LibriVox
Forums

* FAQ    * Search
* Login   * Register
It is currently October 20th, 2017, 3:54 am


Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 3 of 3  [ 44 posts ] 
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

Author Message
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:30 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
DonaldMiller wrote:
I stand by what I said completely. It matters not how long I have been a member. As a member, I can comment on whatever posts I'd like. MaryAnn Spiegel, who DOES do outstandingly professional quality work, made this post. Her reading of "Anna Karenina" was a real revelation to me. I would never have understood the story as well as I did after listening to her read it than I would have if I had read it myself.


Yes, you can comment on whatever you like: that doesn't make your comment of equal value to every other comment, though, because your level of experience with and commitment to, the project are not equal to those of the people you are criticizing.

Quote:
It appears that a club has hijacked Librivox, something which I'm certain the founder of it would not like.


So, you know Hugh personally? How could you possibly know what he does or does not like?

Quote:
The idea that you are here to "Crank them out like sausages" is awful, and no doubt you drive away people who would be interested in making listenable books, rather than just making books that are read any which way.


Actually, many of my favourite readers have said, in past iterations of this thread, that they would not have participated if they were being judged on their voicework. I'm thinking of Peter Why and Martin Geeson, who are both excellent, but undervalue their own contributions.

Have whatever goal you like: but please stop suggrsting that everyone else is wrong to have goals which are not the same as yours.

Quote:
With the advent of computer voices, only people like MaryAnn, Elizabeth Klett, Ariel Lipshaw, Bob Neufeld, and so one (the real solid core of Librivox) will provide a genuine service and add to the Social Contract that the Creative Commons movement is aimed at attaining.


We already know about computer-read text...many of us work with it on a daily basis. This isn't some sort of revelation, here.

Quote:
No computer however "intelligent" can find insights in works of literature and pass that along to others, as the core readers -- who actually work at their volunteer jobs do. With the quickly approaching time when computer voices will sound decently good, there will be little need for a private club. That time will be the province of those who have read and understand the words on the pages they are reading. It is not I who has an "attitude," for I came here with the idea of contributing something of significance and not with the idea of joining a club who have clearly hijacked this most noble idea of making products for the public at no cost.


There's no hijack: you are just demanding that a group that was founded on contribution by all who could record to a basic standard instead meet criteria that are significant to you, because you wrongly believe your criteria are the axiomatically right ones, and that people who do not share them are somehow less wise than you are.

This is hubris on your part.

Choose whatever standard works for you. Accept that other people do not, and will not, share that standard.

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:35 pm 

Joined: August 21st, 2014, 9:34 am
Posts: 1952
Location: Probably the holodeck :)
Just because somebody's recording is not perfect, that does not mean it's not enjoyable. What makes it enjoyable is that the volunteer who recorded it is having fun recording it, and you can tell. Just because these readers don't create "perfect" sections, doesn't mean that LibriVox should reject that. Say you were a reader, and your first section was rejected because you didn't know how to work the noise-cleaning feature in Audacity? That would be quite a discouragement, and you might not continue helping out LibriVox, and getting better as you go.

I admit that my sections aren't perfect, but I have fun recording them. I have fun doing everything I do on LV! I love reading, PL'ing, BC'ing, cover making. It is a blessing that there is such a wonderful, helpful, patient community on here. I hope it stays that way.

Just my opinion,
Kangaroo

_________________
-kangaroo
If I am neglecting something, please don't hesitate to PM me!


Last edited by Kangaroo692 on September 10th, 2017, 6:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:42 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
DonaldMiller wrote:
No! The aim of Librivox is NOT so that the people who run it can have fun making recordings. The purpose of Librivox is to make recordings that people wish to hear, due to their quality and the professional attitude that goes into making a GOOD product FOR the listener!


This is absolutely not the case.

To quote the FAQ:

Quote:
"Why are you doing this? What's in it for you?
We love reading, love books, love literature, think the public domain should be defended and enriched, we like free stuff, we like to hear people read to us, and we like reading to other people. It's fun, it's a great community, it's a rewarding public service to the world. And "nothing" is in it for us, except the satisfaction of participating in a wonderful project."

"Don't you have any standards?
It depends what you mean by standards. Our feeling is this: in order for LibriVox to be successful we must welcome anyone who wishes to honour a work of literature by lending their voice to it. Some readers are better than others, and the quality of reading will change from book to book and sometimes from chapter to chapter. But we will not judge your reading, though we may give you some advice if you ask for it. This is not Hollywood, and LibriVox has nothing to do with commercial media's values, production or otherwise. However: we think almost all of our readings are excellent, and we DO try to catch technical problems (like repeated text etc.) with our Listeners Wanted/prooflistening stage."


Librivox focuses on the reader, not the listener. That's just how it is. If you don't like that, you can, of course, record audiobooks outside the project and load them to Community Audio yourself, and good luck with that...

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:49 pm 

Joined: August 5th, 2015, 7:41 am
Posts: 18
(Removed by its author).


Last edited by DonaldMiller on August 23rd, 2015, 2:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:51 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
XCLN wrote:
Clearly the audio attribution *is* needed, your lawyers are right: because so many other sites re-package these recordings. One of the more popular (from Google searches) for example is loyalbooks.com http://www.loyalbooks.com/book/the-art-of-war-by-sun-tzu. There only mention of Librivox is in their About notice, not visible at all. They make money via advertising, I guess they do add some value added by providing nice illustrations etc.

Personally I'd prefer if LibriVox itself allowed limited advertising (from Audible.com and Amazon for instance) and used the proceeds to enhance the interface. Of course I block most advertising with adblock anyway ...


A few points:

One Librivox gets money, it gets legal problems. Currently its money such as it is, is handled by Internet Archive, as I understand it.

Audible does not want LV material on Audible, and I presume would not want to advertise on the LV site. THey see theirs as the premium brand. Coke doesn't advertise on Dr Pepper's cans. Audible literally -is- Amazon, btw.

You use adblock? You're kind of a pirate, dude...the whole idea of ad supported sites is that they are ad supported. 8)

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 6:53 pm 

Joined: August 5th, 2015, 7:41 am
Posts: 18
(Removed by its author).


Last edited by DonaldMiller on August 23rd, 2015, 2:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 7:06 pm 

Joined: August 5th, 2015, 7:41 am
Posts: 18
(Removed by its author).


Last edited by DonaldMiller on August 23rd, 2015, 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 7:14 pm 

Joined: August 5th, 2015, 7:41 am
Posts: 18
(Removed by its author).


Last edited by DonaldMiller on August 23rd, 2015, 2:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 7:28 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
DonaldMiller wrote:
Quote:
On[c]e Librivox gets money, it gets legal problems.


Not really. According to Wikipedia, Librivox's founder manages to run the operation for a stunningly low annual cost of $5,000. I believe the financial setup is simply due to the "business" model that the founder (forget his name) has used. But no doubt, what with him being an English professor, he would not agree with the attitude that something ought to be read without making an effort to reveal something about it (The time and place in which it was written, for instance.)



Thereby demonstrating you didn't read my previous reply, in which I mentioned his name. Also, no, you are again suggesting you know what Hugh's motives must be, and that they must accord with yours.

Quote:

What really makes Librivox work is its core talent.



This is untrue, because the goal of Librivox is to create more works, and this follows a longtail distribution where most of the works are created by people outside what you are referring to as the core.

Quote:
And there are incredibly talented and dedicated people volunteering here, which is actually why I decided to join. I've been recording and placing stuff online for a while. I can do it on my own, but I had hoped I could get involved with my hero, Elizabeth Klett's productions. Basically the only reason I joined. (It certainly isn't to have someone bust my chops over having made something two seconds too long.)


Perhaps you might like to ask Elizabeth if she feels the site has been "hijacked by a club"?

Also, since you've only made 14 posts, it wasn't hard to see you getting your "chops busted". I went looking because it seemed like a violation of Be Nice, which is one of our basic policies here. You seem to be arguing for higher standards, provided you don't need to meet the site's basic standards (in this case doing your one-minute test, 89db, and 5 seconds of ambient at the end of the track).

Also, you got shirty with your BC, who is a volunteer. That's not cool.

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Last edited by Timothy Ferguson on August 8th, 2015, 10:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 7:29 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
DonaldMiller wrote:
Quote:
Have whatever goal you like: but please stop suggrsting that everyone else is wrong to have goals which are not the same as yours.


I am not suggesting that everyone should have the same goals that I have. I was objecting to the hostile tone which was being used toward people who made good-faith efforts at contributing to the post's topic.

"There's nothing forcing you to listen to . . ." is what is known as an attitude. A buzz off attitude. Not aimed at me, but with it being in plain sight, I get the point, also. It is by default aimed at anyone who doesn't have the goal of that commentor, which is only to have a good time, and if someone else doesn't like it, they can get lost.


Saying the project has been hijacked by a club, and that the founder would disagree with them, is not a "good faith" effort. It's trollery.

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 8:27 pm 
LibriVox Admin Team

Joined: August 1st, 2009, 11:30 pm
Posts: 14236
DonaldMiller wrote:
[snip] ... the founder (forget his name) has used. But no doubt, what with him being an English professor...

I have no idea where you got that notion from? I mean, it's entirely possible that he's one now, but looking at his background, which can be gleaned off Hugh's blog, where he's semi-active, this is quite unlikely. And he has certainly not been one before:
Quote:
Before rediscovering the web, I worked in environmental finance, where I helped build and market structured financial products to address the risk of greenhouse gas emission reduction requirements for large global energy companies, while financing greenhouse gas emissions reduction projects. It was souped-up, complex carbon trading, and we were far too early.

I’ve got degrees in Mathematics & Engineering, as well as Philosophy, from Queen’s University.


Edited to add:
I concur with Timothy above: Given that you don't seem to know who that founder guy is, you are pretty sure about his motives and plans for LibriVox, are you not?

_________________
Cheers,
Ava.

--
AvailleAudio.com


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 8th, 2015, 10:41 pm 

Joined: February 16th, 2009, 5:30 am
Posts: 877
And now I'm off thread...

Donald, I didn't want to suddenly disappear, so I'll explain why you may or may not get someone discussing this with you consistently.

"Let's raise standards / let's focus on the listener" type threads are pretty common here. Most people seeing them then think "Well, I can either explain the FAQ to this person, or I can let it go, and do editing instead. Time to go do editing."

A handful of us who, like me, are between edits (I loaded a finished chapter last night), go "OK, I'll weigh in..." because, hey...why not.

The thing is, though, I've now got enough time to record my next section, and that means I'll be back in the group going "Argue basic principles again, or get on with actually making stuff? Time to do my edits!"

Which means I won't have time / inclination to keep going with this.

I wanted you to understand, in case it seems like a group of us are dropping in and out on this thread. I've seen that can be disconcerting for people.

I hope you want to stay. Having had this bit of a flare up isn't a barrier to that. It's great to be enthusiastic. We just have a particular etiquette that lets us collaborate successfully, and because you've skipped the usual methods of onboarding you aren't following that. That makes you harder to collaborate with, which is clearly frustrating for you. Please consider reading the FAQ, doing your 1 minute test, and then working the bugs out of your system with a short work, perhaps a poem or piece of short prose for one of the collections.

See you around.

_________________
My occasional blog is Games from Folktales


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 9th, 2015, 12:25 am 
LibriVox Admin Team

Joined: April 3rd, 2008, 3:55 am
Posts: 27774
Location: Melbourne,Australia
I've a feeling that this is approaching the "not nice" stage. Everyone has made their point and been answered , let's just agree that people are entitled to their opinions and we all accept that.
But we are not entitled to try and force others to agree, or to belittle them for having a different one.

So in appreciation of the nice forum we have, I think enough has been said by both sides. It has all been said before many times and no one's opinion has ever been changed , so let's all keep doing what we do as well as we are able.

Anne

_________________
Our objective is to make all books in the public domain available, for free, in audio format on the internet. - Hugh McGuire.


Top
 Profile  
Offline
Post Posted:: August 9th, 2015, 1:29 am 

Joined: March 1st, 2011, 2:19 pm
Posts: 2032
Location: Surrey, England
Before we go I would just like to mention that the Wiki quote Timothy posted was actually written by Hugh McGuire, our Founder:

Don't you have any standards?
It depends what you mean by standards. Our feeling is this: in order for LibriVox to be successful we must welcome anyone who wishes to honour a work of literature by lending their voice to it. Some readers are better than others, and the quality of reading will change from book to book and sometimes from chapter to chapter. But we will not judge your reading, though we may give you some advice if you ask for it. This is not Hollywood, and LibriVox has nothing to do with commercial media's values, production or otherwise. However: we think almost all of our readings are excellent, and we DO try to catch technical problems (like repeated text etc.) with our Listeners Wanted/prooflistening stage. Maybe you'd like to help?
… and here is the link for further reading:
viewtopic.php?f=18&t=877

More wise words from Hugh:
viewforum.php?f=18

Wise advice was given during management training before starting a new job - Neither comment on nor criticise procedures for at least 6 months. By then you will have been with the company long enough to understand how and why things happen/or not as they do/do not.

Carol

P.S. Glad you liked Earnest version 3 Image

_________________
My Librivox Recordings


Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 44 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group