awesomeness will make you look at the sample.

I'm not volunteering or anything.

[anamardoll]

Originally Posted by DrNefario

I'm not volunteering or anything.

Exactly.