Am 18.10.2010 um 22:58 schrieb Bowerbird@aol.com:
keith said:
Well, I was taking your description for granted, I will admit that.
not really.
i said roger expected the postprocessor to do all of the work. you were the one who misinterpreted this as "quality control". To put it in your style of comment is "Eat your own words" From your original post :
Cite begin oh yeah, there's one more thing that bugs me about fadedpage, which is that roger's answer, for may things the volunteers ask, is "don't worry about that, the post-processor will take care of it"... so, on the one hand, he's built a system that empowers volunteers -- by giving them the power to take a page from o.c.r. to "final" -- but then, on the other hand, rips the new empowerment from them by constantly reminding them that _someone_else_ will be making the _real_ decisions _after_ their work is done. it's a sad irony, it is. Cite end
quality-control is done _after_ the last person does the work. when the postprocessor does all the work, there's no one left to do any quality-control. so that's one of the main problems. Like I said, I see some of the decisions that the post-proccessor does as quality control. Take it or leave it.
(the other main problem is that stripping the first-line workers of the ability to finalize the page means you disempower them. "match the scan" sounds all friendly and tolerant, but -- in the long run -- it robs the proofers of a sense of accomplishment. what it boils down to is that roger solved the wrong problem... instead of "relieving proofers" of the risk of "making an error", he should have given them the reward of _finishing_the_page_.)
Some what off topic, but it might give you an idea what I am at. When a car comes off an assembly line who finalizes it. The quality control inspector (aka postprocessor) not the line workers! regards Keith