Howdy,
I did respond to this the other day, but was rejected for some reason... Here's
what I said to Graham:
Graham,
We've just released some improvements to the way recent changes are
displayed, namely grouping them into different categories which today are
All Changes, Authors Merged, Books Added and New Covers.
E.g. New covers:
http://openlibrary.org/recentchanges/add-cover
Obviously the New Covers page would be better if it just showed a bunch of
covers which were easier to review and quicker to act upon if there is a
problem. We're planning to do that. This is a list that anyone can watch.
Also, it's worth noting two things: that the ratio of spurious covers to
real ones is very small, and that anyone can remove a suspect image
anytime.
Then Dan said:
> Beyond that, I really don't think it's feasible to "check or moderate"
> all of the images in a given library collection that would use
> OpenLibrary. To help with quality control, it would be nice to have a
> bi-directional relationship with OpenLibrary from a given library
> system so that a user could easily flag a cover as wrong or
> inappropriate without having to be or log in as an OpenLibrary member.
I agree - moderation is time-consuming, and as I said, the amount of suspect
imagery is very small (this is a qualitative assessment). Even the improved
display of the New Covers would aid the general public to be able to clear out
dodgy stuff. It's not just T&A by the way either. I've seen Windows Sunset quite
a bit too.
BTW - Great news about Evergreen using Open Library covers! Yay!
Cheers,
george
Received on Fri Sep 10 2010 - 13:19:21 EDT