Suggestion: Built-in reporting of errors on pre-pub part's reader/viewer.
-
Many times when reading the pre-pub parts, I find errors, such as typos, incorrect words, double words, etc., but I don’t see a simple way to report them.
It would be a nice feature to have, so that members could select the affected section and leave a comment for the editors to address if confirmed.
I would think that would be useful and necessary functionality to have If you are going to have pre-published material made available.
-
The official way to report pre-pub errors is via the linked corrections thread in the discussion thread. The discussion thread for the volume is reachable via the speech bubble icon in the top bar. Though the link is only correct for the volume the reader is initially opened (dunno if this changed in last weeks update).
The official way to report errors post-publish is via support@j-novel.club, though this case requires reports from the published ebook version rather than the pre-pubs since pre-pubs don't usually have corrections made in the ebooks. I believe this is something they eventually want to change because of rentals, but I don't believe it's happened yet.
As for builtin reporting of errors in the reader, it's been suggested before with official responses being less than enthusiastic about its utility (especially given the above). IIRC, some of the other rationale is that the various translation teams handle reports differently. And having an internal processes for error checking and correction is more valuable to JNC than relying on community reporting.
-
@endoftheline Thank you for the explanation.
The method you describe, feels somewhat indirect and counter productive, and probably deters many people from reporting errors. I for one would find it cumbersome.
I have seen many final epubs being released with the same errors that I found in the prepubs.
Disregarding the major benefit of having such a large number of users scrutinizing the text for them "for free", seems rather near-sighted. Making reporting easier for the reader would only be an advantage for them, at least as far as I can see.
-
I think the "problem" is how different people read sections. The assumption we old timer's go by is how things have worked since "forever ago", when people didn't read stuff on their tablets.
For me, reading a section of the book in one tab, with the correction topic in another tab, is simple; doing that on a tablet might be more complex, if you don't have the message board open in another tab. It would be especially difficult if you're reading the the app, and trying to view the board in a browser.
-
@SomeOldGuy said in Suggestion: Built-in reporting of errors on pre-pub part's reader/viewer.:
It would be especially difficult if you're reading the the app, and trying to view the board in a browser.
That’s basically how I’ve been doing it since I signed up to JNC years ago: Read the pre-pubs on my (antique) iPad Pro with the iOS app, and follow the forums on several-of-too-many tabs with iOS Safari (with tabs opened to my JNC library, the release calendar, the unread messages pages, the forum’s Bookworm folder, the Premium ebooks thread, and the expiring volumes thread).
-
The primary issue is that making a reporting system that's easier for users inevitably means the number of reports will increase exponentially, and we do not have the staff or the time to monitor those reports and filter out actual errors from mistakenly reported errors or troll reports, etc. There may be a way to implement a system that mitigates that concern, but our development staff is currently busy with the backend migration that took place last week, and then other projects once that is over.
Whoever said nothing's impossible never tried slamming a revolving door.
-
@myskaros OMG - multiple ways to present errors would be a PAIN! No! Just one way! Don't screw with our brains even more!
-
@CarFMI I couldn't agree more. I've made this suggestion multiple times, but there's just no appetite for it. I can't tell you how often I've noticed errors on my tablet only to forget them by the time I'm on my computer. And I notice something every time I pick up a published book, so it's not like there aren't a bunch leaking through.
-
@myskaros I will grant you the logistical challenge, and I'm sympathetic. But surely there are reasonable heuristics that could act as a workable first-order filter.
For example, people who pay for premium or own a large number of ebooks would (I believe) have a vested interest in improving the service's quality and would be much less likely to submit low quality issues or trolls. You can also keep an internal "valid issue ratio" counter per user that would prioritize issues raised by users with higher ratios. You could also make the feature "opt-in". Adding the extra step should mean that that those who go through the trouble are more likely to submit valid issues (this is basically how the current system works - relegating corrections to a dedicated thread filters out casual users).
-
@unknownmat I edited the following out of my original comment because I couldn't remember a lot of the details surrounding the point @myskaros brought up and I wasn't too interested in looking for the other suggestion threads to review it even though I had recalled it as one of the points that made JNC less enthusiastic about a built-in correction reporting system.
From my perspective one of the biggest problems is that by the time they have a workable system built into the reader, they'll have basically just reinvented the corrections threads (or possibly an issue tracker) except it'll be less flexible and probably more buggy. And the only benefit I can see is that people don't have to give percentages/context for searching the part for the relevant text. The logistical concerns means that not even more reports can be considered a benefit.
The other side of it is that even if it makes it easier for readers to report issues. It doesn't matter if translation/proofing teams don't buy into whatever system is added. And from what I've seen, it seems like not all of them even rely on the existing correction threads for additional cleanup.
Personally, I don't use the apps so I can't really see the issues from that perspective, but I acknowledge, as you and others have mentioned, the correction threads are more cumbersome when using the apps/mobile device. But if the complaint is that there isn't an easy way to get/add to the corrections thread from the app, there are likely solutions that would probably be easier to receive than adding an entire built-in error reporting system that a minority would ever use.
-
@endoftheline To be honest, I really don't see a problem. They could easily integrate it into the existing system.
By the user selecting a section of the text, and writing a comment, the system could then automatically post the details into the forum discussion thread, under the name of that user. The rest would then continue as before and the user could follow up on it in the forum discussion thread.
In other words, nothing would change internally on how they manage these error reports. It would simply just automate it slightly for the user, and at the same time, provide accurate information about the exact location of the error and the user's comments about it.
-
I can imagine that leading to numerous duplicate reports. In the forum we can read the last few posts in the thread and only post about things other people didn't already report. If you're not reading the forum first before posting, you'd post the correction anyway even if it was already there.
-
@endoftheline said in Suggestion: Built-in reporting of errors on pre-pub part's reader/viewer.:
From my perspective one of the biggest problems is that by the time they have a workable system built into the reader, they'll have basically just reinvented the corrections threads
Every solution has tradeoffs - I'm under no illusion that such a system would be perfect. All I'm saying is that I - as a tablet reader - would like to participate in reporting issues, but instead find myself thwarted by the lack of such a feature in the app.
FWIW, Amazon's Kindle has such a feature and I use it often. It's hardly the usage challenge you're making it out to be here. It's really nice because after I've reported the issue, I can then forget about it and enjoy the remainder of the story.
-
@pcj said in Suggestion: Built-in reporting of errors on pre-pub part's reader/viewer.:
you're not reading the forum first before posting, you'd post the correction anyway even if it was already there.
I already don't do that. De-duplication is not my problem. I just begin every corrections post with the magic phrase, "Not sure if this has been mentioned already, but..."
