Amen to that. Scanning is very difficult to get right and folks that get 
it working well aren't great about making simplified processes 
accessible to others.

Will

On 8/9/22 12:16 PM, Warner Losh wrote:
> Perhaps Al could offer those areas that segaloco could use to 
> improve the scans.
>
> Let's get over the 'presentation' of the issue (which we all are 
> thinking in the back of our minds sucked) and understand how we call 
> can produce better scans without getting overly defensive or 
> protective about it (both reactions don't really help, and frankly 
> aren't fun to read played out in a public list).
>
> Warner
>
> On Tue, Aug 9, 2022 at 9:15 AM segaloco via TUHS <tuhs@tuhs.org> wrote:
>
>     I'm literally the one doing it now.  Got a problem with it? Tough,
>     you're not the one doing *these* documents.  Literally nobody is
>     asking you to take on the magnanimous task of "cleaning them up". 
>     Do it yourself or step aside, but again, don't derail a thread
>     about work I am going to do to lob criticism of work you aren't
>     going to do.  Be childish somewhere else.  Sorry Al is stinking up
>     this thread, this is the last thing I wanted, I'm just contributing.
>
>     - Matt G.
>
>     ------- Original Message -------
>     On Tuesday, August 9th, 2022 at 5:49 AM, Al Kossow
>     <aek@bitsavers.org> wrote:
>
>
>     > On 8/9/22 12:00 AM, segaloco wrote:
>     >
>     > > Frankly I will scan however I want given I am both paying for
>     the documents myself and scanning them in my own free time.
>     >
>     >
>     > Queue the virtue signaling.
>     >
>     > That is EXACTLY why I sent the rude message.
>     > I spent days cleaning up your scans to meet the bitsavers
>     scanning quality requirements of the
>     > garbage you produced, because you spent a WHOLE DAY scanning them.
>     >
>     > I've been doing this for twenty years, don't talk to me about
>     time or money spent doing this
>