FREEBMD-DISCUSS-L ArchivesArchiver > FREEBMD-DISCUSS > 2005-06 > 1118124895
From: Dave Mayall <>
Subject: Re: Source for corrections
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 07:14:55 +0100
Quoting Ian Brooke <>:
> Dave Mayall wrote:
> > They are using the material to tell us that what we have on-line is wrong.
> We'll have to agree to disagree on that one. The 1837 view may well be that
> if a person uses the 1837-online data to 'correct' a FreeBMD transcription
> and upload it then that person is deliberatley making it available online
> (albeit through a 3rd-party (us!) which may even implicate us) thus
> breaching their conditions.
It is a fine distinction, but a distinction which we have to draw somewhere.
It is also a distinction that we can be comfortable with, because the source is
only for the correction request, NOT for the actual correction.
> That's a big *may* Dave - when it's software enhanced how can we be *sure it
> is accurate* which has always been the FreeBMD watchword has it not.
It is a big may, indeed. However, provided we always stick to verifying
corrections outside of 1837online, there is no problem.
> > This topic is now straying off topic for the admins list, so if people
> > wish to continue, it belongs on the discuss list.
> I've gone with your ruling here but I would disagree with it - this seems to
> be something affecting at least some transcribers and thus within the scope
> of Admins.
It does affect some transcribers marginally, although as Anne expanded rather
better than I did, it really affects the corrections co-ordinator, as
transcribers should not be making a correction simply on the basis of a claimed
The reason for taking it away from Admins is that Admins is strictly for
Question-Answer matters. As soon as we stray into areas where we are trying to
determine exactly what the position is, it belongs here. he split is made,
because of some unfortunate cases in the past where transcribers randomly
picked an opinion expressed in a discussion, and took it to be policy.
> I am very much of the opinion that what I thought to be our position is our
> safest and best approach - that we do not take any chances with 1837-online
> or any one else's data but simply tell tell transcriber's not to do it under
> any circumstances.
I agree, and I've spent many an hour explaining to people that we are NOT going
to get all tricksy by trying to push it to the wire with what we might legally
get away with. Yes, we might win any case if they got shirty, but I don't want
the hassle. Hence, we stick to not using their scans, and checking and claiming
their scans as a source against our own source.
> We were (rightly) quick to jump on our friend that was
> automating access to our scans, we should be very careful not to risk
> becoming the ones being jumped on. We have now published a policy decision
> that transcribers can correct their files using 1837-online data
No we haven't.
We have a policy decision that we will accept correction REQUESTS quoting
1837online as a source. We will continue to check all such requests.
This mail sent through http://www.ukonline.net
|Re: Source for corrections by Dave Mayall <>|