# Heads up: Amazon is now checking for Typos and Grammar issues in books.



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Hi all! Hope you're having a fabulous day/night!

I received an e-mail today from Amazon stating:


> Dear Publisher,
> Thank you for your submission of "Title Here" (ASIN: ASIN NUMBER HERE) to the Kindle Store through Amazon KDP.
> During a quality assurance review of your title, we have found that there are typographical errors within your title.
> Please make the necessary corrections to the title and republish it.
> ...


My questions are: Since when are they checking for typo's in ebooks? They don't even specifically state where or what the errors are, leaving me questioning everything considering I just had the book edited and it had more typos before the edit and I was never notified. Is this because someone reported an error? Has anyone else received a message like this before? If so, how did you resolve it? (I'm more curious how you found your typos aside from having another editor proof it; I've had two more people read the same manuscript and aside from my intentional errors, they didn't see anything else.)

In the book, in the first chapter, I have a character saying the word, 'git' instead of 'get'. I did this on purpose to insinuate an accent (Northern MA accent actually). Could this be a 'typo' they're talking about?

Thanks in advance for anyone that can help me out!

PS - I did e-mail them and haven't heard back from anyone yet.


----------



## R. M. Reed (Nov 11, 2009)

They can't be counting dialect as a typo, they would have to reject a lot of books. I didn't think they cared about typos anyway, leaving it to publishers and authors to make corrections.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

That's what I thought (about them not caring about typos). It seemed so odd and out of the blue to get this message. Now I'm left scratching my head, trying to figure out what needs to be changed.


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

I doubt it choked on the word "git" since that's a commonly-used derogatory term in the UK.

I uploaded a new ms two-weeks ago and didn't receive any errors.  Try changing the font and size and then read it again.  Sometimes our eyes have looked at it so many times they don't recognise errors when looking at it for the seventeenth time, and our brains simply fill in the missing blanks and skim the mistakes.  Someone suggested this today and I think it a brill idea.

I think this is just a part of Amazon's new leaf in wanting to make the quality of mss better.  They have said in recent weeks that things are going to be slowly changing (now if short-story writers want to get 70% on their singles, we have to write a summary and then submit and wait for approval).  Who knows.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"During a quality assurance review of your title,"_

I'd read that in a very limited way to indicate just the title. I forget how many places there are in the setup page for title. Is it possible there are two and the titles don't agree?


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

opuscroakus said:


> I doubt it choked on the word "git" since that's a commonly-used derogatory term in the UK.
> 
> I uploaded a new ms two-weeks ago and didn't receive any errors. Try changing the font and size and then read it again. Sometimes our eyes have looked at it so many times they don't recognise errors when looking at it for the seventeenth time, and our brains simply fill in the missing blanks and skim the mistakes. Someone suggested this today and I think it a brill idea.
> 
> I think this is just a part of Amazon's new leaf in wanting to make the quality of mss better. They have said in recent weeks that things are going to be slowly changing (now if short-story writers want to get 70% on their singles, we have to write a summary and then submit and wait for approval). Who knows.


What is this about short stories? Are you referring to short stories priced at $2.99?


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

Maybe they're talking about 'typographical' as in text characters which didn't come across properly? If you're submitting it as a word document, there are a few characters which Word will helpfully substitute in for you but which often don't get brought across correctly by conversion software.

There are a couple of options:

- Go through your word document and change all dashes to minus-signs, all quote marks to the plain ' and ". (this is not good typography, but it fixes the problem and most readers don't seem to care)

- Save as HTML, download Mobipocket Creator, and create a .mobi file from the html. Then you can preview the file to check for errors before uploading to KDP.


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> What is this about short stories? Are you referring to short stories priced at $2.99?


No, I'm talking about Kindle Singles. Some new programme that allows single short-stories to be uploaded at less than $0.99 and still get 70%. But you have to send them a query/synopsis and then await approval. They are acting _exactly_ like an agent/publisher in this regard. AND they have the right to deny you. Why they allow all sorts of paeodophilic s**t in full-length novels and then choke on a 3,000 word essay about why your dad keeps mowing over the Azalea he bought for your mum for Mother's Day is beyond me.


----------



## HeidiHall (Sep 5, 2010)

Wow! I'm very interested to see the response you get from CS. I don't have an issue with Amazon weeding the mss out that haven't been at least run through a spell-checker, but what software are they using to find fault with a professionally edited document? Please keep us updated .


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"During a quality assurance review of your title,"_
> 
> I'd read that in a very limited way to indicate just the title. I forget how many places there are in the setup page for title. Is it possible there are two and the titles don't agree?


I just bought a copy of it, to see it for myself. No issues in the title or on the title page that I can see.



nomesque said:


> Maybe they're talking about 'typographical' as in text characters which didn't come across properly? If you're submitting it as a word document, there are a few characters which Word will helpfully substitute in for you but which often don't get brought across correctly by conversion software.
> 
> There are a couple of options:
> 
> ...


Thanks for the suggestions. I did use Mobipocket Creator for the file.  No issues were found.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

WriterGurl1 said:


> Wow! I'm very interested to see the response you get from CS. I don't have an issue with Amazon weeding the mss out that haven't been at least run through a spell-checker, but what software are they using to find fault with a professionally edited document? Please keep us updated .


I totally agree! If I do hear from them, I will definitely let everyone know!


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I just bought a copy of it, to see it for myself. No issues in the title or on the title page that I can see."_

How about in the KDP setup pages themselves? Not the contents of the uploaded file. Wild guess.


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"I just bought a copy of it, to see it for myself. No issues in the title or on the title page that I can see."_
> 
> How about in the KDP setup pages themselves? Not the contents of the uploaded file. Wild guess.


Hmmn. Good point. Last week I had Meatgrinder from Smashwords choke on a URL I put in my DESCRIPTION, ffs. They made me re-do it without the external URL, and I put it in there because one of my short-stories included in the collection was based on a true story with a ghost local to Tennessee. What's wrong with letting people know if they want to learn more, they can visit this link? But neooo, SW wouldn't allow it and made me re-do it.

Do you have something innocuous like that in your description, maybe? This is perplexing.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Hmm ... I noticed that in their e-mail they have the word 'of' capitalized and I don't in any of the title pages or anything. Have no idea if that could cause it (that would be awfully nit-picky if you ask me!). The description hasn't changed since I originally uploaded it back in 2010, but I DID add hyperlinks at the end of the book (to my website, etc). They look fine in the book though. I wonder if Amazon is choking on that (though seems unlikely as I've downloaded several books from other authors who have links to their sites and e-mail addresses)?


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Here is the response I got from CS:



> Thank you so much for contacting us about the errors within the book content of your Kindle title "The Kindness of Strangers." I checked with our quality team and confirmed that there are a few typographical errors within your book content. Unfortunately, we're unable to provide you with exact locations the errors reflect, however, our customers feel there are errors like the use of the verbs lie and lay were used incorrectly in various locations.
> 
> Hence, our quality team believes that few corrections are required to be made within your book content in order to avoid our Kindle readers coming back with a feedback of quality issue with your book. I hope this helps you in making the necessary corrections to the book content. If you have any further questions or clarifications, please feel free to write to us and we'll be glad to assist you.
> 
> Thanks for using Amazon KDP. Have a nice day!


Well, jeez. So I'm assuming someone complained then? Guess even getting an editor doesn't help.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

I got one of them notices about a 'blank page' after my cover shot.  Deleted that.  They said there were some other formatting issues like that, didn't tell me where.  I had the book edited, and went through it very carefully.  The re-uploaded it.  Haven't heard back from them yet.  Fingers crossed.  Hmmm.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

My thing about this is, are they going to do a line by line edit for everyone's books now?! Did someone complain and that's why I'm being 'called out'? One of my reviews (back in 2010, prior to this newly edited version being uploaded) states there were grammar issues. I had the book edited and had two people read it again. I'm just so confused now and bummed out.


----------



## Kathleen Valentine (Dec 10, 2009)

I know it is distressing but don't you also see it as a good sign that they are making an effort to improve the quality of the products they offer? I know a lot of readers have started complaining about the poor quality of writing in the books they purchase and I would not be surprised if they start complaining to Amazon. Yesterday I was in the Kindle section reading samples from a few paranormal indies and I was, frankly, stunned at how many spelling errors I found in the samples -- the samples intended to encourage people to buy the books. Things like the misuse of they're/there/their and your/you're, etc. were in quite a number of them.

I'm sorry for your situation but it does encourage me that Amazon is attempting to impose standards.


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

Kathleen Valentine said:


> I know it is distressing but don't you also see it as a good sign that they are making an effort to improve the quality of the products they offer? I know a lot of readers have started complaining about the poor quality of writing in the books they purchase and I would not be surprised if they start complaining to Amazon. Yesterday I was in the Kindle section reading samples from a few paranormal indies and I was, frankly, stunned at how many spelling errors I found in the samples -- the samples intended to encourage people to buy the books. Things like the misuse of they're/there/their and your/you're, etc. were in quite a number of them.
> 
> I'm sorry for your situation but it does encourage me that Amazon is attempting to impose standards.


Yes, but Amazon, like Smashwords and BN.com are distributors, NOT publishers. What they are doing puts them squarely into publisher territory when they have no right to be there. Yes, it's highly-encouraging that they have imposed quality control standards on the books they are distributing (because to be honest, I feel there are too many wannabe published writers dumping their books on Amazon way too soon before they're ready), but going so far as to tell someone they can't publish because it's sub-standard is not merely a distributor concern any longer. We still have a right to self-publish crap if we want to. Like I said before, they will publish paedophilia crap without question.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Kathleen Valentine said:


> I know it is distressing but don't you also see it as a good sign that they are making an effort to improve the quality of the products they offer? I know a lot of readers have started complaining about the poor quality of writing in the books they purchase and I would not be surprised if they start complaining to Amazon. Yesterday I was in the Kindle section reading samples from a few paranormal indies and I was, frankly, stunned at how many spelling errors I found in the samples -- the samples intended to encourage people to buy the books. Things like the misuse of they're/there/their and your/you're, etc. were in quite a number of them.
> 
> I'm sorry for your situation but it does encourage me that Amazon is attempting to impose standards.


I mean, it is a good thing. My tiny issue with it is, if they found a problem shouldn't they be able to at least tell you what the problem is? I know they mentioned lie vs lay, but that's it. I'm basically stuck now. Sigh ...


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> It's a little distressing, yes, but to me the distressing part is not knowing who it is that's reviewing these manuscripts. I'm paying an editor hard-earned cash, and I trust my editor. I don't trust some nameless, faceless person I've never talked to.


I'd wager a LOT of money that they're putting it through some strenuous algorithm-based software much like Meatgrinder. With squillions of books being uploaded daily, there is simply not enough payroll anywhere to employ the necessary number of people for a forty-eight-hour turn-around. Their customer service is only spitting back to you what the print-out read, which is why they can't directly pinpoint the issue in question.


----------



## altworld (Mar 11, 2010)

Is this on KDP or just on Kindle Singles?
Arigato,
Nick Davis


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

opuscroakus said:


> Yes, but Amazon, like Smashwords and BN.com are distributors, NOT publishers. What they are doing puts them squarely into publisher territory when they have no right to be there. Yes, it's highly-encouraging that they have imposed quality control standards on the books they are distributing (because to be honest, I feel there are too many wannabe published writers dumping their books on Amazon way too soon before they're ready), but going so far as to tell someone they can't publish because it's sub-standard is not merely a distributor concern any longer. We still have a right to self-publish crap if we want to. Like I said before, they will publish paedophilia crap without question.


I wouldn't really refer to Amazon as a distributor. They are a retailer. It's their bookstore. If they feel a book is substandard they probably shouldn't stock it.

I don't think they publish anything without question anymore. Everything goes through some kind of vetting process, though I don't think the vetting is all that stringent. I think they have offshored it, too, probably to India.

There is no way they are doing a line edit on books, though. They either have some kind of automated tool to check or they are responding to a complaint.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

julieannfelicity said:


> I mean, it is a good thing. My tiny issue with it is, if they found a problem shouldn't they be able to at least tell you what the problem is? I know they mentioned lie vs lay, but that's it. I'm basically stuck now. Sigh ...


I'm confused. You posted the e-mail you received, which I assumed was a copy/paste. However, you then mentioned that they capitalized "of" in the title (that is incorrect, by the way). Then, you mentioned this "lie vs lay" thing.

Was there more to the e-mail?

Since you mentioned "of," does that mean that the book in question is "The Kindness of Strangers"? I ask because that one is still up for sale.


----------



## Erick Flaig (Oct 25, 2010)

Hi Julieann,

I wonder if the problem may be with Createspace, rather than Amazon/Kindle per se. I noticed you said your response was from "CS," so I'm guessing that's Createspace.

If you read this article from Publisher's Weekly, it may shed some light on this:

http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/authors/pw-select/article/46707-with-a-little-help-hitting-my-stride.html

Best to you!


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

It sounds to me as if a customers complained while asking for a refund.

Returns cost Amazon money--they may not get back the fees they had to pay on that particular title to the credit card company, and they have to process the return, so that takes time and money. So they're passing on the message from the customer. 

Amazon wants to minimize returns. You want to minimize returns.

I do wonder if this means that they're beginning to track books that result in a sufficient percentage of returns so that they are not profitable to stock.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

Erick Flaig said:


> Hi Julieann,
> 
> I wonder if the problem may be with Createspace, rather than Amazon/Kindle per se. I noticed you said your response was from "CS," so I'm guessing that's Createspace.
> 
> ...


CS is the acronym for Customer Service also. It is commonly used on the Amazon forums.


----------



## opuscroakus (Aug 7, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> I wouldn't really refer to Amazon as a distributor. They are a retailer. It's their bookstore.


Eh, maybe, but I think especially with DTPs, the lines get severely blurred between distributor and retailer, because with ALL online distributors, they still take a percentage, which moves them into retail. By your definition, SW would be considered a retailer, but yet they refer to themselves as an online distributor--I know, because I constantly argue with Mark Coker in e-mails about some of their ridiculous policies. 



> There is no way they are doing a line edit on books, though. They either have some kind of automated tool to check or they are responding to a complaint.


How much time passed, exactly, between the time the OP uploaded their new ms and the time they received the error message? Because I uploaded my new short-story collection, To Keep Away the Chill two-weeks ago and didn't receive anything. I'm wondering if this new impletation of changed policy is more recent than that. 

Erick, just posted the question to my Kindle group and one author said he had received a similar quality control message from KDP for his Kindle upload, but it went up without a hitch.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Julieann,

I just downloaded your sample.

Did you perhaps upload the wrong file, instead of the final, edited one?


----------



## nomesque (Apr 12, 2010)

Hmmm... email them and ask their definition of 'typographical'. Typical usage would imply problems with formatting, and characters appearing oddly, NOT spelling and grammar issues.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

nomesque said:


> Hmmm... email them and ask their definition of 'typographical'. Typical usage would imply problems with formatting, and characters appearing oddly, NOT spelling and grammar issues.


This...

The errors I found were not ones that would be caught by a spell checker or some program like that. They are ones that would require an actual person to find.

As Asher McDonald said, I can't believe that Amazon is doing a line edit.

Plus, your book is still up for sale. So, the whole thing really makes no sense.


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

julieannfelicity said:


> I mean, it is a good thing. My tiny issue with it is, if they found a problem shouldn't they be able to at least tell you what the problem is? I know they mentioned lie vs lay, but that's it. I'm basically stuck now. Sigh ...


I have to agree that if they're going to say you have to correct errors that they need to pinpoint the errors. Not doing so doesn't even make sense.


----------



## Edward C. Patterson (Mar 28, 2009)

It sound like there have been multiple customer complaints t Amazon about your grammar and formatting. What else could it be? Amazon doesn;t have the ability to grammar and spell check eBooks. It sounds like the public is contacting them. You should look to people who you know have bought the book for an opinion. 

Edward C. Patterson


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

altworld said:


> Is this on KDP or just on Kindle Singles?
> Arigato,
> Nick Davis


KDP - it's not a short story.


RedAdept said:


> I'm confused. You posted the e-mail you received, which I assumed was a copy/paste. However, you then mentioned that they capitalized "of" in the title (that is incorrect, by the way). Then, you mentioned this "lie vs lay" thing.
> 
> Was there more to the e-mail?
> 
> Since you mentioned "of," does that mean that the book in question is "The Kindness of Strangers"? I ask because that one is still up for sale.


No, nothing more to the e-mails. I did a copy and replace. Yes, it is regarding The Kindness of Strangers.



Courtney Milan said:


> It sounds to me as if a customers complained while asking for a refund.
> 
> Returns cost Amazon money--they may not get back the fees they had to pay on that particular title to the credit card company, and they have to process the return, so that takes time and money. So they're passing on the message from the customer.
> 
> ...


I've only received 1 refund in the past two months, and that was with the older version (not the newly edited). But it could have been the one that broke the camels back (I've received at least 10 refunds in the +1000 books sold).



RedAdept said:


> Julieann,
> 
> I just downloaded your sample.
> 
> Did you perhaps upload the wrong file, instead of the final, edited one?


The sample I've got is the correct one (downloaded to make sure). I'm curious to know this sentence that was supposed to be a period, instead of a comma. I guess I'm too close to the work, but that doesn't explain my editor and the two beta readers that read it afterward. Sigh ...

I own a copy of it on my kindle PC and I don't see any formatting issues (I've checked every page to be sure everything aligned correctly, and there aren't any weird characters that I saw). 
Regarding 'lay' vs 'lie' ... I found 1 sentence so far: So, she continued to lie there until she finally heard the sound of water hitting against the plastic shower curtain.

I can't assume anything about the editor, but if that's incorrect then I guess I need to hire a new one.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

Amazon now has an idea what happens when they open up their service to everything. What do they have? Over a million? So it's reasonable to expect them to begin managing their offerings. They will probably not tell us their plan, but will communicate individually. 

Didn't they start restricting uploads of public domain books a few months back?

What is unreasonable is to expect them to leave their service open year after year with no oversight.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

opuscroakus said:


> How much time passed, exactly, between the time the OP uploaded their new ms and the time they received the error message? Because I uploaded my new short-story collection, To Keep Away the Chill two-weeks ago and didn't receive anything. I'm wondering if this new impletation of changed policy is more recent than that.


My original MS was uploaded (unedited) on May 20, 2010. This newly edited version was uploaded the end of last month. I received the original e-mail on the 16th.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Okay, I downloaded the sample and found a several punctuation and hyphenation errors in the first couple pages.  Not the sort of thing which would be picked up by an automated system, so I would have to assume this came from a complaint.  Once they have a complaint, they have to ask you to edit if they confirm it, even if the errors aren't blatant or terrible.

If they are doing this as a quality check (independent of complaints) a lot more of us would be getting that letter.  And, frankly, a LOT of the OCR-ed work of traditional publishers would be in big trouble too.

Do a careful edit again and resubmit and see what happens.  In the meantime your book is still up.

(EDIT: I'll message you with the errors I found.  Imho, they're not embarrassing, but I realize I probably shouldn't put them in the post.)

Camille


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Since there was only 1 return mentioned, my guess is that it was found by customers reading the samples. And some of those customers wrote to Amazon about it. I wonder how many emails about a book they have to get before sending this out to authors. Was the book featured somewhere so there was a higher percentage of sampling going on then usual? 

As a consumer I see it as a good thing. They are listening to their customers. And in the long term, I think it helps the Indy community as a whole.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Atunah said:


> Since there was only 1 return mentioned, my guess is that it was found by customers reading the samples. And some of those customers wrote to Amazon about it. I wonder how many emails about a book they have to get before sending this out to authors. Was the book featured somewhere so there was a higher percentage of sampling going on then usual?
> 
> As a consumer I see it as a good thing. They are listening to their customers. And in the long term, I think it helps the Indy community as a whole.


There are definitely some people out there who are looking for indie books with errors. However, I suspect ONE return would carry a lot more weight than several sample complaints. At least if they were able to ascertain that there were indeed some errors.

Camille


----------



## Atunah (Nov 20, 2008)

Wouldn't they be way busy if they go only by returns? Unless it was specified why it was returned at the time I guess, otherwise don't you all have a certain percentage of returns just because some people do happen to hit the wrong button the Kindle?

Heck I almost bought a few books just by moving them around in Collections. The highlighter in full novels goes straight to collection, but on a sample, it goes to "buy" first.  

In any case, must be something newer then they are implementing as I can't remember reading this from other authors.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

julieannfelicity said:


> I've only received 1 refund in the past two months, and that was with the older version (not the newly edited). But it could have been the one that broke the camels back (I've received at least 10 refunds in the +1000 books sold).
> The sample I've got is the correct one (downloaded to make sure). I'm curious to know this sentence that was supposed to be a period, instead of a comma. I guess I'm too close to the work, but that doesn't explain my editor and the two beta readers that read it afterward. Sigh ...


I actually deleted that portion of my post because I felt it was rude. Please accept my apologies.

Since you asked, it was actually a period that should have been a comma:

"Aahh ... I'm a gonna git you, girl; I'm a gonna git you." he taunted her... (The period after "you" should be a comma.)


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Atunah said:


> Wouldn't they be way busy if they go only by returns? Unless it was specified why it was returned at the time I guess, otherwise don't you all have a certain percentage of returns just because some people do happen to hit the wrong button the Kindle?
> 
> Heck I almost bought a few books just by moving them around in Collections. The highlighter in full novels goes straight to collection, but on a sample, it goes to "buy" first.
> 
> In any case, must be something newer then they are implementing as I can't remember reading this from other authors.


No, I don't mean that they're going by returns. That wouldn't make sense at all, because they don't know why people return them.

I mean that a complaint from a single person who had purchased and returned the book would mean a lot more than multiple complaints from samplers. Odds are someone returned the book and complained, and they verified the customer was right, and passed it back to the author.

Camille


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I actually deleted that portion of my post because I felt it was rude. Please accept my apologies.
> 
> Since you asked, tt was actually a period that should have been a comma:
> 
> "Aahh ... I'm a gonna git you, girl; I'm a gonna git you." he taunted her... (The period after "you" should be a comma.)


I read that as a separate sentence -- and the "He" should have been capitalized. It works either way, though -- and one or the other should fix it.

Camille


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I actually deleted that portion of my post because I felt it was rude. Please accept my apologies.
> 
> Since you asked, tt was actually a period that should have been a comma:
> 
> "Aahh ... I'm a gonna git you, girl; I'm a gonna git you." he taunted her... (The period after "you" should be a comma.)


Constructive criticism (to me) is never rude, so please don't apologize! Another friend of mine read those pages and she came across that error too. What's so sad is, in the Smashwords version that I just checked from 7/2010 I had a capital 'H' in He. (kicking myself)


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Amazon now has an idea what happens when they open up their service to everything. What do they have? Over a million? So it's reasonable to expect them to begin managing their offerings. They will probably not tell us their plan, but will communicate individually.
> 
> Didn't they start restricting uploads of public domain books a few months back?
> 
> What is unreasonable is to expect them to leave their service open year after year with no oversight.


I think that numbskull that published a guide to pedophilia forced Amazon's hand. They had to institute some kind of human vetting. Now they have it in place and they will use it for other things besides keeping pedophile books from being placed for sale.

I can't believe someone complained about lay vs. lie usage. I think Julie Ann ran into someone who had an ax to grind over indie writers.

And this...



> Hence, our quality team believes that few corrections are required to be made within your book content in order to avoid our Kindle readers coming back with a feedback of quality issue with your book.


...is not American English. I wonder where these CS people are?


----------



## Gregory Ashe (May 5, 2011)

Man, this is fascinating. Part of me wishes they'd be helpful copy-editors and give specific comments; the other part wishes they'd not do the job at all if they're going to do it half-way. It'll be interesting to see how common this becomes. If this is done by a computer, how will it handle all the strange terms that crop up in speculative fiction?


----------



## Todd Russell (Mar 27, 2011)

After reading everything here I'm voting that this was either a random QA check or the result of a return/complaint. 

Amazon might be experimenting with different backend grammar engines (there are several out there) to provide as a QA service someday but I doubt they are using such an animal on every one of our books. 

And since they already offer these (paid) services through their CreateSpace site it seems more (business) logical to try and upsell those services when their machine detects grammar and typographical issues in books and/or when customer complaints/returns are generated on  author books.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Todd Russell said:


> After reading everything here I'm voting that this was either a random QA check or the result of a return/complaint.
> 
> Amazon might be experimenting with different backend grammar engines (there are several out there) to provide as a QA service someday but I doubt they are using such an animal on every one of our books.
> 
> And since they already offer these (paid) services through their CreateSpace site it seems more (business) logical to try and upsell those services when their machine detects grammar and typographical issues in books and/or when customer complaints/returns are generated on author books.


Yeah, but have you seen the price of the editing services offered by CreateSpace?  Exhorbitant!


----------



## WestofMars (Sep 16, 2009)

Am I the only one scared that we're going to be hit now with scores of people who call themselves "professional formatters" and "professional editors" who are going to complain to Amazon -- and then drop e-mail into our lives, telling us they found problems in our books, and what do you know but THEY are the best formatter/editor who can solve it for us?

Sorry, gang. I see this as a negative thing. Unless Amazon's going to use a real, honest-to-goodness editing team who will manage the complaints and then come back and tell us exactly what the problems are -- which, yes, puts them into the realm of publisher, which is square where they want to be anyway -- the inmates can very shortly begin to run the asylum.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Yeah, but have you seen the price of the editing services offered by CreateSpace?"_

That could be a real money maker if an edit by CS gave a book a guarantee of inclusion in the Amazon eBook catalog. "Edited by CreateSpace."


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

WestofMars said:


> Am I the only one scared that we're going to be hit now with scores of people who call themselves "professional formatters" and "professional editors" who are going to complain to Amazon -- and then drop e-mail into our lives, telling us they found problems in our books, and what do you know but THEY are the best formatter/editor who can solve it for us?
> 
> Sorry, gang. I see this as a negative thing. Unless Amazon's going to use a real, honest-to-goodness editing team who will manage the complaints and then come back and tell us exactly what the problems are -- which, yes, puts them into the realm of publisher, which is square where they want to be anyway -- the inmates can very shortly begin to run the asylum.


So, you want Amazon to edit your books for you?

I don't think your scenario will come to fruition. For one thing, no one can complain if your book has been edited and is not filled with errors. If they did, then presumably, Amazon's little verification process would catch it.

Often, I have had to send e-mails to authors to tell them that I am unwilling to read/review their work because of too many "editing issues." That's the phrase I use. I don't feel obligated to point them out one by one, and I certainly don't feel obligated to edit their book for them.

As a reviewer, that's not my job. As a retailer, it's not Amazon's job to edit, either.

In my mind, this is similar to several people contacting Amazon to say that one of their sellers, or whatever they call them, is selling "broken" merchandise on their site. Amazon would investigate and tell the seller to correct the problem. They would not go to that seller's home and "fix" whatever was broken.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"Sorry, gang. I see this as a negative thing. Unless Amazon's going to use a real, honest-to-goodness editing team who will manage the complaints and then come back and tell us exactly what the problems are -- which, yes, puts them into the realm of publisher, which is square where they want to be anyway -- the inmates can very shortly begin to run the asylum."_

Amazon is selling stuff. That's their realm. They can institute whatever quality controls they choose.

I once ordered an item from an Amazon seller and it didn't arrive. I sent an email to Amazon at noon. At 1230pm I had an email from the vendor expressing regrets, and notifying me they were doubling my order for the same price and shipping by FedEx next day service. They did.

That same afternoon I received an email from Amazon saying they had notified the seller to resolve the issue. Two days later Amazon sent another email asking if the situation was resolved.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

This is a slippery slope Amazon's on here.  I found several misspelled words in a book published by one of the big publishers (they're in both the print and kindle edition). Should I complain?  If I do, will Amazon pull that book just like an indie?  More specifically, how many and what sort of errors cause a book to be pulled?

I'm guessing they won't tell us the details and they won't pull books from traditional publishers. I totally agree that some level of quality control is good in theory.  But when it's my book or your book pulled and it takes weeks or longer to get it resolved, we perhaps may start to feel differently, especially if the errors are no worse than what's in traditionally published books.

I'm not saying Amazon can't do this - of course they can do whatever they want. And perhaps a book that has sold a certain amount will not be pulled, in which case it's a positive for them. But inconsistently applied quality control like this has the potential to do some damage as well.


----------



## Tom Junior (Apr 4, 2011)

Well to be fair. Refunds do cost a company money, banks and credit card companies charge service fees to process a refund. Many consumers don't realize this, as its invisible to them. The company just eats a loss in those cases. (They also charge fees to process the initial charge. So thats a fee x2 for one transaction.).  

So I could see Amazon wanting to stem any tide of refunds for .99 cent ebooks. They could add up pretty quickly. I don't think this Amazon attempting to push their own editorial servies. I think this is Amazon watching their bottom line. I'm very convinced this is refund related.


----------



## Sondrae Bennett (Mar 29, 2011)

opuscroakus said:


> Yes, but Amazon, like Smashwords and BN.com are distributors, NOT publishers. What they are doing puts them squarely into publisher territory when they have no right to be there. Yes, it's highly-encouraging that they have imposed quality control standards on the books they are distributing (because to be honest, I feel there are too many wannabe published writers dumping their books on Amazon way too soon before they're ready), but going so far as to tell someone they can't publish because it's sub-standard is not merely a distributor concern any longer. We still have a right to self-publish crap if we want to. Like I said before, they will publish paedophilia crap without question.


Amazon isn't telling people they don't have a right to self-publish crap. But like any store, they have a right to only stock products they believe will make them money. When you walk into a CVS looking for...oh, I don't know, sunscreen... you won't be able to find every brand ever made, only the ones that CVS believes will sell. Granted, shelf space on the internet is not finite like it is in an actual store, but the store still has the right to refuse to sell something. They probably would and will pull a book from a big publisher if they get enough complaints vs the amount of sales for the product. 25 complaints may seem like a lot on a product selling 100 units but not so much for a product selling 2,000. Amazon, like all businesses, consider the bottom line.

I think this is a good thing as a reader and as an author to have books go through a quality assurance check. I still cringe when I reread Arctic Winds and find an error my editor and I missed. Although based on the second email you posted, it sounds like it was a customer complaint. It's possible they only check books after complaints are made, especially since it is a lie vs lay issue. Since both words are spelled correctly, I'm not sure a computer program would catch that error. Then again I'm no computer expert.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

I don't see this as a change, or a particularly negative thing. (However, since this is only a single instance, it is hard to judge whether it's a sign of things to come or an isolated incident.)

Amazon gets returns and complaints about a product, they have the option to either stop carrying it or ask the vendor to do better.  They want to carry every product in the universe, and so they're not going to instigate this, but they're going to respond to complaints.  

It looks to me like they are handling this the same way they've handled other things.  They don't want to monkey with it.  I'll betcha they will not be instituting quality control beyond this -- they'll just use the cheapest method of dealing with it.  And frankly, what I saw here was not unfair -- there were errors, and they didn't threaten or remove the book.  They just asked for corrections.

Writers should always beware of scamming "services" who drum up business in unethical ways.  If you get this letter from Amazon and get a spam message from an editing business, report it right away with full details.  This won't necessarily help you case (if you have errors, you have errors) but it will certainly help them stop the crooks.

Camille


----------



## Decon (Feb 16, 2011)

Someone said that Amazon are not publishers. I think you will find that is changing. I wish I had the link. Amazon are, or are about to start publishing. It doesn't stop them being a distributor ... just saying.

I haven't followed all the thread. but I saw CS mentioned. CS have editors and proof readers and with the prices they charge, it would not surprise me if they had time on their hands. However, I think like others have said, it it likely to be due to a customer/s requesting a refund/s. 

I had a few errors on the first 10 I sold in the UK and they haunt me every day. I use Word search for all the common pairing errors that spell check doesn't pick up e.g. your-you're, their- there, look- luck, where-were, here hear etc. I have a whole list of them I picked up from my own work and reading over 2000 chapters on a new writers site. It doesn't take long to go through them all as a double check as long as you change them manually and don't use the automatic feature which will create even more mistakes.

One howler I made was translating to American English and back to UK English and that was with the word tires/tyres. Luckily I spotted it in time.

I put my MS a chapter at a time through Wordpress posts. It seems to pick up things like if you use 'past,' instead of 'passed,' or 'by,' as I found out much to my embarrassment. I wish I knew the name of the software they use.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I honestly can't imagine a freelance editor going to that kind of trouble to drum up business. Most of us are booked months in advance, for one thing.

Looking at it another way, who knows how long it takes Amazon to respond to a complaint of this type? I'm assuming it would take more than one complaint for one thing.

So, say some unethical person tries to do a scam by complaining to Amazon. Then, what? They sit back and wait, hoping that a bunch of other customers will complain, too? Okay. Then, what? The books are not being taken down, so how would that 'scammer' even know when to contact the author in question?

As I mentioned previously, I have often found books that are too poorly edited for me to be comfortable reading. I do e-mail those authors to let them know that I won't be reading and reviewing their book. I do this as a curtesy.

However, I do *not* offer to edit their book. As a matter of fact, I tell them that their submission for review means that I *can't * edit it. Instead, I provide them with a list of recommended editors, the recommendations of which were provided by authors here on KB.


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I'm guessing amazon doesn't care about errors - they care about happy customers. If customers have a different threshold before they judge a trad pubbed book "full of errors" vs. an indie book, then we need to live with that reality.
> 
> Also, it appears that Julie Ann got an email requesting an updated copy - they didn't pull her book. In the realm of things they could have done, this seems pretty reasonable.


I don't disagree with anything you've said. Just that living with what is a reasonable reality could potentially be pretty bad for an individual author if it is not clear exactly what has to change to get the book re-approved and if it takes weeks or longer for re-approval.


----------



## valeriec80 (Feb 24, 2011)

Incidentally, your usage of lie was correct in the example sentence you posted.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

As someone who hates typos and grammatical boo-boos, I can't say that I'm disappointed by this. On the other hand, how is THIS still okay?



> When mad sorcerers open a gateway to the very pits of hell, releasing outre demons of darkest nightmare upon the world, only the intrepid knights of House Eotrus stand in their way. Claradon Eotrus takes up the mantle of his noble house to avenge his father and hold back the tide of chaos that threatens to engulf the world and destroy mankind. Claradon recruits Angle Theta and Gabriel Garn, mysterious knights of mystical power to stand with him. Theta and Garn take up their swords one last time against the coming darkness -- a darkness from which only one will emerge.
> 
> The Gateway is the first story in the Harbinger of Doom saga. The epic tale continues in The Fallen Angle. The book, Harbinger of Doom collects The Gateway and The Fallen Angle into a single volume. Volume 3 of the Saga is entitled, Knight Eternal. Each volume is available in Kindle and Trade Paperback formats.
> 
> ...


Just sayin'...


----------



## Erica Sloane (May 11, 2011)

I grabbed a few lines from the email in the initial post, Googled them, and the only other instance of anything close to the case we're talking about in this thread is here:

http://207-171-168-158.amazon.com/kdpforums/thread.jspa?threadID=14036&tstart=-16

That's all I could find. The only other results on Google were from this thread.

Notice that the post is dated 7/22/10, so apparently whatever they are/were using has been around for about 10 months at least, and a Google search indicates that _two people_ have posted about it on the entire Internet. (EDIT: I've been corrected on the date. Thank you. It was posted three and a half weeks ago. Still seems like it's not happening a lot.)

Rare? Looks like it. It seems to me that if this were happening with any kind of frequency there would be loads of hits on Google, especially leading back to the KDP support forum.

(Now, watch me get slapped with a QA check.  )


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Erica Sloane said:


> I grabbed a few lines from the email in the initial post, Googled them, and the only other instance of anything close to the case we're talking about in this thread is here:
> 
> http://207-171-168-158.amazon.com/kdpforums/thread.jspa?threadID=14036&tstart=-16
> 
> ...


Are you referring to this thread created on April 24th?


> Warning: Contains Mormons! (amusing letter from Amazon Customer Service)
> Posted: Apr 24, 2011 6:50 PM


----------



## Erica Sloane (May 11, 2011)

julieannfelicity said:


> Are you referring to this thread created on April 24th?


Ah, you're right. I was looking at the date that poster registered. Still, we have two examples in three and a half weeks, at least going by the number of people who posted about it. I would think the KDP support forums would be overrun with authors posting about it if this is happening a lot.

By the way, I'm not trying to diminish the importance of your situation. I'm sorry this happened to you.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

RedAdept said:


> I honestly can't imagine a freelance editor going to that kind of trouble to drum up business. Most of us are booked months in advance, for one thing.


It would be a scammer doing that, not a real editor.

As for Amazon going into publishing --

Yes, they have several edited publishing endeavors, including the one which has published Konrath. They also do a whole lot of other things like cloud computing, and all of their many many types of vendor services.

Remember that no matter what Amazon adds to the business, they are a retailer first. They specialize in not specializing -- they want it all. You can sell a book as a publisher, or as a book dealer, or as a consumer. You can take donations and you can offer services. Amazon does EVERYTHING, and they learned to do it very very very well a long time ago. They're going to make tweaks, they're going to shift a little this way and that, but they're not going to cut off their lucrative main business (selling everything to everybody) to feed a very expensive (and somewhat marginal) side business (publishing).

Sure I could be wrong, but if you look at all of their past efforts, this publishing business is just another added value that gives everyone a choice of a different flavor. (While keeping their competition on their toes.)

Camille


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2011)

Sorry this his Julie, but I'd love there to be random spot checks of books. Some are atrocious, and often the author either has no idea they are peddling gibberish or they are doing it intentionally. In some extreme circumstances, I'd even give them the thumbs up if they removed buy buttons until books were proofread. People should be scared to upload a book that isn't as reasonably perfect as possible, and if the reader doesn't scare them enough to do it, Amazon should step right in there.

This is Jason Letts, and I approve this message.


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

If the book is just atrocious, as in error after error in nearly every page, I can maybe dig it. But it still gives me an icky feeling. For starters, this could drastically slow down upload times. Worse, it could land a book of mine in a quagmire, where me and this unknown, unaccountable editor just don't see eye to eye about...well, who knows what. The names of my freaking characters, even?


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

I use a fair amount of Scots in my novels. So some twit at Amazon decides I don't know how to spell, maybe? Just... no.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> If the book is just atrocious, as in error after error in nearly every page, I can maybe dig it. But it still gives me an icky feeling. For starters, this could drastically slow down upload times. Worse, it could land a book of mine in a quagmire, where me and this unknown, unaccountable editor just don't see eye to eye about...well, who knows what. The names of my freaking characters, even?


And it would be tremendously expensive for them. They don't vet anything sold by their Marketplace people -- they let the customers do that. And frankly, I don't think they mind selling things with atrocious spelling, etc -- as long as the audience for that particular book doesn't care. They see this as much more like YouTube.

One thing I would expect, though, is a possible plagiarism detector. That's something a computer can do -- and it could make things difficult for those who publish things elsewhere under a different name. (As I publish stories on my blog. Although I do use my name in the body of the post, the "posted by" is my screen name.) The automatic plagiarism detector gave people fits at eHow.

I do not see how they could get boiler-room minimum wage editors to reliably do quality checks. It would not only cost a lot, but you'd end up with people who would deny Nobel Prize winning work on the basis of some stylistic thing. A much better business model to let the customers do it.

Camille


----------



## Victorine (Apr 23, 2010)

I have mixed feelings about this. I do think some quality assurance is a good thing. We've all been lumped together, and there are some books with major issues and it just makes us all look bad. However, I can see some issues with this that don't make me feel cozy warm. 

I mean, we all know there are some authors targeted with bad reviews or malicious tags. Now what, they can report errors and get a book pulled? Sits a little wrong with me.

Vicki


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

I'm thinking that their grammar check is going to be reactive, rather than proactive.  That is, I doubt they'll randomly, or methodically, for that matter, check books.  They probably have a policy where if XYZ number of people return a book for grammatical / formatting issues then it gets checked.  I don't see how they could afford to do otherwise.


----------



## Monique (Jul 31, 2010)

Forgive me if I missed it, but did Amazon actually take any action? Did they unpublish the book or make it unavailable at all?


----------



## chumlyb (Apr 1, 2011)

I am new to the Kindle so don't know if the Feedback box on listings is new or has always been there. I just noticed it the other night for the first time.  Could this be a case of complaints via the "Would you like to report poor quality or formatting in this book?" option?  Choices in the dropdown for that question include "Is poorly formatted", "Has typos" and "Has low quality images or tables".

Liz


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I do not see how they could get boiler-room minimum wage editors to reliably do quality checks. "_

India.


----------



## chumlyb (Apr 1, 2011)

Go way down to the bottom of a book listing.

Liz


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

modwitch said:


> Wow - where do you see that?


This link will bring you to it on one of the few pages I have bookmarked: http://www.amazon.com/Door-Canellin-Gatehouse-ebook/dp/B004WXF2C2/#suggestion-box


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"I do not see how they could get boiler-room minimum wage editors to reliably do quality checks. "_
> 
> India.


That's what I was describing -- out-sourcing to India, or even to Billings Montana, is still going to result in people who are not familiar with the range of usage and needs. No boiler-room, minimum-wage editing is going to be able to handle the job sufficient reliability to not be an utter disaster.

It's not like Amazon were a magazine with a very focused publishing vision and a narrow style book. You could use a boiler-room to edit, say, a site with how-to articles all fitting a very close formula, with a very restricted house style. As a matter of fact, that's pretty common. But even editing a fiction magazine with a single genre and a house style is far beyond the capabilities of a boiler-room. Trying to edit every book ever published? (Which is Amazon's vision.) That would be insane. They won't try. They may do spot checks, but even a boiler-room is too expensive for what they want to do, and it would be a nightmare in terms of horrible publicity (as editors reject prize-winning authors and classics, and minority works, or all Canadians or Australians for not using standard US or UK usage), not to mention law suits and complaints off all kinds.

I really believe they would shut down the KDP before they'd go to that method -- especially since the method they have works so very well. (Look up non-book products -- they have never used product quality control, only customer vetting.) Now I'm not saying they won't play with other methods, spot checking, limiting certain things that are easy to identify, etc.

Camille


----------



## HeidiHall (Sep 5, 2010)

Thanks for keeping us updated! Like many others, I have mixed feelings about this. I do wish there were fewer books uploaded before going through any kind of editing, but sometimes there are reasons I specifically use bad grammar in dialog and it would be disheartening to have to change that when it is pertinent to characterization. Without line editors giving you specific areas of concern, this random checking could get out of hand. Even if a reader complained to customer service by checking the box relating to formatting or typos, that doesn't necessarily mean the issue is truly an issue. Readers could simply feel the need to check _something _ to justify the return.

Ironically, as I scrolled to the bottom of the page to reply, there was a banner ad for Grammarly .


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"That's what I was describing -- out-sourcing to India, or even to Billings Montana, is still going to result in people who are not familiar with the range of usage and needs."_

I have no idea what Amazon will do. They don't call. But as a model, I could set up a flagging operation driven by the comments available on the book screen. Books with a certain number of flags get examined by Indians who speak excellent English. There are lots of them.

The Indians read X number of pages chosen by reference to a random number generator. The pages for many books are mixed together so no reader gets multiple pages from a single book. Paras with errors are highlighted. If the total errors for any given book are more than a certain number, the offending paras with marked errors are grouped by book and sent for final evaluation to American editors sipping nutmeg lattes in Billings saloons. The American just gets one screen per book.

Is it perfect? Of course not. One adjusts the effort, resources, and procedures to meet the chosen standards. Nor do I know if it's worth it or if anyone cares. But it can be done relatively easily.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> I have no idea what Amazon will do. They don't call. But as a model, I could set up a flagging operation driven by the comments available on the book screen. Books with a certain number of flags get examined by Indians who speak excellent English. There are lots of them. ....


The thing is, Terrence, I've worked with systems like that. They work great for the kind of publication I described, with very limited subject, purpose and house style. They are awful as soon as any variety is introduced. And when fiction or poetry is introduced the 'excellence' of anybody's English (especially native speakers) can become a major detriment. (Heck, it's nearly impossible to get English teachers from the same region and same department to agree on basic minimal standards.)

And the problem isn't that it's not perfect, but HOW it's not perfect. The false positive and false negative rates are worse than random.

But ultimately, Amazon's got a very low cost and every effective method already. So why would they need to risk this?

Camille


----------



## JRTomlin (Jan 18, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Paras with errors are highlighted. ...
> 
> One adjusts the effort, resources, and procedures to meet the chosen standards. Nor do I know if it's worth it...


*screams in horror*

They know those errors are in fact errors... how? How many "errors" are in this? "The sea, the snotgreen sea, the scrotumtightening sea."

"One adjusts the effort to meet the chosen standards"?

Not even!


----------



## STOHara (Feb 23, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> This is a slippery slope Amazon's on here. I found several misspelled words in a book published by one of the big publishers (they're in both the print and kindle edition). Should I complain? If I do, will Amazon pull that book just like an indie? More specifically, how many and what sort of errors cause a book to be pulled?


Now that I know that Amazon listens to these complaints, I'll make a habit of doing it. Next time I find a

word
book with a completely random paragraph break or a out of line with text, I'm emailing Amazon. I'm tired of giving Simon & Schuster money for crappy OCR work.



Half-Orc said:


> If the book is just atrocious, as in error after error in nearly every page, I can maybe dig it. But it still gives me an icky feeling. For starters, this could drastically slow down upload times. Worse, it could land a book of mine in a quagmire, where me and this unknown, unaccountable editor just don't see eye to eye about...well, who knows what. The names of my freaking characters, even?


How about if you speak a dialect that uses snuck instead of sneaked and dove instead of dived?


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> How many "errors" are in this? "The sea, the snotgreen sea, the scrotumtightening sea."


At least two


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Okay, after putting some more thought into this - I don't have a problem with Amazon doing this in a reactive way. If customers - your readers - are complaining, don't you want to know? As for grammar and such, some things are just wrong. Sure, some is subjective - whether to use a comma in a certain place for pacing purposes, whether you want a colon or an em-dash to show inflection, etc., but... some things are wrong. Always have been, always will be. Loose instead of lose is never gonna be right - sorry.


----------



## DevonMark (Jan 28, 2011)

What I want to know is why has this particular book been singled out? I have read two indie books in the UK top 50 that have appalling formatting problems throughout and I have posted previously about a Stuart MacBride thriller published by Harper Collins that had obviously not even had a cursory read through to check for errors.

Something not quite right about all of this...


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

This seems like great news. Amazon didn't make her title unavailable. They're just telling her that there are errors that need to be fixed. Bravo.

Btw, if you have lay/lie errors, search for laid, lain, lays, lies, lying, and laying, in addition to lay and lie.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I would assume that this particular book was chosen simply because enough people used that feedback feature.

As for their "lay/lie" comment, I would bet that is just a generic example they send to everyone who asks what the errors are.


----------



## 41419 (Apr 4, 2011)

Hi,

I only read part of this thread, so forgive me if I missed some of the details.

If Amazon are instituting a program that will check for errors in manuscripts, and the system is fair and applied to everyone, I don't have a problem with that.

If it leads to better quality manuscripts all round, that can only be a good thing.

Some people don't buy indie books because they say "they are all full of errors". Now we know that's not true, but there are quite a few out there.

If those can get weeded out, or made to correct it, it can only be good for everyone. Right?

Dave


----------



## edwardgtalbot (Apr 28, 2010)

JRTomlin said:


> They know those errors are in fact errors... how? How many "errors" are in this? "The sea, the snotgreen sea, the scrotumtightening sea."


And. . . I now have the opening line for my next maritime conspiracy thriller!


----------



## Amy Corwin (Jan 3, 2011)

See, I'm one of those who has no problem making up a word here or there (infrequently, but it happens) such as "gazelling" as in "gazelling down the stairs".

If it was good enough for P.G. Wodehouse, it's good enough for me!

I just wonder how their spellchecker is going to handle that?
Then there are all the words I use that are legal terms, Latin, or from another language? Or just big words often not found in your average dictionary (this drives me bonkers, already, since I have to tell the dictionary to accept certain words, etc). Or names with unusual/archaic spelling.

While I think their efforts are good, I can see myself getting into long arguments about what is or is not correct.
How will they handle British English versus U.S.A.? Colour versus Color? I'd assume both variations would be correct.

This could be the source of a lot of amusement, though.


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2011)

opuscroakus said:


> We still have a right to self-publish crap if we want to. Like I said before, they will publish paedophilia crap without question.


And they have the right to REFUSE to sell on their site. THAT was the result of Amazon allowing people to "self-publish crap" if they want without checking it. As a reminder, your right to free speech does not also mean a right to other people's time, money, and server space.

I have been saying for well over a year now that stuff like this was going to happen. There is just no way a company is going to continue to allow anyone and everyone to upload whatever to their site indefinately. Eventually, they would have to start putting in checks and balances to balance the needs of the company against the needs of the consumers. This should not be a surprise to ANYONE. I doubt the OP is being singled out or picked on. This is apparently the result of customer complaints. I don't think Amazon would be wasting time on one or two complaints. There must have been enough to warrant them looking.


----------



## STOHara (Feb 23, 2011)

edwardgtalbot said:


> And. . . I now have the opening line for my next maritime conspiracy thriller!


Well, the line is from a book based upon a maritime conspiracy thriller.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

dgaughran said:


> Hi,
> 
> I only read part of this thread, so forgive me if I missed some of the details.
> 
> ...


That was my line of thinking too. If they are notifying us of problems in our book(s) and allowing us to correct and then re-upload them that is a good thing.

If it's some random generated thing though...like they mistake a fictional word as a misspelling. If that is the case, then a lot of us fantasy and scifi authors are in trouble! LOL

For example, the name of a fictitious floral plant in my fantasy realm is "Yasminea." No, I did not misspell Jasmine. An automated bot or program could flag that as an error that recurs throughout my book. And, that could be problematic for me. However, an actual person checking that would see that it's obviously a fictional flora that I created.

...so it just depends.

I do however think that whatever "bot" or reader they have in place to do the checking should recognize that errors have been corrected in the new file. If not...then that would leave an author stuck in some weird systematic loop. Sounds like that's what Julie is dealing with, and I can empathize, as I've had a similar issue in the past with the art gallery on Elfwood, as well as with my cover art on createspace. 

As far as hiring editors, well even the best editor can miss something.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

If it were random, or generated by a check by Amazon itself, I think the whole incident would have shaken down differently.  Much differently.

I disagree with Julie -- they can go on foever letting anyone and everyone upload what they want and only culling based on complaints.  That's their business model. It's the YouTube of retail.

BTW - did the original communication threaten any dire consequences?  Or did it merely request corrections and an upload?

Camille


----------



## LauraB (Nov 23, 2008)

opuscroakus said:


> ..., but going so far as to tell someone they can't publish because it's sub-standard is not merely a distributor concern any longer. We still have a right to self-publish crap if we want to. Like I said before, they will publish paedophilia crap without question.


Actually they can. My husband owns a business, and he tells suppliers "I'm sorry your product doesn't meet our quality standards and it isn't going to be stocked." Amazon has that right, and as a reader I say "about time!"


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

Hmm, a lot of interesting replies.

As long as a book does not get pulled due to customer complaint and revisions by the author are accepted without a delay (since no specific errors were pointed out) then this could work.

On another level it is troubling though.  I've read what a lot of people say and most say that no book will be error free.  So a customer complaint about grammar/typo error's in any book will be right.  So unless Amazon is preparing to enforce some kind of standard I don't really see how sending such a generic message to an author is helpful since it did not point out a specific problem.


----------



## LauraB (Nov 23, 2008)

I think people need to come to the idea that readers, and Amazon, are not editors who pay for the privilege to read and edit your work. A customer has a right to get a refund for poorly edited work. And they don't owe the writer/publisher a list of where the edits are needed unless the writer/publisher is going to compensate them for the work.Would it be nice if they provided the info? Sure, and I've done it in the past, but it isn't something I should have to do. It is the writers/publishers obligation to put out a decient product. I, personally, have never returned a book for editing or typo's, I have for unreadable formatting. (meaning 1/2 blank pages, numbers and symbols where letters should be.).


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

It's helpful in that you know customers are complaining.

The average customer will not complain over a handful of errors. Generally, they complain if the errors were so prevalent that they interfered with the reading.

As a reviewer, I do not even mention editing errors unless they are distracting or prevalent. Generally, this means that the "Editing" section does not appear in the reviews on RAR unless it is something that would cause the book rating to go down. For instance, if the rest of the sections averaged out to 3 stars, we wouldn't even mention editing issues if that section would receive 4 stars, as in, not having many. In other words, we don't give kudos for having done something that is expected - publishing a readable book.

As an editor, I cannot possibly promise my clients perfection. What I do think is that any book I edit will not receive a review stating, "This book needs an editor" from 99% of customers. The other 1% are the nitpickers who find one typo and go nuts or the ones who blame the storyline on the editor (and I'm not referring to plot holes).  

I'm quite certain Amazon would not bother checking a book based on one customer complaint. I would think that they have a set quota, if you will, for the amount of complaints that must be received in order for them to bother with it.

Therefore, I would think that if you use an editor, at least one better than whoever the OP used, or are able to make your book grammar-free enough yourself for customers not to complain, you should be fine. (I mention the OP's editor simply because I am not the only one who checked out her sample and found multiple errors of the type that are not debatable.)


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"They know those errors are in fact errors... how?"_

They do it the same way any editor does. Amazon hires laid off New York editors to sit in that Billings saloon. They read the passages sent to them from India, and make a judgement based on grammar, spelling, usage, etc. Just like people who advertise editing here do it. Just like people who complain about editing do it. They do it the same way folks in this thread have identified errors in the subject book.

What we have to consider is an alternative in which nothing is done. A firm has to make a choice and both choices may not be optimal. As it is, it appears they are doing something based on customer complaints. So, if they are doing something, I presume they will use some system to do it. Someone is tasked with doing it and sending out the subject emails.

As to why they would do something like this? I don't know. Like I said, they don't even call anymore. But should they determine they have a need, they will then have to devise a system to do it. I have suggested one.


----------



## RobertMarda (Oct 19, 2010)

I was in no way trying to imply that a reader or Amazon should edit a book.  But it would be helpful to an author to have an example or two of the problem instead of a broad generic message that is too vague to be helpful beyond letting the author know there is some problem(s) and at least one customer complained.


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> I disagree with ***** -- they can go on foever letting anyone and everyone upload what they want and only culling based on complaints. That's their business model. It's the YouTube of retail.


They physically can, sure. But is it a wise business decision? Amazon, in fact no business, takes on more responsibility than it has to in order to meet customer needs. If they are starting to check, that means enough customers have complained that it has become a threat to their business. If their bookstore gets a reputation for being a dumping ground for crap, people will shop elsewhere.

It made sense at the start for them to be as flexible as possible with standards to acquire enough volume of content. But they have PLENTY of content now. They can afford to start putting up gates to entry. And if they are starting to do so, that is because customers are demanding it. After all, the difference between Amazon and Youtube is that Amazon has for the most part always been profitable. I believe Google still has yet to turn a profit on it and uses it as a giant loss-leader. Amazon is a business. Not a social club. Not a democracy. Not a charity.

I do sell on other sites where they do have minimum standards, and they do routinely cull digital products that are not generating sales. It keeps search results clean and makes it easier to navigate the site. I guess I just don't see it as a big deal because this is stuff I have encountered elsewhere and therefore don't see it as all that earth-shattering.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Good afternoon everyone! 

I just wanted to post that I did hear back from Amazon regarding which version(s) the complaints were on (and learned something also  ).



> Thanks for writing back to us.
> I checked your title and I found that the reviews were received for the errors in the third version of your content you had uploaded towards the end of June, 2010.
> However, I see that you've improved the content of your title "The Kindness of Strangers" recently. We'll be glad to send an e-mail to customers who previously purchased your book to let them know an updated version is available.
> At this time, we must receive their permission before sending the revised version to their Kindles because receiving the new version causes highlights, the last page read, bookmarks to be removed, and the locations of any notes won't match the updated copy of the book.
> ...


I have hired another editor, but just have to wait (she's working a few projects at the moment). With that being said, I hope no one thought I was complaining about this as that was not my intention. This was all new to me and initially I was seeking information from others who may have gone through this. Once it was determined that it was customer complaints that led to this, I figured I'd give everyone a heads up that Amazon would be checking. (Hopefully my thread title isn't misleading. If so, I do apologize!)

My title wasn't removed, it is still available (with the errors mentioned by a few others in this thread and from PMs I received - I thank everyone for their help, I will be fixing those errors immediately!).

As a reader, this is a good thing because we all expect quality when we spend our hard-earned cash (even if the title is only $.99). As a writer, it does leave one scratching their head, especially if they have a hard time finding the 'issues', but that's OK too. This message got my attention and I am going to try once again to make it the best story it can be! I am going to hold off on notifying customers though, as I'm currently not feeling very confident. I will wait until it has gone through another edit before doing so. Once again, thank you to everyone that has chimed in!


----------



## iamstoryteller (Jul 16, 2010)

Traditional book distributors do not just take any book offered. They have their own 'gatekeepers'. It costs money to produce catalogues, hire reps etc. and they don't have a business if their retailers cannot sell their products. Retailers don't have a business if they cannot sell their products. Just because Amazon is an online distributor/retailer does not mean they don't have costs involved and that they don't care if the product they are selling is of a certain quality.

@RedAdept: _The average customer will not complain over a handful of errors. Generally, they complain if the errors were so prevalent that they interfered with the reading. _

@Moses: _This seems like great news. Amazon didn't make her title unavailable. They're just telling her that there are errors that need to be fixed. Bravo._

Just like tradpubs, Amazon isn't likely to get overly nit-picky, they need our content. But as with any other retailer it would be prudent for them to listen to their customers. If they feel they are getting a bad rep with their indie books, it would be natural for them to put some quality controls in place. And it would be helpful for us indies too.

Sharon


----------



## iamstoryteller (Jul 16, 2010)

julieannfelicity said:


> Good afternoon everyone!
> 
> I just wanted to post that I did hear back from Amazon regarding which version(s) the complaints were on (and learned something also  ).
> 
> ...


Julie, your title was not misleading at all, and indeed this was a very valuable post, so thanks for posting. Good for you for taking all the information in a positive light. It is unfortunate that you are having to hire another editor, hope this one works out for you. All the best for your book.

Sharon


----------



## MegHarris (Mar 4, 2010)

This thread has been picked up by Dear Author:

http://dearauthor.com/features/industry-news/wednesday-midday-links-6/



> On the one hand I can see this being abused but on the other, I'm glad that Amazon is taking steps to exert some quality assurance. If anything, this tells me that I need to write Amazon and return any book that I feel is subpar. As a caveat, though, please note that Amazon has suspended accounts where there have been too many returns so readers should be careful when using the the return feature.
> 
> However, if Amazon starts doing more of this, even the scare of getting the book pulled down might encourage authors to use editors before self publishing.


----------



## Michael J. Scott (Sep 2, 2010)

It might be too soon to say Amazon is putting gatekeepers back up, though it's not all that surprising if they did so. But if they get too picky, then indie authors will start going elsewhere, and, I suspect, so will a lot of customers. 

The whole point of the sea-change has been the removal of the wall between customers and artists. I'm all for quality and so forth, but I don't want to see a group of people begin deciding what is acceptable for others to read, or for me to sell, by extension. That was the problem with the traditional model, and one of the main reasons it's been collapsing since the e-reader revolution. 

I suppose the positive note is that Amazon let the writer know of the issues and worked with the author to make the changes and helped her get the content available to the readers who complained. Frankly, however, I'd rather hear from the readers directly. Wonder why Amazon can't just automate those complaint buttons to send a note to the author instead of to some customer support rep in India who could care less about the book? Just thinking out loud...


----------



## kathieshoop (Feb 18, 2011)

Wow, I hadn't heard of that happening before. But...I'm new here so that could be why. I have lots of grammar tics in my books...fragments, etc. when it works. Hope they don't catch them! Thanks for the heads up.


----------



## Sebastian Kirby (Jan 3, 2011)

Hi

It's a good idea, imho, if it can be made to work. You could see it as amazon improving the quality of its offerings.

On the other hand, many of us are struggling with the Word to KDP conversion process where, for example, though nothing is showing in Word, the result can be a blank page in KDP.

Best wishes


Seb


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

kathieshoop said:


> Wow, I hadn't heard of that happening before. But...I'm new here so that could be why. I have lots of grammar tics in my books...fragments, etc. when it works. Hope they don't catch them! Thanks for the heads up.


It's not about Amazon "catching" anything. It's about readers complaining. Readers aren't going to complain about sentence fragments that are part of the style, or about odd contractions in dialogue to show an accent.


----------



## Michael J. Scott (Sep 2, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell first.  Customers will celebrate this, imo - who wants to read a book riddled with errors of the fixable kind? And amazon is so dominant that no sane indie author will walk away from that market - certainly not enough of them to matter to amazon (Oh, no - all those authors with books that gets lots of customer complaints are leaving...).
> 
> I think there's a big difference between being a gatekeeper, and exerting basic QA. It's the difference between what a publisher does, and what the guy who makes sure the paperback actually has all its pages does. Amazon isn't judging content here - they appear to be getting a bit more focused on things like OCR/formatting issues and books with enough grammar/typo issues to result in several reader complaints/returns.


Ah, see, that's what I get for not replying directly to a post. I'm not suggesting that Amazon is, in fact, becoming a gatekeeper. Rather, I was responding with admittedly half-formed thoughts about whether or not they might be moving toward that action, having read some posts to that effect.

And you're right: I'm sure a lot of readers will rejoice... for now.

Amazon's dominance is directly due to their accessibility--that, and the fact that they got in the business early without the focus on brick and mortar stores like Barnes and Noble.

But if the recent sea-changes have taught us anything, they've taught us that just because you've become the biggest, doesn't mean you'll always stay that way. It wasn't that long ago that Amazon was the new upstart, and no one had heard of Facebook or Twitter. Who's to say these behemoths will last another ten years, or even five (no, not predicting, just saying)?

What I am suggesting is this: the sea-change is more fundamental than just moving from brick and mortar to electronic. I believe it means that there are no more barriers nor gates needing keepers between the artist and the audience. If Amazon starts making it too difficult to sell on their site (and this ain't just about QA), then Indie authors will gradually drift elsewhere, and something else will rise to take their place. But, this is just my opinion. What do I know, anyway?


----------



## KerylR (Dec 28, 2010)

If I had to guess Amazon has a set algorithm that determines what the average number of complaints and returns a product will get.  Then, if a product strays too far beyond the average range that probably triggers some sort of review.  From there they figure out what to do next.  The one thing I am certain of: they don't want to have to fiddle with too many returns, it costs them money.  Likewise, going over every book would cost them too much money.


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> They physically can, sure. But is it a wise business decision? Amazon, in fact no business, takes on more responsibility than it has to in order to meet customer needs. If they are starting to check, that means enough customers have complained that it has become a threat to their business. If their bookstore gets a reputation for being a dumping ground for crap, people will shop elsewhere.
> 
> It made sense at the start for them to be as flexible as possible with standards to acquire enough volume of content. But they have PLENTY of content now. They can afford to start putting up gates to entry. And if they are starting to do so, that is because customers are demanding it. After all, the difference between Amazon and Youtube is that Amazon has for the most part always been profitable. I believe Google still has yet to turn a profit on it and uses it as a giant loss-leader. Amazon is a business. Not a social club. Not a democracy. Not a charity.
> 
> I do sell on other sites where they do have minimum standards, and they do routinely cull digital products that are not generating sales. It keeps search results clean and makes it easier to navigate the site. I guess I just don't see it as a big deal because this is stuff I have encountered elsewhere and therefore don't see it as all that earth-shattering.


I think these online retailers are still in the process of figuring things out. B&N de-ranked erotica last month. Prior to that, both B&N and Amazon removed some erotica titles. Clearly they are sensitive to their image and don't want to give indies carte blanche to post anything they want.

I'd guess that every single ebook KDP receives gets some brief scrutiny by someone over in India. I read somewhere that Amazon added some 47,000 ebooks last month. Divide that by 30 days and then divide that answer by 24 hours and you're getting about 60-70 ebooks an hour. That's still a manageable flow of books and Amazon doesn't need a big army of workers to check each one. A worker taking five minutes with each book could check 10 per hour to make sure there are no new pedophile guides someone is trying to publish. My guess is that's mostly what they look for, objectionable material, which gets flagged and routed to a team somewhere in the U.S. for a final decision.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

modwitch said:


> I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell first.  Customers will celebrate this, imo - who wants to read a book riddled with errors of the fixable kind? And amazon is so dominant that no sane indie author will walk away from that market - certainly not enough of them to matter to amazon (Oh, no - all those authors with books that gets lots of customer complaints are leaving...).
> 
> I think there's a big difference between being a gatekeeper, and exerting basic QA. It's the difference between what a publisher does, and what the guy who makes sure the paperback actually has all its pages does. Amazon isn't judging content here - they appear to be getting a bit more focused on things like OCR/formatting issues and books with enough grammar/typo issues to result in several reader complaints/returns.


This.



Michael J. Scott said:


> I suppose the positive note is that Amazon let the writer know of the issues and worked with the author to make the changes and helped her get the content available to the readers who complained. Frankly, however, I'd rather hear from the readers directly. Wonder why Amazon can't just automate those complaint buttons to send a note to the author instead of to some customer support rep in India who could care less about the book? Just thinking out loud...


And dude... what? Why should I complain directly to the author? Amazon is the store where I bought the product. I want my money back. First place 99% of consumers are going to go is to the store where they bought the widget. Furthermore, I'll complain directly to an unknown author (ie. someone non-KB) the day that I'm assured that I'm not going to get cussed out for it. Just no.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

KerylR said:


> If I had to guess Amazon has a set algorithm that determines what the average number of complaints and returns a product will get. Then, if a product strays too far beyond the average range that probably triggers some sort of review. From there they figure out what to do next. The one thing I am certain of: they don't want to have to fiddle with too many returns, it costs them money. Likewise, going over every book would cost them too much money.


I suspect it's a percentage of sales. If you sell 100,000 copies and get two returns, they aren't going to bat an eyelash (I wouldn't think). If, on the other hand, you've sold five copies and two got returned... well. That's a horse of a different color.


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

"I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell."
-Debora Geary


----------



## David &#039;Half-Orc&#039; Dalglish (Feb 1, 2010)

Anyone else now worried this will be abused? I mean, I've seen malicious tags, fake reviews...am I gonna end up ticking someone off, and have someone use three sock puppets to label all my books as full of errors? Seriously, I just don't like this.


----------



## LauraB (Nov 23, 2008)

Readers don't like books that are poorly written and formatted. I hope it isn't abused, I suspect Amazon would ban anyone using "sock puppets" to do so. At least I hope they would. The fact is the poor quality of books, not just indie, at Amazon needs to be fixed. Hopefully Amazon can find a way that won't punish writers, but that will help both writers and readers.


----------



## Maria Romana (Jun 7, 2010)

Ok, there's a lot of stuff going on in this thread, but from Amazon's response to Julie, it seems clear that this was NOT caused by any kind of random error-checking.  They specifically mentioned "reviews" of her third version from June 2010, so it seems that their original email to her came as the result of specific customer complaints.  That makes sense.

The idea that anyone--computer or human--could systematically identify real grammar/spelling errors from intentional errors created for character-building or style is ridiculous (in fiction, of course).  Even highly trained editors disagree over what is correct, as other posters have pointed out.

I'm glad that Amazon is being responsive to customer complaints.  I'm relieved that they're not trying to vet our books with a computer program or a bunch of off-shore wanna-be editors.

Now back to coloring outside the lines,
Maria


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

modwitch said:


> I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell first.  Customers will celebrate this, imo - who wants to read a book riddled with errors of the fixable kind? And amazon is so dominant that no sane indie author will walk away from that market - certainly not enough of them to matter to amazon (Oh, no - all those authors with books that gets lots of customer complaints are leaving...).


This... Well, and I like the image of the pink snowbunnies.  



Half-Orc said:


> Anyone else now worried this will be abused? I mean, I've seen malicious tags, fake reviews...am I gonna end up ticking someone off, and have someone use three sock puppets to label all my books as full of errors? Seriously, I just don't like this.


I really don't think this is going to be a big worry. For one thing, I don't think Amazon will listen to people who haven't purchased the book. So, the person would have to buy three copies of the book, then go on all three accounts and complain.

Also, per Amazon's letter to the OP, they actually check these complaints. If that's true, then when they check your book, they won't find the issues.


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2011)

Michael J. Scott said:


> What I am suggesting is this: the sea-change is more fundamental than just moving from brick and mortar to electronic. I believe it means that there are no more barriers nor gates needing keepers between the artist and the audience. If Amazon starts making it too difficult to sell on their site (and this ain't just about QA), then Indie authors will gradually drift elsewhere, and something else will rise to take their place. But, this is just my opinion. What do I know, anyway?


The majority of indie authors wouldn't have an audience without Amazon. My concern is not indies taking their business elsewhere. A lot of indies HAVE no business elsewhere. The whole of their marketing is solely dependent on being able to manipulate Amazon rankings and algorithms. Far too many spend more time worrying about whether or not they have the right tags on Amazon than they do creating their own markets. While some of the most successful indies have learned how to build their own audiences who are loyal to them, most indies are dependent on reaching customers who are loyal to Amazon. If Amazon started to close access, it would be because they have to in order to meet their customer expectations and indies would be out of luck if they couldn't make the cut. I don't think BN is going to actively recruit Amazon's cast-offs. Can you image?



> Rejected by Amazon? Customer complaints about your grammar get you kicked off their site? Don't want to worry about whether or not your book is properly formatted? Cover look like it was drawn by a blind monkey? COME TO BN! Bring us your stuff too bad for Amazon, and we'll sell it!


Or maybe we'll start seeing threads at the Amazon forum like this:



> *Poster One:*Hey, anyone know why I can't find any crappy books on Amazon anymore?
> *Poster Two:* Amazon started checking grammar, man.
> *Poster One*: That's BS! WTF! How am I suppose to find crap to read if Amazon has standards!?
> *Author Spam* my buks r on BN now go their to buy my buk hear is the link www.bn.5457rhjrew
> *Poster One*: Thanks! I'm leaving Amazon for BN now!


OK, I'm being silly. But I think you get the point.


----------



## Guest (May 18, 2011)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> "I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell."
> -Debora Geary


We already have pink bunnies with chainsaws fighting zombies. I fail to see how this is so far of a stretch.


----------



## intinst (Dec 23, 2008)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> "I think pink snowbunnies will ski in hell."
> -Debora Geary


I am so going to use this and will remember to attribute it to the author.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

intinst said:


> I am so going to use this and will remember to attribute it to the author.


Et, tu?


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> We already have pink bunnies with chainsaws fighting zombies. I fail to see how this is so far of a stretch.


Debora Geary, owned.


----------



## Sondrae Bennett (Mar 29, 2011)

I think a lot of people are panicking and forgetting the most important thing about Amazon. They are a business that thinks almost exclusively about the bottom line. They aren't going to shut out indies because it's a growing market and they have make a lot of money from indies. Half-Orc, they aren't going to pull your book based on sock-puppetry unless someone created dozens of accounts and spread their complaints over a stretched out period of time. I doubt anyone would bother or that Amazon would be easily fooled. They aren't going to penalize people for making up words in sci-fi novels (Dune would light up like a Christmas tree). BUT there is a possibility that they will pull books that are so riddled with errors that end up costing them money. If a book has low sales, high return rate, and Amazon has to hire and pay people to continue checking the quality...well, I wouldn't blame them for pulling the book because it would make the most sense _for them_.

Amazon isn't going to take a side indies vs. trad pubs because it wouldn't be a sound business decision. Likewise though, they don't care if a couple people get offended because their books are pulled IF its in their best interest. _It's all about the profit._ Remove your emotions from the equation and examine the situation from a business standpoint. If you're able to do that, I think you'll see things in a different light and maybe won't be quite as worried.

The easy way to make sure your book won't be singled out/pulled is to put out the best possible product. Will there be errors? Most likely. I've yet to find a perfect book. But unless it's riddled with errors--and if you do your due diligence, it won't be--chances are good you won't have a problem.


----------



## KerylR (Dec 28, 2010)

Half-Orc said:


> Anyone else now worried this will be abused? I mean, I've seen malicious tags, fake reviews...am I gonna end up ticking someone off, and have someone use three sock puppets to label all my books as full of errors? Seriously, I just don't like this.


I'm thinking your sales levels will make you immune from this. It's got to be a complaint/return per X number of sales thing. Someone that pissed at you will need a lot of socks/money.

Those of us with less exalted sales levels... Well, the best protection is a clean copy. All the more reason to keep beating the 'professional edit, well formatted drum.'


----------



## nobody_important (Jul 9, 2010)

Michael J. Scott said:


> It might be too soon to say Amazon is putting gatekeepers back up, though it's not all that surprising if they did so. But if they get too picky, then indie authors will start going elsewhere, and, I suspect, so will a lot of customers.


Highly doubtful. There are tons of books published each month, and indies need Amazon to sell their books more than Amazon needs indies to hit their quarterly result.



Michael J. Scott said:


> The whole point of the sea-change has been the removal of the wall between customers and artists. I'm all for quality and so forth, but I don't want to see a group of people begin deciding what is acceptable for others to read, or for me to sell, by extension. That was the problem with the traditional model, and one of the main reasons it's been collapsing since the e-reader revolution.


The traditional model isn't crumbling. They need to realign their business model, sure, but the Big Six made profit. Don't confuse Borders with trad publishers.

There is no removal of the "wall between customers and artists". You still have Amazon and other retailers between you and your readers. It's always been that way. And in old days, booksellers skipped titles they didn't think will sell. So just b/c some publisher printed your title didn't mean you'd be stocked / sold at B&N and so on.



Michael J. Scott said:


> I suppose the positive note is that Amazon let the writer know of the issues and worked with the author to make the changes and helped her get the content available to the readers who complained. Frankly, however, I'd rather hear from the readers directly. Wonder why Amazon can't just automate those complaint buttons to send a note to the author instead of to some customer support rep in India who could care less about the book? Just thinking out loud...


I rarely if ever tell authors directly unless I know them personally. I've seen enough psycho drama meltdown from authors who get p*ssed off over "trashy" or "mean" emails, reviews, etc. that I'm leery of saying anything.


----------



## R. H. Watson (Feb 2, 2011)

I skimmed through this discussion. Overall, I'm encouraged that Amazon seems to pay attention to customer proofreading complaints. I just finished the Kindle version of A Game of Thrones and the OCR errors were numerous. I'm going to click that "poor quality or formatting" link. It may not be futile.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

KerylR said:


> Well, the best protection is a clean copy. All the more reason to keep beating the 'professional edit, well formatted drum.'


This!


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Sondrae Bennett said:


> I think a lot of people are panicking and forgetting the most important thing about Amazon. They are a business that thinks almost exclusively about the bottom line. They aren't going to shut out indies because it's a growing market and they have make a lot of money from indies. Half-Orc, they aren't going to pull your book based on sock-puppetry unless someone created dozens of accounts and spread their complaints over a stretched out period of time. I doubt anyone would bother or that Amazon would be easily fooled. They aren't going to penalize people for making up words in sci-fi novels (Dune would light up like a Christmas tree). BUT there is a possibility that they will pull books that are so riddled with errors that end up costing them money. If a book has low sales, high return rate, and Amazon has to hire and pay people to continue checking the quality...well, I wouldn't blame them for pulling the book because it would make the most sense _for them_.
> 
> Amazon isn't going to take a side indies vs. trad pubs because it wouldn't be a sound business decision. Likewise though, they don't care if a couple people get offended because their books are pulled IF its in their best interest. _It's all about the profit._ Remove your emotions from the equation and examine the situation from a business standpoint. If you're able to do that, I think you'll see things in a different light and maybe won't be quite as worried.
> 
> The easy way to make sure your book won't be singled out/pulled is to put out the best possible product. Will there be errors? Most likely. I've yet to find a perfect book. But unless it's riddled with errors--and if you do your due diligence, it won't be--chances are good you won't have a problem.


God bless you.



> Those of us with less exalted sales levels... Well, the best protection is a clean copy. All the more reason to keep beating the 'professional edit, well formatted drum.'


And you.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"The whole point of the sea-change has been the removal of the wall between customers and artists. I'm all for quality and so forth, but I don't want to see a group of people begin deciding what is acceptable for others to read, or for me to sell, by extension."_

The point of Amazon's KDP is whatever they want it to be. They don't care what is acceptable to read, nor do they care what we sell, but Amazon does care what Amazon sells.

There is a gatekeeper. He has left the gate open, and we all sprint through. But it's his gate, and he can swing it any way he chooses. As an unknown author with no leverage, my response is to shout, "How high, Sir?"


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> There is a gatekeeper. He has left the gate open, and we all sprint through. But it's his gate, and he can swing it any way he chooses. As an unknown author with no leverage, my response is to shout, "How high, Sir?"


LOL That's awesome, Terrence


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

I like your new sig, Arkali


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

MosesSiregarIII said:


> I like your new sig, Arkali


Why, thankee  Now I just have to find a picture of a pink snowbunny. Or perhaps I should leave it to the imagination...


----------



## Larry Buttram (May 15, 2011)

Wow, this is confusing. I just uploaded my books last month and had no problem. And if anyone would have a problem I would think it would be me. My books are set back in the hills of Tennessee where I grew up and I use hundred's of _y'all _ and _goin'_ and _I'm a fixin_, ect. I'd love to hear what anyone learns about this.

Larry Buttram
www.larrybuttram.com


----------



## kCopeseeley (Mar 15, 2011)

I don't know, as a reader, this makes me super super happy. I was just complaining to a friend the other day about _Anna and the French Kiss_. Definitely cost me more than a 99 cent indie, and yet it was filled with formatting errors. That's just sloppy.
To be honest, as a writer, if someone feels upset enough after reading my books (which I DO get a proofreader for) then I want to know if I'm getting my money's worth from my editor. Although, I'm so anal, I double check the editor. Yes, I really do. It's a disease.
And yet I'm sure there are still typos. I think most people here have it right, if you get some professional help with your books, I don't think you're going to get a lot of complaints.
If it's sock puppets, then, whooo boy, I hope it's not me.


----------



## Casper Parks (May 1, 2011)

In Perceptional Threshold, old English used on and off... Didn't have any issues at all when uploading.


----------



## Paul Clayton (Sep 12, 2009)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> They physically can, sure. But is it a wise business decision? Amazon, in fact no business, takes on more responsibility than it has to in order to meet customer needs. If they are starting to check, that means enough customers have complained that it has become a threat to their business. If their bookstore gets a reputation for being a dumping ground for crap, people will shop elsewhere.
> 
> It made sense at the start for them to be as flexible as possible with standards to acquire enough volume of content. But they have PLENTY of content now. They can afford to start putting up gates to entry. And if they are starting to do so, that is because customers are demanding it. After all, the difference between Amazon and Youtube is that Amazon has for the most part always been profitable. I believe Google still has yet to turn a profit on it and uses it as a giant loss-leader. Amazon is a business. Not a social club. Not a democracy. Not a charity.
> 
> ...


----------



## MosesSiregarIII (Jul 15, 2010)

callingcrow, I can't tell your words from Julie's words. Check your post.


----------



## Erin Zarro (Apr 30, 2011)

I've never had this happen before but it's kind of scary.  I mean, great to make sure they are putting out a godod product, but that could be taken to the extreme.

E.


----------



## k8jonez (Mar 24, 2011)

One thing occurs to me that I haven't seen mentioned. If I hired an editor and he or she failed to catch a fairly common error like  'lie vs lay' I would be really upset with the editor. I'd want my money back.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Half-Orc said:


> Anyone else now worried this will be abused? I mean, I've seen malicious tags, fake reviews...am I gonna end up ticking someone off, and have someone use three sock puppets to label all my books as full of errors? Seriously, I just don't like this.


With power comes responsibility. With opportunity comes danger.

The readers known that the quality of an ebook might not be as good as the quality of a published book. They also know that since there is no fact checking or anyone to look at the legal side of things, you could abuse your right to publish in order to attack someone or misinform. You have no editor to share the responsibility, so abuse is more probable.

You know that the quality of a reader review might not be as good as that of a professional reviewer. You also know that they chould abuse their right to review in order to attack the writer. They have no editor to share the responsibility, so abuse is more probable..


----------



## KerylR (Dec 28, 2010)

k8jonez said:


> One thing occurs to me that I haven't seen mentioned. If I hired an editor and he or she failed to catch a fairly common error like 'lie vs lay' I would be really upset with the editor. I'd want my money back.


Good luck on getting it back. One thing I've learned the very hard way, you want at least two sets of eyes, both of them well versed in grammar to check your work. In effect, you want to make sure your copy editor/proof reader gets audited.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

k8jonez said:


> One thing occurs to me that I haven't seen mentioned. If I hired an editor and he or she failed to catch a fairly common error like 'lie vs lay' I would be really upset with the editor. I'd want my money back.


Depends on how much money you spent on the editor. Freelance editors have an association in USA and their average recommended pricing for a 100K novel boils down to:

$1,000 for proofreading
$2,000 to $5,000 for copy editing depending on the quality of the manuscript
$6,000 for line editting
$9,000 for developmental editing
$15,000 for ghostwriting

A very cheap editing job is possibly based on checking for red and green underlining produced by Microsoft Word. When you have a sample edited, you can plant some mistakes. Change some words with other words that make no sense in the given concept and add some grammatical/syntactical errors that Word cannot detect. You would be surprised by how many editors do not even do proofreading, even on a 5 page sample assigned when a publisher wants to check their skill.


----------



## k8jonez (Mar 24, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> Freelance editors have an association in USA and their average recommended pricing for a 100K novel boils down to:
> 
> A very cheap editing job is possibly based on checking for red and green underlining produced by Microsoft Word.


Editing is a really important step in producing a viable book. Neither the very expensive or the very cheap editing job is appropriate for indie books. We may have to find a middle ground. Setting a price for editing based on the expected revenue from the book maybe. I'd be willing to spend 20 to 30% for a competent editor. Another solution might be to have the editors endorse their work with an 'edited by' credit.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> They physically can, sure. But is it a wise business decision?


Absolutely. That's what makes them the business giant they are. They made that decision when they began, and it has done marvelously for them. Same decision YouTube made.

I'm an Amazon investor, and have been for many years. I don't always read their quarterly reports and other stockholder info, but it's eye-opening for folks who don't realize that they really do have a completely different business model and paradigm in mind. They're not Walmart... they're Google. They are a search company, not a gatekeeper. When you look at their business model, it's hard to even consider them a retailer.

I really think that folks here are looking at a tiny slice of the Amazon pie, and thinking there's a problem where there really isn't one. Sure _indies_ have a problem with the reputation other indies give them, but that is seriously not a problem for Amazon.

Here's what I think: They react to algorithmic problems, and they do it in algorithmic ways. If you do something to disrupt the algorithm (like tagging clubs) they'll adjust the algorithm to conteract it. If you do "black hat" things like mass plagiarism, they'll look for ways to auto-detect, and they'll start a blacklist to keep trouble-makers out of the system. (This could be a part of the real reason behind the limitations on public domain works.)

And if editing errors become more and more of a problem, they will gather the data on users who complain about it and books being complained about, and by golly those books will not be shown to those readers who don't like them. On the other hand, those who tolerate it, and even seem to like those authors best, will see more of them.

Sure, they may have editors on hand to vet complaints, but to Amazon, we're all just datapoints, and datapoints are not a problem -- data is their stock in trade.

Camille


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

I have seen good work from some $4 a page editors for line editing. That's 1.6 cents per word.

I have seen people work for $2 to $3 a page, but I have found most do not want to provide a receipt for their work. A receipt is worth 45% of its value in tax. Anyone can do anything at half rate if they don't have to pay taxes. That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. I'd rather pay 2x and be legal. It doesn't even cost more.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

The one hesitation I have in regards to freelance editors is the price. If I'm going to pay someone over five hundred dollars to edit my normal 100k+ word novels, they have to come out perfect. Why would I be willing to pay that much if a single error is left in place?

I did the math of what it would cost to have the novel I'm writing edited. It would come out to be over $700 from the editing service that I checked out most recently. That's a large chunk of change to drop before the book is even out, especially when you're a college student.


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

It's clear from this thread that finding a good editor is a problem for writers. I know Hocking even said she had hired editors but still her books were slammed for not being that clean. How do you know what you're getting when you hire someone? That's such a tough question. You can have them do sample edits, go with recommendations from your fellow writers, but it's much harder than hiring a cover artist, for example. An artist at least has her art on display and you see whether or not you appreciate their style. An editor is more personal and more hidden, and hard to evaluate until you're in the middle of it.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"A receipt is worth 45% of its value in tax."_

Can you expand on that? Worth 45% to whom? In what context? Is there an invoice involved? Is this a payment by cash, credit card, wire transfer, or check?


----------



## Stefanswit (May 9, 2011)

Good for them, now I can fire my editor.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> speak, and the snow bunny shall appear!


    Is that a Glendon original? Totally awesome! Streetlight Graphics rocks!


----------



## LauraB (Nov 23, 2008)

Panayotis said:


> The readers known that the quality of an ebook might not be as good as the quality of a published book.


This reader doesn't know that  . I consider the ebooks I buy to have been published and I expect the quality of the ebooks I buy to be as good as the quality of the paper books I buy. Granted, that sometimes includes the _rare_ typo, but I don't have lower standards for the ebooks I read.

The average price I've paid for an ebook since I got my kindle in '07 is just at $9 though, so maybe that has something to do with my thoughts on this as well.


----------



## lpking (Feb 12, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> I'm an Amazon investor, and have been for many years. I don't always read their quarterly reports and other stockholder info, but it's eye-opening for folks who don't realize that they really do have a completely different business model and paradigm in mind...
> Here's what I think: They react to algorithmic problems, and they do it in algorithmic ways...Sure, they may have editors on hand to vet complaints, but to Amazon, we're all just datapoints, and datapoints are not a problem -- data is their stock in trade.
> 
> Camille


To confirm that:

"Random forests, naïve Bayesian estimators, RESTful services, gossip protocols, eventual consistency, data sharding, anti-entropy, Byzantine quorum, erasure coding, vector clocks &#8230; walk into certain Amazon meetings, and you may momentarily think you've stumbled into a computer science lecture...Look inside a current textbook on software architecture, and you'll find few patterns that we don't apply at Amazon...

"...to construct a product detail page for a customer visiting Amazon.com, our software calls on between 200 and 300 services to present a highly personalized experience for that customer..."

-- from the "Letter to shareowners" (Amazon-speak for stockholders) in the 2010 Annual Report

"[Amazon.com] offers Earth's Biggest Selection. We seek to be Earth's most customer-centric company for three primary customer sets: consumers, sellers, and enterprises."

-- from Amazon.com, Inc's Form 10-K (2010) filed with the U.S. SEC, Item 1. _Business_ General

Reiterated right on their Investor Relations homepage -- see link at bottom of www.amazon.com -- in their Mission Statement, no less.

I'm putting my money on those consumer customers to win the battles. ;-)


----------



## jnfr (Mar 26, 2011)

I expect it to be as good, but I have to say that the trade published ebooks I've had recently have had a lot of noticeable problems.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Every production expense, just like all office costs are negatives on my balance. I don't know the specifics for your country, but it should be the same. What changes from country to country is details like when something will be filed as an expenses, or what part of it in case of equipment purchases. If you buy $100,000, it might be put on your expenses in $25,000 segments during the next four years. It doesn't matter how it is actually paid as long as it is paid by you, you can prove that, and it's something that actually contributes to production of goods and services. Usually it's a recept with the business info of both parties. They will not accept your piano purchase as an expense for a writer, but they will certainly accept editing, paper, print catridges etc.

Ignoring VAT (which does not cost anything in the bottom line):

$20,000 revenue from sales
-$10,000 expense (editing)
=$10,000 income to tax which is a $4,500 tax

Without that $10,000 expense, it would be
$20,000 income to tax which is a $9,000 tax

So, that $10,000 editing only cost me $10,000-$4,500=$5,500.

If I paid $5,500 and I didn't get a receipt from you, it would be exactly the same thing.

The only case in which this is not true, is if your income is very low, so you wouldn't pay tax anyway. In all other cases you get a tax advantage depending on what % tax you are hitting. Most businesses and enterpreneurs are already hitting 45% tax so they make the most of it.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> speak, and the snow bunny shall appear!


WOOT!

OK, now somebody go write the book so that can be used as a book cover!


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> I don't issue a 1099 because they aren't contracting a service I'm passing on to a client. Just like I wouldn't issue a 1099 to anyone who does over $600 worth of work on my car, or my heat pump, or my house.


You are passing the service to the customer, the reader actually reads the effect of the service on your work. But even in other cases of expenses, where you don't pass the expense directly, it contributes to production. Office rent, phone, phone, fax, internet bills and everything else directly connected to your professional work. A laywer does not sell his office space and fax messages to the customer but the expenses are true, they contribute to the production of his service. If he travels to another city to represent you in court, that's also a business expense.

If you start spending serious money related to the production of your book, you should talk to your accountant or laywer about starting a business. These are not personal expenses, they are business expenses. They should be deducted from your revenue before taxing.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"A receipt is worth 45% of its value in tax. *Anyone can do anything at half rate if they don't have to pay taxes*. That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. I'd rather pay 2x and be legal. It doesn't even cost more."_

Who is it who is not paying taxes? Are you saying an editor works at half rate because he is not paying taxes? If so, 1) how do you know, and 2) what does a receipt to a editor's client have to do with the editor paying taxes?


----------



## Sondrae Bennett (Mar 29, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> So, that $10,000 editing only cost me $10,000-$4,500=$5,500.
> 
> If I paid $5,500 and I didn't get a receipt from you, it would be exactly the same thing.
> 
> The only case in which this is not true, is if your income is very low, so you wouldn't pay tax anyway. In all other cases you get a tax advantage depending on what % tax you are hitting. Most businesses and enterpreneurs are already hitting 45% tax so they make the most of it.


I believe what T.L. Haddox was trying to point out is that you don't need a receipt to deduct it on your taxes as long as you can prove you made the payment. Unless you paid in cash, which I think would be unusual, there is always a papertrail. Copy the check before you send it or get a copy from the bank (at bank of america online, I can see a scanned image of any check) and file that away. Or file your credit card bill with the business expenses highlighted. Receipts are just one form of proof you can use to claim a business expense.


----------



## hanna.reed80 (May 10, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"During a quality assurance review of your title,"_
> 
> I'd read that in a very limited way to indicate just the title. I forget how many places there are in the setup page for title. Is it possible there are two and the titles don't agree?


I read that notice the same way. In fact, I had Smashwords reject an upload for the same reason. I went nuts trying to find the error until I took the message literally.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> Who is it who is not paying taxes? Are you saying an editor works at half rate because he is not paying taxes? If so, 1) how do you know, and 2) what does a receipt to a editor's client have to do with the editor paying taxes?


The one who is getting the money

In Europe, receipts contain information that is used for taxing. It's either produced sequencially by a computer that contains a tax mechanism, or an online credit card charging system connected to a bank, or in some countries, from a printed block that is issued by the tax authorities. Issued receipt = tax. No receipt = no tax.

I know because I have seen it happen. I can't believe all writers here get receipts from their editors. The editors know some writers do not care for a receipt because they can't use them or because they are not paying much tax anyway.

As a consequence, if a professional freelance editor or cover designer does not issue a receipt, he/she is getting tax free money. He can afford to work at very low rates compared to what he/she has to charge to a publisher and still make the same money per hour or even more. Until he is caught at least.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Sondrae Bennett said:


> I believe what T.L. Haddox was trying to point out is that you don't need a receipt to deduct it on your taxes as long as you can prove you made the payment. Unless you paid in cash, which I think would be unusual, there is always a papertrail. Copy the check before you send it or get a copy from the bank (at bank of america online, I can see a scanned image of any check) and file that away. Or file your credit card bill with the business expenses highlighted. Receipts are just one form of proof you can use to claim a business expense.


That's what I figured. Obviously, as long as there is proof it's fine.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Here are two truisms:  Nobody's perfect.  You get what you pay for.

On the one hand I do think that any editor, even a cut rate one, should have caught the errors in the sample we talked about here. However....

1.) Nobody's perfect and even the best of editors will miss something once in a while.  An editor provides another pair of skilled eyes, but they are providing back up to YOU.

2.) If the manuscript is really riddled with errors, simple fatigue could cause you to miss more than usual.

3.) Proper proofing is not a fast process.  It takes time, and if you're good at it, you can make more money per page than most indies are willing to pay.

Proofing is a skilled job, editing more so -- not a minimum wage job.  Just READING the dang manuscript takes time, reading it word-by-word is going to take a great deal more time.  Think about how much time it takes YOU to do a meticulous job of proofing.  Then tell me those editors are not worth any price they charge.  (Maybe you can't afford it, but that doesn't mean they're not worth it.)

Someone on Dean Wesley Smith's blog pointed out that other freelance writers are expected to be professional. They were talking about not needing an agent to find or negotiate work or run their business, but it also applies to editing.  If you want to be a pro, then hiring an editor is not enough. You've got to really work on being a better editor yourself.

If you don't want to be a pro... imho, that's okay. I really think the amateur and hobby writer is going to be a major part of the future -- just they are with blogs -- but if you're accepting cash for a product, you're going to have to provide customer service.

Camille


----------



## Krista D. Ball (Mar 8, 2011)

LauraB said:


> This reader doesn't know that  . I consider the ebooks I buy to have been published and I expect the quality of the ebooks I buy to be as good as the quality of the paper books I buy. Granted, that sometimes includes the _rare_ typo, but I don't have lower standards for the ebooks I read.


A-freaking-men. I don't care about the format. I want to read a book that is its best.

People here keep talking about all of the errors they are seeing in publishing house books...Clearly I'm not reading the same books because it's very rare that I come across any.

As for hiring editors, I have two for the self-published titles I'm planning to put out this year. One is Faith Carroll, whom I know through having interned with Bards and Sages (and, thus, I know her work). The other is the editor who was assigned to me for my three works through one of my publishers. I've opted to commission her as well for an upcoming short novel/long novella that I'm planning to self-publish (along with Faith).

My goal is to ensure that my books through publishers (I have two upcoming with two different houses) will be indistinguishable from anything I self-publish. After all, my readers don't care how or where I publisher. They expect a level of professional quality...not to mention I expect that of myself, too.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> As a consequence, if a professional freelance editor or cover designer does not issue a receipt, he/she is getting tax free money. He can afford to work at very low rates compared to what he/she has to charge to a publisher and still make the same money per hour or even more. Until he is caught at least.


Um, I honestly don't follow this at all. Unless it is a requirement in Europe that all bank accounts must be electronically linked to the tax office and payments require pre-approval from the government before they were issued, how would this even work? How does me giving you a piece of paper printed off of my computer "force" me to pay taxes?

I think you are making assumptions regarding what info is on a receipt and who does what with it. My Quickbooks program will create invoices for me, and I can customize it to add whatever data I want. But none of that data is generated, or automatically sent, to the IRS. It's just an invoice I use to keep my paperwork straight. Here in the US, the IRS only knows what is reported to them manually (either from paper forms or from e-filing). Nobody is wired into the tax office with automatic records of their receipts being turned over to the tax man.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"As a consequence, if a professional freelance editor or cover designer does not issue a receipt, he/she is getting tax free money."_

That is not the case in the US.

The value of the receipt is for the one paying the money. It documents a payment and represents an expenditure which is deductible for tax purposes. However, in business to business dealings few receipts are issued. It is inefficient. An invoice is normally received in either paper or electronic form. A check or wire transfer is used to pay the invoice. The invoice and the payment information are sufficient to document the payment. If there is a contract or a purchase order associated with the payment, that is also keyed to the invoice and payment.

Receipts are commonly issued at point of purchase for consumer transactions, especially for cash, since there is little else to document the transaction.

There is no basis to say an American editor who does not issue a receipt is a tax cheat. Nor is there any basis to say an American editor who does not issue a receipt is basing her rate schedule on anticipated tax cheating.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Um, I honestly don't follow this at all. Unless it is a requirement in Europe that all bank accounts must be electronically linked to the tax office and payments require pre-approval from the government before they were issued, how would this even work? How does me giving you a piece of paper printed off of my computer "force" me to pay taxes?
> 
> I think you are making assumptions regarding what info is on a receipt and who does what with it. My Quickbooks program will create invoices for me, and I can customize it to add whatever data I want. But none of that data is generated, or automatically sent, to the IRS. It's just an invoice I use to keep my paperwork straight. Here in the US, the IRS only knows what is reported to them manually (either from paper forms or from e-filing). Nobody is wired into the tax office with automatic records of their receipts being turned over to the tax man.


So you issue a receipt, but you only pay taxes if you want to? You will only get caught if the other party files an expense and somebody bothers to see if you presented that as revenue?

As I mentioned above, in some countries it's not just any printed piece of paper.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"As a consequence, if a professional freelance editor or cover designer does not issue a receipt, he/she is getting tax free money."_
> 
> That is not the case in the US.


In our case, the business transaction is documented at the same time for both parties and the papers (even electronic) contain the VAT numbers of both parties. Only exception is simple consumer receipts being acceptable for businesss expenses below 85 euro or something like that.

So, in USA, you might get a receipt and the supplier might still not pay his taxes? Wonderful!


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> So you issue a receipt, but you only pay taxes if you want to?


Receipts are for the benefit of the person paying the money, not the person collecting it when it comes to taxes. If you pay me $500, that money is either being wired/deposited into my bank account or sent to my Paypal account. In either case I already HAVE a record of the transaction through the bank. Unless you are dealing in a cash business (which I do not), a receipt is just an extra piece of paper that gets shoved in a file and lost. I use QB to track my income and expenses. If I get audited, I print off the expense and income report for the IRS, and give them copies of the deposits and payments issued through my Paypal account. If they do ask for receipts, they only ask me for receipts for expenses I paid in cash. They aren't going to ask for copies of receipts I issued to other people.

I think you are arguing based on a lot of assumptions and you don't really understand who generates what receipts and why.


----------



## Guest (May 19, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> So, in USA, you might get a receipt and the supplier might still not pay his taxes? Wonderful!


I haven't decided yet if you are just being funny, not understanding due to a problem with English a a second language, or if you are being willfully ignorant. People who do this professionally and for a living are trying very hard to explain this to you, and you keep talking in circles. Regardless, I'm done with this conversation because it has become apparent you don't really want to listen.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Bards and Sages (Julie) said:


> Receipts are for the benefit of the person paying the money, not the person collecting it when it comes to taxes. If you pay me $500, that money is either being wired/deposited into my bank account or sent to my Paypal account. In either case I already HAVE a record of the transaction through the bank. Unless you are dealing in a cash business (which I do not), a receipt is just an extra piece of paper that gets shoved in a file and lost. I use QB to track my income and expenses. If I get audited, I print off the expense and income report for the IRS, and give them copies of the deposits and payments issued through my Paypal account. If they do ask for receipts, they only ask me for receipts for expenses I paid in cash. They aren't going to ask for copies of receipts I issued to other people.
> 
> I think you are arguing based on a lot of assumptions and you don't really understand who generates what receipts and why.


The bank transactions do not mean anything, we do a lot of things through them. I might return some money I borrowed through your bank account. They are not usually dedicated to business and in most countries tax authorities cannot even monitor them, unless you get involved in something illegal.

First of all, you don't understand that a receipt is. A receipt is a part of the tax record, not just a piece of paper.

QB does not contain a trace of the transaction for which you issued a receipt? Can you print receipts with it registering them? There is no tax mechanism in that? They call it a machine record or a machine-sensible record in some countries. Your present it like a spreadsheet, but it sounds like accounting software with a record the tax authority can examine at will. By mechanism I mean a closed and protected data system that you cannot manipulate by editing through the user interface and which the tax authorities can ask for.

If there is something like that, there is your receipt copy in electronic form, and you have to pay taxes based on that. It's a dual receipt, or a tripple one, one record for you, one for customer, one for tax authority. One or two printed, one electronic. And if you do the transcation which produces the user receipt, you will pay tax for it.

The main point of the record is that the supplier pays taxes, the client filing expenses is secondary to the authorities. If you issue a receipt outside such a mechanism, in other words without a record open to auditing, the tax system would collapse. You would be able to save someone thousands of dollars in tax by issuing fake ones until somebody noticed.

I don't understand your tone. Let me guess. You are an editor?


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> Of all the positive things to come out of this thread, I am once again grateful and proud to be an American. Never thought I'd say I preferred our tax system, but I'll take it any day if those previous posts are what it is like in other countries.


Ha! Defnitely more complex in Europe. It depends on the country, but there are VAT balance papers, tax papers, prepaying of taxes on income, calls for settlements to pay to avoid audit once in a while, etc. Even for the common person, lets say a hairdresser, a freelance artist or a lawyer. For an LLC it's even more complex and even a small incorporation needs full time accountants, but that's true in most countries.


----------



## BrianKittrell (Jan 8, 2011)

Is there an option to give them a dollar or two to fix them?

I doubt they have people going through and reading the entire thing, and that's really the only way to check for things like spelling and, especially, grammar. If they do, they could put in a value-added service of correcting them for a fee. It would save many of us a great deal of trouble.

I bet this is just an automated scanner that looks for the ridiculously obvious things like non-standard/non-unicode characters and such.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> No offense, but what country are you in? I want to avoid it. I don't think I would do well in that sort of environment.
> No, the record-keeping is not such a heavily protected thing. It's not like voting, where the ballots are in boxes that are locked.


Greece. It's the champion of tax complexity but any VAT country is also complex.

Voting is overprotected also. It's done manually, on paper, and votes are counted and verified by a group of representatives of local parties and laywers. A whole group of people are counting 30 to 500 votes. We wouldn't want it any other way. We really want to be sure haha.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

Ryne Billings said:


> The one hesitation I have in regards to freelance editors is the price. If I'm going to pay someone over five hundred dollars to edit my normal 100k+ word novels, they have to come out perfect. Why would I be willing to pay that much if a single error is left in place?
> 
> I did the math of what it would cost to have the novel I'm writing edited. It would come out to be over $700 from the editing service that I checked out most recently. That's a large chunk of change to drop before the book is even out, especially when you're a college student.


If you don't hire an editor and you find out your book is full of errors, you are then putting out substandard work and in the long run that can and will ruin your reputation. You are likely to lose repeat business from your initial readers. Those readers are likely to be lost forever. If I purchased _any_ book and it was filled with grammatical issues, I wouldn't read that author again no matter how good the story is.

It's important to think about what kind of product you want to show the world. For me, I wouldn't dream of putting out a book without an editor doing a thorough pass. I have a proof reader as well and it's pretty clear to me both eyes are needed. Yes, it is an investment, but this is a business and all businesses have start up costs.

If you don't have the cash, I'd advise trying to work out a trade or getting help form a friend who is an English major or something before trying to sell your book.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

DChase said:


> If you don't hire an editor and you find out your book is full of errors, you are then putting out substandard work and in the long run that can and will ruin your reputation. You are likely to lose repeat business from your initial readers. Those readers are likely to be lost forever. If I purchased _any_ book and it was filled with grammatical issues, I wouldn't read that author again no matter how good the story is.
> 
> It's important to think about what kind of product you want to show the world. For me, I wouldn't dream of putting out a book without an editor doing a thorough pass. I have a proof reader as well and it's pretty clear to me both eyes are needed. Yes, it is an investment, but this is a business and all businesses have start up costs.
> 
> If you don't have the cash, I'd advise trying to work out a trade or getting help form a friend who is an English major or something before trying to sell your book.


I'm well aware of all that. I wasn't suggesting that a book should be put out with absolutely no editing. I was merely explaining my only hesitation about hiring the services of a freelance editor.

I'm an English major, and that naturally means that I know other English majors and English professors. Before it goes to anyone, I do a very thorough check for errors. It is actually quite rare for me to miss more than a few. As I said, I am very thorough.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

BrianKittrell said:


> I bet this is just an automated scanner that looks for the ridiculously obvious things like non-standard/non-unicode characters and such.


They can't afford to do proofreading so, yes, it's obviously automatic. Dialect will be the most dangerous.

Lule do what they call a "mechanical edit" that costs $150 for 7,500 words. That would be $2,000 for 100K or if there is no quantity discount. That's $5/page, close to market standards. If Amazon did something like that, I don't think it could be much cheaper. A freelance editor would be cheaper and the communication would probably be better.


----------



## Pnjw (Apr 24, 2011)

Ryne Billings said:


> I'm well aware of all that. I wasn't suggesting that a book should be put out with absolutely no editing. I was merely explaining my only hesitation about hiring the services of a freelance editor.
> 
> I'm an English major, and that naturally means that I know other English majors and English professors. Before it goes to anyone, I do a very thorough check for errors. It is actually quite rare for me to miss more than a few. As I said, I am very thorough.


That's great. I wish you well.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

DChase said:


> That's great. I wish you well.


Thanks. Same to you.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Ryne Billings said:


> I'm well aware of all that. I wasn't suggesting that a book should be put out with absolutely no editing. I was merely explaining my only hesitation about hiring the services of a freelance editor.
> 
> I'm an English major, and that naturally means that I know other English majors and English professors. Before it goes to anyone, I do a very thorough check for errors. It is actually quite rare for me to miss more than a few. As I said, I am very thorough.


Still, it would make sense for someone else to have a look at it. Many editors do not edit their own books. A new set of eyes is very valuable. Since english is your expertise, you could edit for someone else and use the money to have your own novel edited. You novel will probably require very little editing, you will probably get a very good rate from the editor, and you might even make money you can use for covers and marketing


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

Panayotis said:


> Still, it would make sense for someone else to have a look at it. Many editors do not edit their own books. A new set of eyes is very valuable. Since english is your expertise, you could edit for someone else and use the money to have your own novel edited. You novel will probably require very little editing, you will probably get a very good rate from the editor, and you might even make money you can use for covers and marketing


Once I can afford to have someone look at it, I will, but that will have to wait. The revenue would have to come from book sales though. Between my job and writing, I'm too busy to do any editing of any sort for other people. In the meantime, I'll just use my method, along with having some associates look over it.


----------



## nobody_important (Jul 9, 2010)

Ryne Billings said:


> The one hesitation I have in regards to freelance editors is the price. If I'm going to pay someone over five hundred dollars to edit my normal 100k+ word novels, they have to come out perfect. Why would I be willing to pay that much if a single error is left in place?
> 
> I did the math of what it would cost to have the novel I'm writing edited. It would come out to be over $700 from the editing service that I checked out most recently. *That's a large chunk of change to drop before the book is even out, especially when you're a college student.*


Then get another job and save for it.

Your readers deserve a clean, well-edited and well-formatted book from you. Why should they PAY YOU for an unedited draft?


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

NadiaLee said:


> Then get another job and save for it.
> 
> Your readers deserve a clean, well-edited and well-formatted book from you. Why should they PAY YOU for an unedited draft?


You assume that it wouldn't be a clean, well-edited, and well-formatted book. It will be. You don't have to pay a freelance editor to manage that, though it certainly helps.

And that's the last I'm going to say on the subject. I'm not interested in a debate of any kind, which this subject can easily turn into.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

1.) We all should strive to have another set of eyes (or more) on every manuscript.

But....

2.) A professional author should be able to proof _at least_ as well as a cut-rate editor.

Seriously, it's a part of the job. (And frankly, I have to admit I would rather see inexperienced authors sink or swim on their own merits -- let the sample show their skills, rather than that of an editor. But I don't blame people for seeking every advantage they can.)

Camille


----------



## Sondrae Bennett (Mar 29, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> 2.) A professional author should be able to proof _at least_ as well as a cut-rate editor.


I know authors whose day jobs are as a professional editor and they all admit they need someone else to edit their writing. It is very rare that a writer, no matter how good an editor, can detach themselves from their own work enough to edit it. And many people cannot put friendship aside to offer adequate critique. Good editing is more than just spelling and grammar.

Honestly, if cost is such a large concern, seeking a publisher should be a consideration. *Before people start thowing the rotten fruit let me explain! * I'm absolutely _not_ saying a publishing house is the right way or that self-publishing isn't valid. Self-publishing _is_ valid and the right decision for some people. However, there are still reasons someone might want/should work with a publisher and not being able to supply the start up costs for a quality product is one of them. I work with a small e-publisher and they take out 60% but for that my book goes through at least two rounds of copy edits, a round of line edits with a second editor, another round or two of copy edits, and then two rounds of proofing. I don't even want to imagine what that would cost me and even then it isn't perfect. And that's just the editing. My cover art and limited promotion is all in that 60% too. Who knows what the future will bring but for now, I'm happy with my 40% considering all they're investing in me. It's not for everyone, but I don't think it should be ruled out completely either.

Okay, that's my 2 cents. Resume the rotten fruit throwing.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Sondrae Bennett said:


> I know authors whose day jobs are as a professional editor and they all admit they need someone else to edit their writing. It is very rare that a writer, no matter how good an editor, can detach themselves from their own work enough to edit it.


I have edited this post because I don't want to throw rotten eggs at you at all. But I've had a lot of experience with all kinds of editors, and no I don't claim to be a brilliant editor myself.

As I said in the post you partially quoted, everybody could use an extra set of eyes.

But the fact is, the only kind of writer who is so helpless and dependent on experts helping them out is a fiction writer. It is not rare at all for a professional writer in any other field to take responsibility.

Professional editors -- even really good ones -- are not such paragons. They make mistakes too. And your average copy editor at a "real publisher" these days is just a recent lit major who has to be overruled on half the edits. The problem here is not that writers _need _to hire editors, but that writers are made lazy by a culture of helplessness. No other freelancer is so convinced that they can't do their effing job.

I'm not saying that your publisher shouldn't use so many editors -- good on them for being proactive -- but sheesh, they shouldn't need them.

Learn your craft, folks. That's the bottom line. If you can afford an editor, yes, hire one -- but they're not there to fix up your weaknesses. They're there to catch the things you missed, in an timely and efficient manner.

Camille


----------



## India Drummond (Nov 1, 2010)

I see this as a good thing. I bought an indie Kindle title a few days ago that had a good story, but oh _God _ the errors. I was actually embarrassed for the author. Fortunately, it wasn't anyone I knew personally. I think this author hit every single pet peeve of mine, like consistently having a character afraid of "loosing" her boyfriend and using ALL CAPS for emphasis instead of _italics_. The one that annoyed me most? Excessive exclamation points!!!! I really, really wish I hadn't been too lazy to preview the sample.

A stray comma I don't mind. And typos can happen to anyone, especially with homophones. So one or two I can overlook and it doesn't affect my enjoyment of the book. But when it's so prevelant that I find myself saying, "Oh, for eff's sake," then I am not a happy bunny.

But.... but... I don't write bad reviews. Ever. I'm an author, and I would be opening myself up to retaliation. I've heard so many horror stories about that. And the idea of creating an alternate account for complaints feels wrong. I don't want to post anything I can't put my name to. But a checkbox complaint to Amazon? That I would feel OK about.

I'm happy knowing Amazon is trying to protect readers from a negative reading experience. Yes, I'm an author. But on this subject I see myself as a _reader _ first.


----------



## J.D. Pasco (May 15, 2011)

I could be wrong but this (lie vs lay) was detected prior to formal editing as I understand it.



k8jonez said:


> One thing occurs to me that I haven't seen mentioned. If I hired an editor and he or she failed to catch a fairly common error like 'lie vs lay' I would be really upset with the editor. I'd want my money back.


I've also submitted a Kindle Singles yesterday and for few hours, it says about quality check. After about 6 hours when I reopened my Bookshelf, the status is now 'Publishing.' I'm not sure if this is new since this is my first submission.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I'm one of those "freelance editors" with "cut rates" under discussion here.

My rates average .0065 per word.

I send my clients actual invoices through PayPal, which gives them a receipt when paid. I use Peachtree Accounting to keep up with my income and expenses. Yes, I report it to the IRS and pay my taxes.

Do we guarantee "perfection"? No. However, we are proud of the service we offer.

Why am I saying "we"? Because included in our price is a full read by my proofreader.

First, I edit the entire book. This is not just checking for spelling, grammar, and punctuation. Many of my clients have most of that pretty well in place. It also includes tightening up the writing, adjusting sentence structure, commentary on characters, storyline, plot issues, and anything else I find that needs discussion.

Second, after the author goes through my edits, accepts or reject them, and makes their own changes and additions, I go through those changes and additions to ensure they both corrected the problems and are grammatically correct.

Most of the time, there are third and fourth passes over more changes. (Though my Editing Service page claims that I do only a second edit of the changes made, in reality, I edit until both I and the author are satisfied with the manuscript. There is no extra charge for the extra editing.)

When we are both satisfied, the manuscript then goes to my proofreader, Jim.

He catches lots of little things that were missed. Yes, there are a few because I am not perfect.

Last, I also include editing/assistance with the Book Description.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

daringnovelist said:


> Learn your craft, folks. That's the bottom line. If you can afford an editor, yes, hire one -- but they're not there to fix up your weaknesses. They're there to catch the things you missed, in an timely and efficient manner.
> 
> Camille


This!

I have had to turn down editing projects simply because the manuscripts were not ready.

Quite often, my clients list me as the editor when they publish their books. That means my name is on there for everyone to see.

If the manuscript is not ready to be edited into a quality book, then I won't work on it. I can fix grammar-type errors in my sleep, but I can't fix your ability to tell a story.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

Panayotis said:


> Many editors do not edit their own books. A new set of eyes is very valuable.


No one, even an experienced editor, should be the final editor on their own books.

If/when I ever find time to finish writing something for publication, I will hire an editor.

Sure, I'm terrific at grammar and punctuation. What I would need an editor for is so they can tell me if I said what I meant to say. That's of major importance.

You know what you meant to convey, but will another person read it and know? You can't possibly tell that on your own.


----------



## Courtney Milan (Feb 27, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> Okay, I'm lost because it's pretty simple, tax-wise. I have the receipt from where I've made payment to my editor, and I use that on my taxes. Whether they claim it on theirs, it's on them. I have no control over that. I don't issue a 1099 because they aren't contracting a service I'm passing on to a client. Just like I wouldn't issue a 1099 to anyone who does over $600 worth of work on my car, or my heat pump, or my house.
> 
> If you're trying to say editors aren't professional if they don't issue some kind of receipt, um...okay. I don't agree. They don't have to issue me a receipt for me to claim that service as a deduction on my taxes, I just have to have proof I paid.


A note: in the US, you absolutely have to issue a 1099 to any noncorporation you pay over $600 for business purposes. It's the business purpose that's the dividing line. You need to send information returns to anyone you pay over $600, and that means if you plan on paying someone more than $600, you need to get some kind of a taxpayer ID from them.

That being said, I've talked to a handful of copy editors who work for New York, and they don't charge anything like $2000 a manuscript. Not unless your manuscript is 200,000 words and you're a slovenly pig.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Panayotis said:


> I don't understand your tone. Let me guess. You are an editor?


Whoa. That was TOTALLY uncalled for. Because things are done differently in your country you are making a LOT of incorrect assumptions. And you know what they say about assuming.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"If you refuse to let other eyes on your script prior to publication, at least tell us you do that. Please?"
_
Now, that's an interesting idea. If an author disclosed editing problems, the customer would know what he was buying.


----------



## julieannfelicity (Jun 28, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"If you refuse to let other eyes on your script prior to publication, at least tell us you do that. Please?"
> _
> Now, that's an interesting idea. If an author disclosed editing problems, the customer would know what he was buying.


Just for the record (in my case), I had done that. I stated EVERYWHERE that it was unedited (prior to it actually being professionally edited). I never once hid the fact it was unedited. I did have several beta readers prior to publication, but still kept finding errors. I was advised not to pull the story, even though I couldn't afford an editor (I know, that statement is a point of contention for some ); so I didn't. I simply didn't hide the fact. I didn't expect people to buy it, and I certainly didn't force anyone to purchase it either. I figured it would languish until I was finally able to afford editing. I barely promoted it (I mean ... barely!). Only _after_ it was edited did I remove all the 'unedited' descriptions and placements, then once again bumped my bazaar thread. Now that I've been told there are _still_ issues I'm back in the same boat, but I won't add the 'unedited' descriptions. It was edited, ... but, I'm going to have to go through it with another editor.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

It's still an interesting idea. It's like a "Scratch and Dent" section in a store, or a "Refurbished" link on an internet store. A customer knows they are getting something that is not up to new standards, and they willingly pay a reduced price for it.

For a book, it is clearly stated there are editing problems, and a customer makes an informed decision. The expectation of a well edited product is removed.

[Note: As with all speculative posts, this is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of the speculation.]


----------



## lpking (Feb 12, 2011)

T.L. Haddix said:


> Courtney, if I as an individual - Tabatha Haddix, lady with crazy hair - pays someone over $600 to do work for me, say to build a house, fix a car, etc., I don't issue them a 1099....


I understood Courtney to mean that she is going to claim that payment as an expense in her (Courtney's) business, so she will issue the tax form to the service provider (editor, etc.).

I also assumed in your personal circumstances, T.L. Haddix, the hypothetical building of the house or fixing the car would not be expenses you will be claiming against your business income.

Most people giving attention here to this tax subplot seem to understand the concepts, IMHO. (And if they're honestly confused, they should pay a professional accredited accountant to help them with it.)


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

daringnovelist said:


> I have edited this post because I don't want to throw rotten eggs at you at all. But I've had a lot of experience with all kinds of editors, and no I don't claim to be a brilliant editor myself.
> 
> As I said in the post you partially quoted, everybody could use an extra set of eyes.
> 
> ...


All good points.


T.L. Haddix said:


> Oh, I thought of one more thing - I checked a book out of the library once, a NYC approved and published book - that had *literally* every other sentence ending in exclamation points. It was historical romance, and I cannot for the life of me find the danged thing again. It wasn't that long ago, either. Maybe a year? The blurb sounded so interesting, but then the book itself, OMG. I couldn't read it. I think there was an Earl....
> 
> Anyhow, India, your post reminded me of that. It was one of those books that you look at and go "who did the author know that this got published?" And I wish I could find it - I've searched the library stacks over and over again. It was large print.... Someone, anyone, have you also encountered this book? I'd like to go back and see if it was as bad as I remembered.
> 
> Point is, even NY can screw up here and there, and whoever edited that book? They need to go see Donald Trump and let him say a couple words to them.


LOL! Again, good points. I wish I could help you out with that title.

My boss at my full-time job loaned me a really interesting commercially published thriller. The story was great, a very intriguing thriller. But, the editing was very poor. Typo errors and misspellings on nearly every page, bad punctuation, consistency errors, etc... 
I felt the editors were marring the final work of the now disceased author, by releasing it to the public like that.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

T.L. Haddix said:


> As to the editing your own stuff - people who have a really good grasp on the mechanics of writing can turn in a pristine script to an editor. However, there still will be errors in that script. You *cannot* see your own work clearly. It's too close to you. Ryne, you have options available - being an English major, you can access people who are wanting to build their portfolio, and will probably work for food, being college students. Plus, you can have a few beta readers you trust look it over. There is no excuse for not having had at least that done. You may be the next Truman Capote or Maya Angelou, but I guarantee you need someone to look over that book for you.
> 
> Let me ask you this - have you looked at your manuscript in more than one format? Read it out loud? Our brains, once familiar with something, will put words in that aren't there. We literally can't see the mistakes. That's why changing formats is so important. I used to print a hard copy out and go over it with a red ink pen, but now that I have the Kindle, I just dump a script there, instead. You'd be amazed at what you can pick up just by switching from one device to another. If you refuse to let other eyes on your script prior to publication, at least tell us you do that. Please?


Here's another tip: Run it through a program like Grammarly, Serenity, or Auto Crit (I actually do all this in between letting others proof-read/copy edit/beta read. _NOBODY sees my first draft!_ Heck, nobody really sees the second draft either. I'm very self-conscious that way  LOL ). Also, print out your work and read it backward...from the end the whole way back through the title page. (I do this at the end, right before uploading. It's more to catch typos than anything else.)


----------



## Will Write for Gruel (Oct 16, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> It's still an interesting idea. It's like a "Scratch and Dent" section in a store, or a "Refurbished" link on an internet store. A customer knows they are getting something that is not up to new standards, and they willingly pay a reduced price for it.
> 
> For a book, it is clearly stated there are editing problems, and a customer makes an informed decision. The expectation of a well edited product is removed.
> 
> [Note: As with all speculative posts, this is neither a recommendation nor an endorsement of the speculation.]


You could almost create a brand for it. Instead of color covers, simple black and white text.

The problem is there's no pricing room for such a brand. There are already tons of books at $0.99 that have nice covers and have had some editing done.


----------



## PeggyI (Jan 9, 2011)

xandy3 said:


> _NOBODY sees my first draft!_ Heck, nobody really sees the second draft either. I'm very self-conscious that way  LOL ).


As an editor I don't want anyone's first draft, or second draft either. Don't waste your editor's time until the manuscript has been seen by a couple beta readers, and you have already plugged most of the major plot holes and pummeled your characters into shape.

I can guarantee that when I copyedit a manuscript that needs every second sentence rewritten, it's gonna cost big time.

Red Adept is correct when she says she sends a book to a separate proofreader, copyediting always introduces errors, and the editor will never catch all of them.

At the end of the day it is the writers job to take the editors comments and rework plot problems. Copyedits are suggestions not directives cast in stone. And the writer is always responsible for the final proofread. (That's why they send out galleys.)


----------



## k8jonez (Mar 24, 2011)

xandy3 said:


> Here's another tip: Run it through a program like Grammarly, Serenity, or Auto Crit (I actually do all this in between letting others proof-read/copy edit/beta read.


Thank you so much for this suggestion. I didn't know about these. Excellent way to clean up a manuscript before it goes to beta readers.


----------



## xandy3 (Jun 13, 2010)

k8jonez said:


> Thank you so much for this suggestion. I didn't know about these. Excellent way to clean up a manuscript before it goes to beta readers.


You're welcome!


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Arkali said:


> Whoa. That was TOTALLY uncalled for. Because things are done differently in your country you are making a LOT of incorrect assumptions. And you know what they say about assuming.


I'm actually supporting editors by proposing we treat them as professionals and pay them according to their effort. Getting attacked by an editor would be funny. Editing is not easy and I would be sceptical when somebody offers editting for $100. That would be sponsoring

From a google search I have found that QB edit does contain a record that can be used in an audit. I don't buy that we have total freedom on what we put on record. I don't have to be in USA to know that this wouldn't work for the tax authorities. Even the most complex way to do this in Europe is quite easy. I input your business info including your VAT number and the euro amount and you get a document through mail or email. It's automatically produced. If I ask for your editing and you are in USA, you have to include my VAT number in the notes of your receipt.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_" If I ask for your editing and you are in USA, you have to include my VAT number in the notes of your receipt._"

If I am a US editor I don't have to give you a receipt.


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Panayotis said:


> I'm actually supporting editors by proposing we treat them as professionals and pay them according to their effort. Getting attacked by an editor would be funny. Editing is not easy and I would be sceptical when somebody offers editting for $100. That would be sponsoring
> 
> From a google search I have found that QB edit does contain a record that can be used in an audit. I don't buy that we have total freedom on what we put on record. I don't have to be in USA to know that this wouldn't work for the tax authorities. Even the most complex way to do this in Europe is quite easy. I input your business info including your VAT number and the euro amount and you get a document through mail or email. It's automatically produced. If I ask for your editing and you are in USA, you have to include my VAT number in the notes of your receipt.


What I was referring to as being uncalled for was your snipe at Julie which insinuated that she cheats at her taxes. As for the rest of your post, I'm ignoring you because I have no desire to debate tax law with you when it's obvious that you aren't listening.

PS: I'm glad you Googled QuickBooks. Truly. That's no substitute for paying an accountant who studies tax law and it certainly doesn't make you an expert. I have an accountant, and I'd honestly be gob-smacked if Julie doesn't.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _" If I ask for your editing and you are in USA, you have to include my VAT number in the notes of your receipt._"
> 
> If I am a US editor I don't have to give you a receipt.


That would hurt my income, so I would get someone else to do the job.


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"That would hurt my income, so I would get someone else to do the job."_

OK. The fact remains that under US law a US editor is under no obligation to issue a receipt, and the lack of a receipt has no effect on the taxes of the US editor. Nor does the lack of a receipt indicate the US editor is a tax cheat and bases her rates on an expectation of tax cheating.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Arkali said:


> What I was referring to as being uncalled for was your snipe at Julie which insinuated that she cheats at her taxes. As for the rest of your post, I'm ignoring you because I have no desire to debate tax law with you when it's obvious that you aren't listening.
> 
> PS: I'm glad you Googled QuickBooks. Truly. That's no substitute for paying an accountant who studies tax law and it certainly doesn't make you an expert. I have an accountant, and I'd honestly be gob-smacked if Julie doesn't.


I did not accuse anyone. It's a given that someone can undercut other professionals by not being a very good tax paying citizen. I recommend anyone using editing services in any part of the world to get a receipt for the service or anything equivalent that can be used for filing expenses. Anyone who has a problem with that in Europe is immediately classified as a non professional crook and usually reported to his tax authorities.

I don't give a damn about tax law in the USA or your perception of my posts, but I found that the software contains a record. Issuing a change to he record means the professional will pays his/her taxes. If that's not true, someone should correct me. Who does it help to leave that hanging? It's a simple question. Can you issue a receipt through that accounting software and not have the receipt affect your taxes? If that's true, an editor might not want to issue a receipt.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"That would hurt my income, so I would get someone else to do the job."_
> 
> OK. The fact remains that under US law a US editor is under no obligation to issue a receipt, and the lack of a receipt has no effect on the taxes of the US editor. Nor does the lack of a receipt indicate the US editor is a tax cheat and bases her rates on an expectation of tax cheating.


Yes, but if it helps your customer and it doesn't hurt you, why not do it?


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Asher MacDonald said:


> You could almost create a brand for it. Instead of color covers, simple black and white text.
> 
> The problem is there's no pricing room for such a brand. There are already tons of books at $0.99 that have nice covers and have had some editing done.


Actually, I do expect this to become a genre. Just like blogs. The hobbyist and amateur ebook publisher. I don't think it will be long before there are generic cover templates out there ... just like blogs. And they will have a following, probably a big following (just like fanfic) and their following will not be looking for the lowest price either.

While I wouldn't take any bets on the future, I am blindly predicting that this will be the Next Big Thing.

Camille


----------



## Terrence OBrien (Oct 21, 2010)

_"I don't think it will be long before there are generic cover templates out there ... just like blogs."_

Last summer when Amazon and Wylie had the deal to bring out eBooks of established authors' backlists, the covers were generic. The covers for Phillip Roth, Hunter S Thompson, Saul Bellow, and a dozen others were simple black print on a tan background. The deal fell through, so the covers went with it.

I realize those authors don't need the artwork most others do, but the standard template was interesting.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Terrence OBrien said:


> _"I don't think it will be long before there are generic cover templates out there ... just like blogs."_
> 
> Last summer when Amazon and Wylie had the deal to bring out eBooks of established authors' backlists, the covers were generic. The covers for Phillip Roth, Hunter S Thompson, Saul Bellow, and a dozen others were simple black print on a tan background. The deal fell through, so the covers went with it.
> 
> I realize those authors don't need the artwork most others do, but the standard template was interesting.


True, and there are lot of PD books with nicely done plain covers -- just typography.

But I meant like you see on the "template designer" sites. You pick a template, type in your title, name and blurb, and *boink* out crops a finished jpeg, ready for download. It'll have ugly art and will come with a watermark which says who made it -- maybe a fine pint url or something. Not to mention the formatting and upload services which will soon be advertised in the back of every magazine (and many websites) the way "Draw Binky" used to be. Or the famous poet competition (where everyone's a winner, and oh by the way, you to can order a copy of the 10,000 poem volume with your winning poem in it for $59.95).

Some of these businesses (aside from the crooks) have been around for a while, serving the traditional self-publishing crowd for things like cookbooks and family histories.

Camille


----------



## Anne Victory (Jul 29, 2010)

Panayotis said:


> I did not accuse anyone. It's a given that someone can undercut other professionals by not being a very good tax paying citizen. I recommend anyone using editing services in any part of the world to get a receipt for the service or anything equivalent that can be used for filing expenses. Anyone who has a problem with that in Europe is immediately classified as a non professional crook and usually reported to his tax authorities.
> 
> I don't give a d*mn about tax law in the USA or your perception of my posts, but I found that the software contains a record. Issuing a change to he record means the professional will pays his/her taxes. If that's not true, someone should correct me. Who does it help to leave that hanging? It's a simple question. Can you issue a receipt through that accounting software and not have the receipt affect your taxes? If that's true, an editor might not want to issue a receipt.


I can hand-write you a receipt on a frickin' paper napkin and it's a legal and binding receipt in this country. As to whether or not that receipt affects my taxes, no it does not. That's what I (and others) keep trying to tell you - you are hearing us but you are not listening. You're too caught up in how it's done in your country. However, I will try to explain it to you in simple terms. And no, that's not a dig at you. Tax laws are convoluted and to do anything more than a simplistic explanation would take way more than one post.

If you are a business, or a free-lancer, you can set yourself up in several different ways - a simple Doing Business As Your Name, all the way up to a corporation, and there are several flavors between. Each type carries certain advantages and has certain requirements, so most people get with their accountant and / or lawyer to figure out which is the best match for them. When it comes time to file my taxes - and I file as an independent contractor - I submit my 1099s (this is a "receipt", if you will, that I receive from companies stating how much they paid me). There are other forms of income proof, as well, but... keeping it simple. I then submit any expenses that are qualified tax write-offs. The final total (income minus expenses) is what I owe taxes on - there's a lot more that goes on, but that's the gist of it.


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

daringnovelist said:


> I don't think it will be long before there are generic cover templates out there ... just like blogs.


There are some software applications for template based book covers.

http://bookcoverpro.squarespace.com/templates/book-cover-templates/


----------



## Panayotis (May 12, 2011)

Arkali said:


> I can hand-write you a receipt on a frickin' paper napkin and it's a legal and binding receipt in this country.


It's not in other countries.

I have done business requiring services and part sourcing from 4 continents for more than 10 years. I have worked in software and book publishing and I have also handled two commercial electronic product projects. I have had software written, articles written, editing and translation done, books printed, books finished and shipped. I have worked with large companies and freelancers. I have accepted content electronically and products through customs. I have NEVER had to discuss whether I should get a proforma and an valid invoice or not. It's a given. All professionals do it. If you start discussing the issue or require information on the subject I would immediately think I'm talking to an amateur. You can sense the amateurism on the attitude, but spending time on these things adds up.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

In the US, I can take a Sharpie and use it to write my account number, along with all of the other required imformation, on a pig and use it as a check. It's legal here.


----------



## daringnovelist (Apr 3, 2010)

Panayotis: I think you are confused as to what people are objecting to in your statements.

Sure, people give receipts all the time in the U.S. And no one objects to you asking for one. And you are correct that if someone refuses to give you a receipt when you give them money, you should not do business with them. It's like an invoice -- when money is not due immediately on order, many company send invoices as a matter of course. And you may insist that they do it as a part of your business deal.

HOWEVER:

It is not required of them to give it to you unasked, and it is irrelevant to _their_ taxes. (It's relevant to yours, because it's proof of what you paid.) There is no particular legal form required of it. And yes, Ryne is right -- you can write a check on anything. Every year or so there is always a news story about some guy who wrote a check to pay taxes on a shirt, so he could say he gave the government the "shirt off his back."

If you don't believe this, then I suggest you drop it, because you will find all Americans in agreement on this point.

Camille


----------



## mathewferguson (Oct 24, 2010)

Ryne Billings said:


> In the US, I can take a Sharpie and use it to write my account number, along with all of the other required imformation, on a pig and use it as a check. It's legal here.


I'd like to cash that cheque.


----------



## Ryne Billings (May 15, 2011)

mathewferguson said:


> I'd like to cash that cheque.


I believe someone did that at one of the banks near my hometown. I don't remember the whole story. I was too fascinated by the legalities of such a thing at the time.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Folks, the tax discussion, while fascinating, has moved quite far afield from the OP about Amazon's apparently checking for typos and grammar in books.  

Let's move away from the tax discussion as rules are quite different from country to country.  As my friend Ann, the tax professional says, consult a tax professional.  (And as my brother, the CPA and tax professional says, the voluntary compliance in the US is the wonder of many other countries.) 

And please, no comments directed at others saying or implying or hinting that they might be cheating on their taxes.  Those comments will be deleted as inappropriate for this forum.  Of course, if you follow the "Let's move on" above, you won't be making those comments anyway. 

Betsy
KB Moderator
(who is on the road and has no hats with her...)
KB


----------

