Exactly Womble! Especially when some filehost cancels you without warning, and you have to start all over again.

But in the end it is such a great pleasure to be able to upload books for others to read. There are so many people out there that have no other way to get books, except from this site.

For that reason I will keep posting and re-upping books.

 

Thanks to everyone who took the time to read and post to this thread. I always said I opened the discussion to canvas viewpoints, and I'll take on-board what I've read.

I have followed this discussion with interest. But I haven't really heard a satisfactory answer to the first thing that crossed my mind when I read the first post. Feenix touched on the subject briefly, but the issue was quietly brushed aside in favour of discussing internet connection speeds.

I've been dealing with eBooks for a long while now and my experience is that far too many digital releases - and I include some of the older so-called retail versions - are very shabby and hardly deserve the name book. We all know them: unedited OCR texts, if possible with headers, footers and pagination mixed up with the text, PDF conversions without free-flowing (bad linebreaks) text that are hardly readable on handheld equipment, no TOC's; the list is almost endless. Some items in my library have been changed multiple times, exchanging bad for better. and I expect that to continue.

Let's suppose now that I upload a book, a title never before seen in digital format, but a horrible version, as described above. Then you turn up with a perfect copy: TOC, headings, titlepage, and even the little chapter graphics that can make even a digital book look real. You wouldn't be allowed to improve the library, would you? Because the way I understand it you'd be breaking you own rules. And my crappy version would be the defacto standard of that particular book, at least on this site.

I believe that has to change if we're to improve the product. First and foremost because I like a nice looking, readable book. But also because in many ways we determine the standard of what is acceptable. EBook publishers of late have been making big efforts to improve their product, mainly too demonstrate the difference between professional and pirated versions. I've been hearing for years that they are against sharing because they want to protect the consumer, which in my humble opinion is a load of BS. I think the truth is probably that we've been pushing the envelope, with the help of some clever new software, and they therefore were forced to improve their product, which - after all - isn't free.

Basically I believe that a continual upgrade of available material is essential. But with your rules this will not happen. Changes are needed, maybe in the form of version (i.e. quality) control. It should be possible to upload a v5.0 if the copy on site is a v3.0 or even worse. It's one of the things I like about Bolt. If you can improve on a upload, often actually by reworking the original, you're allowed to upload the new version, whenever possible in the same thread for convenience.

Maybe this is something that needs to be discussed further.

HJ

I agree with Hans on most everything. I've had things that gave me a headache trying to decipher what the word or sentence actually said.

I don't know how everyone else feels about this but if you sent me a PM telling me that you have a superior copy of the same book, I wouldn't think twice about telling one of the MODs to please strike my upload down so that you could put yours up. I'd love to get a copy of it, who wouldn't?

Now, some people are very protective ($$) of their uploads, unlike the majority of us, so maybe they'd like to have a better copy to put in place of their crappy one. Properly handled -maybe a note that says "Thank you so and so for the upgraded copy- the same people -and perhaps more- that downloaded the crappy version would like to get their hands on the better one. Double the hits for the protective uploader.

What I don't see here is trying to come up with simple solutions to a very simple problem. All that one has to do is ask, the worst that can happen is that someone will say no, and I very much doubt that. You'd have the opportunity to get a better copy of something for nothing.

Who wouldn't like that?

We don't have to re-invent the wheel or change the system, it's much easier to work from within it. And it's always easier to work together than it is against it.

HansJam is right on many points.

Where I have found a crappy quality book and I happen to have a good, clean one, I would send it to the Original Poster to update their post. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Sometimes they thank me, sometimes they don't. The point is to get good books out to the members, as long as we all give a little and take a little it will all balance out.

I hear you.

But I'm not sure I understand.

Here we are, disputing in many ways the concept of unquestionable ownership of intellectual property, to the point that we defend the principle of sharing books even against authors; but at the same time we are willing to grant quasi ownership privileges for first uploaders that - at least in my view - have no moral rights to the properties at all. There's a whiff of hypocrisy in that.

Call me a fool, but I thought sharing was about serving people that otherwise - for any number of reasons - wouldn't have access and that the mission was to get as many good quality book as possible out there before the powers that be bring the shutters crashing down.

That explains the hustle. First is first and second is nobody. So if you'll get your hands on a as yet rare copy you rush to publish, without even looking inside the book, because you know that if you spend a few hours to clean up that book with Sigil someone's bound to beat you to it. We're all on the same merry-go-round, after all. But I doubt we're doing ourselves a favour; not to our reputation, and not to our 'clients' who will have to be satisfied with second best.

Why though? There is not any longer much chance of a viable commercial interest for uploaders since the filehost meltdown earlier this year. And even if there were;isn't this what separates us from the likes of Hachette and Random House? I thought they were the parasites that feed on creative talent. I don't get it.

It is one of the reasons why I haven't gotten more involved here, even though I pass through almost daily. Too many handicaps, too many rules. I prefer to get the books out. I'll try to avoid double-postings, not because I might hurt somebody's feelings, but because it is boring for the client. Last week I've uploaded over 200 books, had something over 10'000 downloads; and all of it presented in a way Amazon would find acceptable (even though I don't have a price list). For me that is what it is about.

Books. Free books. For people that without us wouldn't have any access at all. It's not about Freebies for the citizens of the 'first' world. They have multiple choices. It's for the people who for the first time in history have been given a measure of access thanks to the WWW and pirates like us, and who - if the media corporations have their way - will be denied their fair share again. So let's get a few million books out there before that happens. Let's ensure they have something to work with in those areas not covered by english language copyright conventions by the time they shut us down. That's the mission, and everything else is of secondary importance. Let's defend the right of access, not the rights of pirates.

HJ

No, it wasn't brushed aside. I replied very clearly, just as Zack did after me: PM - A - MOD.


Please forgive me if I am not my usual patient self, I forget the number of times I have answered this question. Some in this very section, actually. I understand you don't want to go back and read all that has been discussed before, but to those of us who have been following the threads since the beginning, it is a bit wearying.

This is the most recent result of a few days-long negotiations between a user who wanted to upload a collection claiming he had better files, the poster of a number of books by the author, and myself: viewtopic.php?f=121&t=317853


You are right about one thing, HJ: the only ones with absolute rights over the books are the authors. We just do our best to keep the eBook section uncluttered.

You sell the site short there Merry. Although this site is a great resource, and has some outstanding members/releasers/mods, there is still an impression of protectionism towards sharers making money.

I don't post often on this forum, but do post on many other sites. I've NEVER posted on a host that paid any kind of 'commission' or benefit to the poster. I don't have the type of ego that needs boosting by seeing a load of Warez or Thanks posts (which is just as well as I've had downloads on here and esleswhere download 500+ times and had the thanks button clicked only half a dozen times).

As a result there is NO vested interest in my links being used over any other members. Meaning that if my links die and someone wants a book they don't have to wait until I deign to make an appearance to get help. Instead they can ask in the same thread, and ANY member that has the book or a download link is able to assist.

If there is an improved/updated/better version available then it can, as a rule, be simply added to the thread, or a new thread started and the older thread allowed to die a death on it own. It DOESN'T affect me, as I benefit not one jot by anyone using my link.

Where a collection is concerned then the thread can be updated, or renewed by ANY member. Even if larger single files aren't utilised, a single post or thread with all the books in a series in it makes for faster searching and downloading.

I'm actually quite happy with the way this forum works. And I would say to anyone thats not happy, 'find a forum where you will be happy'. You're not likely to make yourself happy if you think you need to 'change' a forum. And there is no need to change a forum to suit you. The forum that suits you already exists, you just need to find it.

Is this a joke????

No Merry, it was not a joke. There was a time, not so long ago, when people were choosing their hosts based on the best returns per download. This resulted in members posting to hosts that were 'less than reliable' to say the least. There are still hosts that pay referral fees from what I understand? I've not looked closely into it, but thats my understanding.

You and I know that the vast majority of Mobilism users are not of this ilk. But that shouldn't rule out the discussion should it?

No, no discussion is ever ruled out. But I would really appreciate it if you visited the threads below and come back to us with more background knowledge. Then you tell me how the ebook team of moderators should feel when you talk about protectionism towards money-making sharers, after having fought so hard for so long to protect our users from them:

viewtopic.php?f=1147&t=220070
viewtopic.php?f=1147&t=221895
viewtopic.php?f=1147&t=228725

Merry. I've taken care all the way through this discussion to make sure that I don't cast ANY aspersions on ANY existing member or moderator. Its important to me as a member that I support the work carried out by the Mods, and that I don't keep asking for changes to the way that the forum is run. If anything I've written can be taken in any other spirit than that of total support then that was not the intention of my post.

I really wanted to open up the discussion, not a can of worms. And to be fair to those that have replied to date its been a well argued discussion from all angles imho.

My query really was aimed at the posters, probably more than the Mods. If the posters need 'protecting' from future release surely we are shooting ourselves from the cream of releases?

I still don't see the requirement to protect posters personally, but I really DO see the need to maintain the quality of releases on Mobilism. Clearly not everything is carried out the way I'd carry out, but that certainly doesn't mean that its done badly. There's a reason that I'm so found of Mobilism, and there's clearly a benefit in it being managed (by the Mods and Admin) as well as it is and in the manner that it is.

I've got to say that I agree with you. I would rather download once, than many times. On the flip side, this is only as long as the collection is under the download max; some of the maximum size limits are 300 mb or so. It depends on the site, I suppose.

After looking around for a couple of weeks, I jumped in and did my first release. I had to do the hard one and made it a release for a series. A Mod set me to rights in the things I missed (THANK YOU!). In order for the post to get moved, I had to remove books that were posted by another member. Though it bothered me, I did it because that is the rules of this site. I added link(s) to the thread that had the books I removed but that thread had all dead links. I do not remember if that thread said not to post mirrors.

With this rule in mind, I've been noticing "collection" releases. These releases definitely contain books that have been posted in the other ebook categories. I wonder how it is decided when a series is moved to "collection" category so it does not fall under rule you cannot post dups.

We define collections as "Large Number of Books in One Topic"

Collections encompass ONE author's or ONE epic's complete works. That is how we classify collections. A collection is one release that includes the separate series, stand alone novels, and short stories of one author or epic. WE don't decide what a collection is, the nature of the post does. Say you want to post all of Stephen King's two hundred and fifty thousand gazillion works: that would be a collection. Say you want to post ALL of the Star Wars related novels and short stories written, that would be an epic.

We do exactly the opposite: When someone wants to post a series already contained in a LARGE collection release, we OK the series. The site would much rather have ten series in ten different SMALLER -and easier to download- posts than all ten in one large file. So would I. I'd much rather download "The Dark Tower Series" than "The Dark Tower and 249,992 things I have no interest in"

If anyone wants to take the time and make the effort of breaking up a collection, adding covers, blurbs, searching for like items, links and all the extra effort required to assemble and upload a series, how can we say no to that?

And to avoid confusion:

Just make sure that your post doesn't include something already released under that author's or epic's name as a stand alone post, or in another series, or in a multiple novel release, etc. i.e. a multiple book release of Stephen King's stand alone novels, or a stand alone of The Green Mile or one of his series. It doesn't matter if it's included in something classified as a collection, think of them as not relevant to this subject.

How do you know if a release is part of a collection? Just read the thread's header: Board index » Device-independent » eBooks » eBook Releases by Category » Collections

Easy.

PS. I don't know what the policy is if you post a collection that includes something already released. Common sense?