From: SMTP%"LISTSERV@BINGVMB.cc.binghamton.edu" 13-AUG-1997 12:04:32.57 To: CIRJA02 CC: Subj: File: "INDEX-L LOG9707C" Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 12:05:16 +0000 From: BITNET list server at BINGVMB (1.8a) Subject: File: "INDEX-L LOG9707C" To: CIRJA02@GSVMS1.CC.GASOU.EDU ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 15:00:02 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Linda Cross Subject: Re: $50,000 IN THREE MONTHS -- READ THIS TWICE!! In-Reply-To: <199707150320.NAA18629@dingo.cc.uq.edu.au> On Mon, 14 Jul 1997, John Heinlein wrote: > >The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in > >taking a look at. It can be started with VERY MINIMAL outlay and > >the income return is TREMENDOUS! > > > ><> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> > >You are about to make at least $50,000 - In less than 90 days > >Read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!... > ><> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> > > > >The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my > >fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave > >some thought and study to it. > > > >My name is Christopher Erickson. Two years ago, the corporation I > >worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was > >eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my > >own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen > >financial problems. I owed my family, friends, and creditors over > >$35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just > >couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow > >against my home to support my family. In mid-December, I received > >this program via email. Six months prior to receiving this program > >I had been sending away for information on various business > >opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, > >were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to > >comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to > >see if they worked or not. One claimed I'd make a million dollars > >in one year...it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it. > > > >But like I was saying, in December of '95 I received this program. I > >didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a > >mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several > >times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my > >eyes. Here was a MONEY-MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as > >I wanted to start, without putting me further in debt. After I got a > >pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money > >back. After determining that the Initially I sent out 10,000 emails. > >It only cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing > >about email is that I didn't need any money for printing to send out > >the program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am telling you > >like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself > >that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost > >me! > > > >A good program to help do this is Ready Aim Fire, an email > >extracting and mass mail program http://microsyssolutions.com > > > >Another more advanced one can be found at: > >http://www.extractor.com/ads.htm > > > >In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. > >By January 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you > >read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST > >RECEIVE 15 TO 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, > >SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making > >$50,000 in 20 to 90 days was done. By January 30th, I had received > >196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST > >RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2, IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE > >PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO". I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much > >needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, > >IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it wont work if you don't > >try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! > >Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different > >place. It doesn't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! > >REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15 to 20 > >orders for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for REPORT #2. > >If you are a fellow business owner and you are in financial > >trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider > >this a sign. I DID! > > > > Sincerely, Christopher Erickson > > > >PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like > >piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! > > > >"THREW IT AWAY" > > > >"I had received this program before. I threw it away, but later > >wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no > >idea who to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was > >emailed another copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it > >came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000 on the first try." > > > > Dawn W., Evansville, IN > > > >"NO FREE LUNCH" > > > >"My late father always told me, 'remember, Alan, there is no free > >lunch in life. You get out of life what you put into it.' Through > >trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally > >figured it out. The program works very well, I just had to find the > >right target group of people to email it to. So far this year, I > >have made over $63,000 using this program. I know my dad would > >have been very proud of me." > > > > Alan B., Philadelphia, PA > > > > > >A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM > > > >By the time you have read the enclosed information and looked over > >the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that > >such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created > >by an amateur. > > > >Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business > >for ten years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was > >doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but > >it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was > >the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy > >that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what > >happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from > >first hand experience. You have just received information that can > >give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" > >and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the > >next few months than you have ever imagined. > > > >I should also point out that I will not see a penny of your money, > >nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. > >I have already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from > >the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have > >several offices which market this and several other programs here > >in the US and overseas. By the Spring, we wish to market the > >'Internet' by a partnership with AMERICA ON LINE. Follow the program > >EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works > >exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to email a copy of this > >exciting program to everyone that you can think of. One of the > >people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be > >on every one of them!. Remember though, the more you send out, the > >more potential customers you will reach. > > > >So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials > >and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU > >NOW! > > > >"THINK ABOUT IT" > > > >Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, > >take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a > >pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure > >out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, > >you will still make a lot of money! Definitely get back what you > >invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders > >come in. IT WORKS! > > > > Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC > > > >HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$ > > > >Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, > >and we'll assume you and all those involved send out 2,000 programs > >each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a .5% response. > >Using a good list the response could be much better. Also many > >people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of > >2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 > >programs. With a .5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. > >Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each. With the > >same .5% response, that is 100 orders for REPORT #2. Som if you > >continue the calculation, that will be 1000 orders for REPORT #3 and > >10000 orders for REPORT #4. 10000 + 1000 + 100 + 10 = 11110. > >11110 * $5 = $55550 !!! > > > >REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL > >TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING... AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO > >THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE OR HALF SENT OUT > >100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2,000. Believe me, many people > >will do that and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this > >is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet > >connection and email is FREE!!! REPORT #3 will show you the best > >methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email. THIS IS A > >LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require > >you to come in contact with people, do any hard work, and best of > >all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If > >you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been > >waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your > >dream will come true. This multi-level email order marketing > >program works perfectly...100% EVERY TIME. Email is the sales tool > >of the future. > > > >Take advantage of thi MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained > >respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, > >and both Stanford Research and The Wall Street Journal have stated > >that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold > >throughout Multi-level Methods by the mid to late 1990's. This > >is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires > >in the US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several > >years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become > >millionaires annualy with MLM. > > > >INSTRUCTIONS > > > >This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making > >opportunity. Basically, this is what we do: As with all multi-level > >business, we build our business by recruiting new partners and > >selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to > >recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product > >for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE > >MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it > >privately in your own home, store or office. > > > >This is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: > > > >Step (1) Order all four 4 REPORTS listed by NAME AND NUMBER. Do > >this by ordering the REPORT from each of the four 4 names listed on > >the next page. For each REPORT, send $5 US CASH and a SELF-ADDRESSED, > >STAMPED envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person listed for the > >SPECIFIC REPORT. If you order a report from someone in another > >country, do not stamp the envelope. International orders should also > >include $1 extra for postage. It is essential that you specify the > >NAME and NUMBER of the report requested to the person you are ordering > >from. You will need ALL FOUR 4 REPORTS because you will be REPRINTING > >and RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the names or sequence other than > >what the instructions say. > > > >IMPORTANT: Always provide same-day service on all orders. > > > > > >Step (2) Replace the name and address under REPORT #1 with yours, > >moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2. Drop the name > >and address under REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was > >there to REPORT #4. The name address that was under REPORT #4 is > >dropped from the list and this party is no doubt on the way to > >the bank. When doing this, make certain you type the names and > >addresses ACCURATELY! DO NOT MIX UP MOVING PRODUCT/REPORT > >POSITIONS!!! > > > > > >Step (3) Having made the required changes in the NAME list, save > >it as a text (.txt) file in it's own directory to be used with > >whatever email program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the > >best methods of bulk emailing and acquiring email lists. > > > > > >Step (4) Email a copy of the entire program (all of this is > >important) to everyone whose address you can get your on. Start with > >friends and relatives since you can encourage them to take advantage > >of this fabulous money-opportunity. That's what I did. And they > >love me now, more than ever. Then, email to anyone and everyone! > >Use your imagination! You can get email addresses from companies on > >the internet who specialize in email mailing lists. These are very > >cheap, 100,000 addresses for around $3 IMPORTANT: You won't get a > >good response if you use an old list, so always request a FRESH, > >NEW list. You will find out where to purchase these lists when you > >order the four 4 REPORTS. > > > >ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!! > > > > > >REQUIRED REPORTS > > > >*** Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME *** > > > >ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 US CASH FOR > >EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER > > > >__________________________________________________________ > >REPORT #1 > >"HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" > > > >ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: > > > >Oliver Email > >C.P. 231 > >Drummondville (Quebec) > >CANADA J1B 6V7 > > > >Note: If you want to receive this report by email instead > > of mail, just send $5 US with the NAME and NUMBER of > > this report and your EMAIL address. (you don't have > > to send a SELF-ADDRESSED and STAMPED envelope) > > > >__________________________________________________________ > >REPORT #2 > >"MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" > > > >ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: > > > >Solutions SD > >C.P. 1751 > >Sherbrooke (Quebec) > >CANADA J1H 5N8 > > > >Note: If you want to receive this report by email instead > > of mail, just send $5 US with the NAME and NUMBER of > > this report and your EMAIL address. (you don't have > > to send a SELF-ADDRESSED and STAMPED envelope) > > > >__________________________________________________________ > >REPORT#3 > >"SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" > > > >ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: > > > >MHB Marketing > >P.O. Box 87026-466 > >Yorba Linda, CA 92885-8726 > > > >__________________________________________________________ > >REPORT #4 > >"EVALUATING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" > > > >ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: > > > >Super Growth Group > >P.O. Box 9006 > >Gaithersburg, MD 20898-9006 > > > >__________________________________________________________ > > > >CONCLUSION > > > >I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You > >too, will be making money in 20 to 90 days, if you follow the SIMPLE > >STEPS outlined in this mailing. > > > >To be financially independent is to be FREE. Free to make financial > >decisions as never before. Go into business, get into investments, > >retire or take a vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you > >back. > > > >My method is simple. I sell thousands of people a product for $5 > >that costs me pennies to produce and email. I should also point > >out that this program is legal and everyone who participates WILL > >make money. This is not a chain letter or pyramid scam. At times > >you have probably received chain letters, asking you to send money, > >on faith, but getting NOTHING in return, NO product what-so-ever! > >Not only are chain letters illegal, but the risk of someone breaking > >the chain makes them quite unattractive. > > > >You are offering a legitimate product to your people. After they > >purchase the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them. > >It's simple free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed > >material, the PRODUCT is a series of four 4 FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS > >REPORTS. The information contained in these REPORTS will not only > >help you in making your participation in this program more > >rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other business decisions > >you make in the years ahead. You are also buying the "IT WAS TRULY > >AMAZING" > > > >"Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my > >mind to participate in this program. But conservative as I am, I > >decided that the initial investment was so little that there was > >no way that I could not get enough orders to at least get my money > >back. BOY, was I ever surprised when I found my medium sized post > >office box crammed with orders! I will make more money this year > >than any ten years of my life before." > > > > Mary Riceland, Lansing, MI > > > >TIPS FOR SUCCESS > > > >Send for your four 4 REPORTS immediately so you will have them when > >the orders start coming in. When you receive a $5 order, you MUST > >send out the product/service to comply with US Postal and Lottery > >laws. Title 18 Sections 1302 and 1341 specifically state that: "A > >PRODUCT OR SERVICE MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED." > > > >WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE: > > > >1. Name your new company. You can use your own name if you desire. > > > >2. Get a post office box (preferred). > > > >3. Edit the names and addresses on the program. You must remember, > > your name and address go next to REPORT #1 and the others all > > move down one, with the fourth one being bumped OFF the list. > > > >4. Obtain as many email addresses as possible to send until you > > receive the information on mailing list companies in REPORT #3. > > > >5. Decide on the number of programs you intend to send out. The > > more you send, and the quicker you send them, the more money > > you will make. > > > >6. After mailing the programs, get ready to fill the orders. > > > >7. Copy the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to sent them out as > > soon as you receive an order. IMPORTANT: ALWAYS PROVIDE > > SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ORDERS YOU RECEIVE! > > > >8. Make certain the letter and reports are neat and legible. > > > >YOUR GUARANTEE > > > >The check point which GUARANTEES your success is simply this: you > >must receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1. This is a must!!! If > >you don't within two weeks, email out more programs until you do. > >Then a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders > >for REPORT #2, if you don't, send out more programs until you do. > >Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, (take a > >deep breath) you can sit back and relax, because YOU ARE GOING TO > >MAKE AT LEAST $50,000. Mathematically it is a proven guarantee. > > > >Of those who have participated in the program and reached the above > >GUARANTEES-ALL have reached their $50,000 goal. Also, remember, > >every time your name is moved down the list you are in front of a > >different REPORT, so you can keep track of your program by knowing > >what people are ordering from you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT IS!!! > > > >REMEMBER: > >"HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR ANYTHING." "INVEST A LITTLE > >TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY NOW OR SEARCH FOR IT FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE." > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 02:12:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth Subject: Junk email Re the long message about earning $50,000 dollars in three months. I didn= 't want to read it the first time - why are people posting it back to the li= st again, in full? Christine *************************************************************************= * Christine Shuttleworth - Indexing and Editorial Services Flat 1, 25 St Stephen's Avenue, London W12 8JB Tel/Fax (+44 181) 749 8797 email ChristineShuttleworth@compuserve.com or 106234.1745@compuserve.com *************************************************************************= * ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 07:51:33 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Cynthia Bertelsen Subject: Junk Email Christine Shuttlesworth asked why were people reposting the junk email message to the list and my guess is that they have been told that they should just return the message to the sender. Since I routinely delete stuff like that without reading it (with a title and size indicator like that one you know it had to be a a waste of time!), I have no idea who originally sent it, but from now on if you receive a message like that, PLEASE just delete it or send it back to the sender if you can, not to the list! It takes time to download those monster messages and time is something few of us have these days! In my opinion, junk email is just like print junk mail--it goes in my trash! ***************************************** Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer cbertel@usit.net Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ***************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 09:55:56 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Craig Brown Subject: Re: How suite it is Dick... I use Claris Works which, while not a full suite, is close enough for = comparison. The index to the manual has been adequate for me and it = follows your objects example. For instance, Typing, in database fields 7-10 draw documents 4-17 paint documents 5-10 spreadsheets 6-4 word processing documents 3-4 Since the manual is arranged in sections by type of application, I can = go to a particular section (or look at the TOC) for general info about = the application. Hope this helps. Craig Brown The Last Word= ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 08:22:06 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Sachs Subject: Re: Junk Email At 07:51 AM 7/15/97 -0400, you wrote: >...PLEASE just delete it or send it back to the sender if you can, not to the >list! It takes time to download those monster messages and time is >something few of us have these days! *Do not* send it back to the sender. A response -- any response -- will probably add you to their mailing list for good. If you want to do something more aggressive than throwing it away. Complain to postmaster @ the sender's ISP. There are several junk mail FAQs floating around the net that explain how to do this if the junk mailer is trying to conceal his location, as they often do. Jonathan Sachs Sand River Software, Inc. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 12:16:22 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Karl E. Vogel" Organization: Sumaria Systems Inc. Subject: Re: Junk Email In-Reply-To: <2.2.32.19970715152206.006bed8c@dnai.com> >> On Tue, 15 Jul 1997 08:22:06 -0700, >> Jonathan Sachs said: J> If you want to do something more aggressive than throwing it away. Complain J> to postmaster @ the sender's ISP. I did that as soon as I got the message. -- Karl Vogel vogelke@c17.wpafb.af.mil ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 13:22:12 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rica Night Subject: Re: questions re proofreading--LOOOONG reply Hi Helen: >I *may* have a job coming up in the fall that would involve proofreading >galleys against a manuscript with copyediting corrections. (The work is an >annotated edition of a 19th-century novel.) Supposedly this should be more >"mechanical" than the kind of proofreading I usually do -- that is, simply a >word-by-word comparison rather than including edits for consistent >hyphenation and the like. I'd appreciate hearing from anyone who's done this >kind of proofreading and knows about tips, tricks, and pitfalls. What you're describing is in fact what professional proofreaders who work for publishers (and sometimes typesetters) do. In Canada, it's called "copy-to-copy proofreading" to distinguish it from "dry proofreading" (a.k.a. "editorial proofreading"), which is really copyediting on proofs. Confused yet? Sorry. I teach a course called _Proofreading: An Overview_ for the Toronto branch of the Editors' Association of Canada [EAC]. The seminar is eight hours long, though, so I can't really give you all of it online...yet . Until I can, I'll try to make a few useful suggestions. Much of what follows is culled from a reply I recently posted on BIZ-L (a listserv for Canadian women who own small businesses). In edited form, I plan to post the piece on my Web site, which is now in the planning stages and which I hope to have up and running soonish--by summer's end, ideally, or by year's end at the latest. Please do *not* repost it, forward it, or reprint it in a newsletter without checking with me first; I nearly always give permission, *and* I do prefer to be asked. First, you can find definitions of editorial skills, taken from EAC's annual _Directory of Members_, at the following URL: http://www.web.net/eac-acr/west/skills.htm You may also find EAC's main national Web site helpful: http://www.web.net/eac-acr/ IS IT MORE MECHANICAL? Depends. Was the manuscript copyedited by a professional or by an untrained amateur who once spotted a typo in a book? Was the manuscript copyedited at all? And either way, are you expected to serve as a kind of "backup copyeditor"? In other words, will you have a relatively high level of authority to change or at least query errors and inconsistencies that aren't true typos but are actually things that the copyeditor missed? (For a discussion of levels of authority, see Peggy Smith's _Mark My Words_; details appear below, under the subhead "LEARNING TO PROOFREAD." WHO USUALLY PAYS FOR PROOFREADING? > What would >be a usual rate to charge per 500 words? Is it common for the author to pay >for this sort of proofreading? (In this case of course I mean the >editor/annotator -- apparently the press will not pay for it.) For an answer (of sorts) to your first question, see below, under the subheads "HOW SHOULD YOU STRUCTURE YOUR PRICES?"; "HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE?"; and "HOW MUCH SHOULD YOU CHARGE PER HOUR?" As for your second question, the arrangement you describe isn't, as far as I know, common in Canada, at least not with traditional publishers. Usually the publisher, having paid a copyeditor and then a typesetter, also pays a professional proofreader to do a full copy-to-copy proof at least once. At that same stage, proofs are generally sent to the author. That way, two sets of eyes go over the proofs. (Sometimes this parallel-proofing approach demonstrates incompetence on the part of the proofreader--if the author, who typically *isn't* marketing his or her services as a proofreader, catches more typos than the so-called professional does, the publisher knows not to hire *that* proofreader again.) Virtually no one uses "team proofreaders" any more: while more accurate, that approach is just too expensive for most publishers. Possibly you're dealing with a non-traditional publisher (if the book's being self-published, for example). Or maybe things work differently in U.S. book publishing. Finally, it's conceivable that what's happening is that the editor/annotator is paying you out of pocket to do the proofreading that s/he is considered responsible for (see previous paragraph), while the publisher's proofreader is *also* proofing parallel to you. Frankly, the only reason to care who's paying is that if you're being paid by an individual (rather than a corporation that will issue a purchase order), it's a good idea to get half the money up front and the other half on delivery. The only time in 15 years I've ever been stiffed by a client involved an individual who didn't have the bucks to back up his big talk and his big plans--or, for that matter, his matching demands. Fortunately I lost only $600 on that (non)deal, and I learned an invaluable lesson--which, by the way, more than one mentor had tried to warn me about in advance. So listen to your Auntie Rica, please, and do as I *say*, not as I do (well, did). LEARNING TO PROOFREAD You can learn a great deal about proofreading, and even get some practice in it, by ordering and working your way through a copy of Peggy Smith's excellent book _Mark My Words: Instruction and Practice in Proofreading_, now in its second edition. If I taught a longer course in proofreading, Smith's superb book would be the required text. It's not available in bookstores, but can easily be ordered directly from the publisher by phone, fax, Web, or snail-mail. Here are the particulars: URL: http://www.eei-alex.com Phone: 703-683-0683 Fax: 703-683-4915 EEI (formerly Editorial Experts Inc.) 66 Canal Center Plaza, Suite 200 Alexandria, VA 22314-5507 You might also find it helpful to review Chapter 3 of _The Chicago Manual of Style_, 14th edition (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993; ISBN 0-226-10389-7). In fact, I'd recommend reading or rereading all of that book's Part 1, "Bookmaking," to get a good grounding in where copy-to-copy proofreading falls in the publishing process. HOW SHOULD YOU STRUCTURE YOUR PRICES? As a freelancer, I'm a big fan of per-hour fees. Clients, for obvious reasons, are less crazy about them. When you take your car to a mechanic, you don't want to hear "It's $60 an hour--we'll let you know whether you need to take out a second mortgage in order to pay the bill." You want to hear "We can fix this for $250, parts and labour included, and we can have it ready for you on Thursday." To keep everybody happy, I've found that it works best to do the following. First I figure out how many hours I think it's going to take (that's the *hardest* part--more about how to do it in a minute); then I add a "contingency cushion" (typically 10-25%, depending on the kind of work involved). I multiply the result by the amount I need to gross per hour in order to stay in business. (In case you're not sure how to figure that out--and a tragically high number of self-employed folks aren't--I'll include suggested references at the end of this message.) Even then, I like to give the client a range ("between $1500 and $1700, plus sales tax"). Then I try *very* hard to come in under the top end of that range (even if it means "eating" a few hours' worth of work). HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE? OK, the $64,000 question is, of course, "How the bleep do you know how long it will take?" If possible, don't estimate "sight unseen." That is, try to see the material--*all* the material--before you estimate. Otherwise, it's a little like being a house painter and having someone call up and ask "How much will you charge to paint my house?" You can't really give a reliable quote without going to the house and checking how many rooms there are, how big they are, whether they're currently painted black, how many fiddly little fixtures and woodworking details you must work around, and so on. If you can look at the material, try working on a copy of it for an hour, and then do the math. (Don't forget to add a generous contingency cushion, though; as I get further into a project, I often discover problems that necessitate my going back over material I've already proofed. As a result--and perhaps counterintuitively--my speed is often *faster* at the beginning than in the middle or toward the end--where, at least for a huge project, burnout and exhaustion may also begin slowing me down. Deadline pressures, and what they do to the quality of the work, are another story.) What if you can't see it? Maybe it's not yet written; maybe it contains some kind of industrial secrets and the client's paranoid about letting you see it before you sign a contract with an iron-clad confidentiality clause. Then you must fall back on the experience of others. Productivity standards for proofreading vary somewhat, but the figure that's been considered typical for the 15 years I've been in this business is an *average* of 10 to 15 *manuscript* pages per hour. (Again, I'll append references that verify this to the end of this message.) A manuscript page is defined as a double-spaced page of 12-point monospaced type, left-justified on a line length of about 60 characters. These specs produce a page that contains roughly 250 words. So another way to put this standard is that a professional proofreader can be expected to work at a speed of between 2500 and 3750 words per hour. Obviously, the slower end of that range applies to denser text (such as might be produced by an academic who was writing for a scholarly journal with an audience of other specialists in the field), while the speedier end applies to "normal" text. And certain kinds of writing generally fall outside that range. With children's books, one can generally work more quickly. A proofreader's speed on heavy-duty scientific/medical stuff (technical term, that! ) might fall to 7 or even 6 ms pp/hour. A word of caution here: a proofreader who claims to be able to cover a lot *more* pages/words per hour than the above rates inspires skepticism in most professionals. Much depends, as I've already stated, on the kind of document. Other things being equal, though, I generally find that few people can maintain what I'd consider to be an acceptably high standard (i.e., catching 90-95% of the problems in a typical document) at speeds much faster than the time-tested ones I've quoted here. If you have to incorporate the corrections onto a disk file once they've been approved by the client, that's a separate step and must be estimated separately. (Your speed at doing this will vary according to how well you know your software, how deft you are with a mouse, and the volume of changes that need to be made. At my office, when required to estimate on this step before I know how many changes there'll be, I generally assume 2,500 to 5,000 words--or 10 to 15 manuscript pages--an hour.) HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHAT TO CHARGE PER HOUR? Now, what do professional proofreaders charge per hour? That question, too, rates a *big* "that depends." People set their fees based according to their experience, their knowledge of the client, and the unique nature of the project in question, so the best I'm going to be able to do here is give you a range--and a pretty wide range at that. It often depends on some combination of the following factors (here I'm quoting liberally from a FAQ I wrote years ago for EAC's Toronto branch): * the TYPE OF CLIENT or MARKET SECTOR (individual versus Big Company Inc.; trade-book publisher versus scholarly book publisher versus reference-book publisher) * your EXPERIENCE/EXPERTISE with the editorial function (maybe you're a crack proofreader, but haven't done much copyediting, or vice versa) and with the subject matter * the project's GENERAL DIFFICULTY (does it involve simple, folksy prose or highly technical, number-laden copy?) * the project's SIZE (some people charge more per hour for small jobs, to compensate for the extra energy involved; some even charge a minimum--but note, too, that a huge project requiring months of full-time work has disadvantages for a freelancer, since taking on such a commitment can necessitate turning down other opportunities that come your way during that period, and those clients may wind up going elsewhere permanently) * the DEADLINE (if you're asked to drop everything and work over a weekend, you may feel justified in charging a premium on your usual rate) * your GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION (rates in rural areas or smaller urban centres often differ from those in larger cities, although the Internet is levelling the playing field somewhat) * your COMPETITION (are you the only game in town, or are there dozens of people with similar skills vying for the same contracts?) * your PREFERENCES (while some people charge the same hourly rate no matter what they're asked to do, many publishing freelancers charge different rates for different functions; you might, for example, charge more for copy-to-copy proofreading if you really *loathe* it and would prefer to be doing, say, structural editing--or you might charge a higher rate for structural editing, reasoning that it takes more creativity and is tougher [though I'd argue that point with you]) * HUNGER--i.e., how much you want the work (you may use the "loss leader" approach in hopes of getting your foot in the door, particularly if you lack experience or if the client isn't convinced of the value of your services; even very experienced editors occasionally lower rates to get business from a coveted new client, or to do a project that's dear to their hearts) The Editors' Association of Canada, having done surveys over the years, will tell you that Canadian proofreaders *generally* charge between CDN$25 and CDN$60 an hour. Because EAC is not a union, it does not attempt to impose these rates on members. Many experienced freelancers, as well as those working in highly specialized fields, regularly command higher hourly rates than the top end of that scale. By the same token, no one fusses if a newcomer charges, say, $15 an hour because she's just starting out and wants the experience. (I can tell you, though, that unless you have another source of income--a rich relative, a trust fund, a day job--you're unlikely to be able to survive for very long at that rate. *Never* make the mistake of just translating a desired annual salary into a per-hour rate by assuming 40-hour weeks and 50 weeks a year. You *must* allow for overhead--expenses for supplies, equipment, books, and so on, and the nonbillable time [at a ratio, in my business, of 1 nonbillable hour to 2 billable hours] spent generating new work and maintaining your business--following up leads, writing proposals, estimating, recordkeeping, invoicing, collecting what's owed you, and so on. You must also remember that you will be paying for your own benefits: sick days, holidays, and disability insurance come out of your pocket. Finally, of course, there's the unpredictability of work. We have no guarantee of having a steady 37.5 hours of work a week, all billable at, say, $30 an hour. Moreover, even if that much work *is* available, it's rarely possible to chalk up more than 4 or 5 billable hours a day on a long-term basis. This is partly due to the draining nature of editorial work itself, which requires intense focus and concentration--one mentor of mine says that editing for a living "is like taking a 5-hour exam every day of your life"--and partly due to having to make time for the above-mentioned essential but nonbillable tasks. Decide what works best for you, and don't be afraid to change your rates over time to reflect your growing experience with an editorial skill or a subject field. Often it's hard to bump rates up significantly with clients who've become accustomed to paying a certain fee. You can keep working for them at the "preferred-customer rate"; just use your new rates with any new clients. Oddly, raising your rates can actually *attract* certain types of clients--the kind of people who figure that if you're expensive, you must be *really* outstanding at what you do. For another perspective on pricing editorial services, you can visit the Web site of e-mend, a Canadian virtual corporation headed by my colleagues Greg Ioannou and Dennis Bockus. They give rates by the word, including added premiums for "rush" and "panic" service: http://www.e-mend.com For proofreading, they charge 2 (Canadian) cents a word, with a $35 minimum. At the speeds given above, this rate should yield between CDN$50 and CDN$75 an hour, assuming I've got the math right. --------- Okay, Helen. I hope this helps. The promised references follow my signature. Regards, Rica Night >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Ms.) Rica Night rnight@inforamp.net * Freelance Copyeditor, Proofreader, Indexer * Seminar Leader: _Networking With Integrity_ _Romance Meets Reality: Becoming Your Own Boss_ _Starting Out and Thriving as a Freelance Editor_ _Professional Proofreading_ Toronto, Canada 416-463-EDIT "My own boss: when I talk, *I* listen!" <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< REFERENCES Bruce O. Boston, ed., _STET!: Tricks of the Trade for Writers and Editors_ (Alexandria, VA: EEI, 1986), particularly the article titled "Editorial Productivity Standards," pp. 187-188. Ben Chant and Melissa Morgan, _The 21st Century Entrepreneur: How to Start a Service Business_ (NY: Avon, 1994), Chapter 10, "Washing Windows: Calculating Fees and Working Capital Needs." If you're just starting out, see also Chapter 9, "First-Step Finances: How Much Will It Cost to Get Started?" Martin Edic, _Marketing for the Self-Employed_ (Rocklin, CA: Prima Publishing, 1997), Chapter 19, "Profits and Profit Centers" (particularly the section "Your Shop Rate," pp. 281-283"), and Chapter 20, "Competition and Pricing." Ford Harding, _Rain Making: The Professional's Guide to Attracting New Clients_ (Holbrook, MA: Adams Media Corp., 1994), Chapter 14, "Quoting a Fee." Karen Johnston and Jean Withers, _Relationship Selling: Building Trust to Sell Your Service_, 2nd ed. (Vancouver: Self-Counsel Press, 1992), Chapter 3, "Asking for What You're Worth" (especially the sections "Deciding How Much to Charge," pp. 23-26, and "Five Fatal Flaws," pp. 22-23; the latter discusses the many ways that service providers rationalize *undercharging* for their services). Edna Sheedy, _Start and Run a Profitable Home-Based Business: Your Step-by-Step, First-Year Guide_ (Vancouver: Self-Counsel Press, 1990), Chapter 6, "Start the Forecasting Habit" (especially the sections "What Price Will You Charge?"; "Pricing Strategies"; "Pricing a Service"; and "Indirect Costs and Overhead"). ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 10:26:01 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "P. Buell" Subject: Re: Junk Email In-Reply-To: <199707151537.IAA00834@mx3.u.washington.edu> I think a point is being missed with respect to the spam recently received. Someone is posting to the entire list and is presumably a member of INDEX-L (at least he or she should be in order to do so). The list owner should block any postings from this person. That is the easiest way to deal with the issue. Of course the person may repost under an alias. Then complain to his or her service provider. But the first stage of defense against spam should be a vigilant list owner. I note that some lists suffer far more from this kind of thing than others. On a Central Asia list we got email all the time from "Olga" offering all we dull scholars various sexual favors next time we were in Moscow (that I should have the youthful energy to even think of such things again). I gave up and departed (the list that is, not for Moscow). Paul D. Buell ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 14:01:34 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Help for indexers of scientific materials The following was distributed on a scientific list I subscribe to and I wished I'd had it as a reference long ago. Here's help in deciphering some of the verbiage encountered in scientific works. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ************************************** Science Definitions: The following phrases, frequently found in technical writing, are defined here for you edification and enlightenment. This list was mostly plagiarized from an unknown genius who evidently had read (or refereed) one too many scientific papers." - Thom Quinn "IT HAS LONG BEEN KNOWN" - I haven't bothered to look up my sources. "OF GREAT THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL IMPORTANCE" - Interesting to me. "WHILE IT HAS NOT BEEN POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE DEFINITE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS" - The experiments didn't work out, but I figured I could get a paper out of all this. "EXTREMELY HIGH PURITY, SUPERPURITY, HYPERPURE" - Composition unknown except for the exaggerated claim of the supplier. "THREE OF THE SAMPLES WERE CHOSED FOR DETAILED STUDY" - The results of the other's did not make sense and were ignored. "ACCIDENTALLY CONTAIMINATED DURING THE EXPERIMENT" - I dropped these on the floor. "HANDLED WITH EXTREME CARE DURING THE EXPERIMENT" - I did not drop these on the floor. "TYPICAL RESULTS ARE SHOWN" - The best results are shown. "PRESUMABLY AT LONG TIMES" - I did not take the time to find out. "THESE RESULTS WILL BE REPORTED AT A LATER DATE" - I might get around to this someday. "THE MOST RELIABLE VALUES ARE THOSE OF JONES" - He was a student of mine. "IT IS BELIEVED THAT..." - I think. "IT IS GENERALLY BELIEVED THAT..." - A couple of other guys think it too. "IT MIGHT BE ARGUED THAT..." - I have a good answer for this objection that I shall raise now for no other reason. "IT IS CLEAR THAT MUCH ADDITIONAL WORK WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE A COMPLETE UNDERSTANDING..." - I did not understand it. "CORRECT WITH AN ORDER OF MAGNITUDE" - Wrong. "IT IS HOPED THAT THIS WORK WILL STIMULATE FURTHER WORK IN THE FIELD" - This paper is not very good, but neither are any of the others on this miserable subject. "THANKS ARE DUE TO JOHN SMITH FOR ASSISTANCE WITH THE EXPERIMENT AND TO JANE DOE FOR VALUEABLE DISCUSSIONS" - Smith did all the work and Doe explained to me what it meant. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 14:02:52 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Junk email In a message dated 97-07-15 03:02:31 EDT, you write: > Re the long message about earning $50,000 dollars in three months. I didn= > 't > want to read it the first time - why are people posting it back to the li= > st > again, in full? > > Christine Christine, The first time that message downloaded, I deleted it without reading based on the title as obvious spam. When two replies to it downloaded this morning, I was annoyed that they were merely copies of the same stupid spam. I think that those who posted the message "replies" aren't legitimate Index-L subscribers but kamikaze spammers who joined the list specifically for that purpose. (I was even more annoyed that by posting them as replies, I was conned into wasting time by opening them to read.) I noticed that the "name" of one of the senders was that of a famous science fiction author. The email address of the other looked as if it came from a university (an .edu domain) but suspiciously had "mailbox" before the domain name. Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 12:36:39 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: David Robert Austen Subject: Indexing Olga In-Reply-To: <199707151728.MAA24440@belize.ucs.indiana.edu> Urgent. STOP Please supply OGGLE, no I mean URL, for Olga. STOP Thank you. STOP Dull scholar in Indiana, and not all THAT tired. P.S. I look for Indexing work wherever I can get it, for those of you who wonder. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 14:25:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Charlotte Skuster Subject: Re: Junk Email In-Reply-To: <199707151725.NAA13956@library.lib.binghamton.edu> Listowner here-- Anyone can post to this list..does not have to be a subscriber. The latest spam appeared on a least one other list that I subscribe to. Index-l also experienced the Olga letters. This too shall pass 8-). Charlotte Skuster Index-l Moderator On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, P. Buell wrote: > I think a point is being missed with respect to the spam recently > received. Someone is posting to the entire list and is presumably a member > of INDEX-L (at least he or she should be in order to do so). The list > owner should block any postings from this person. That is the easiest way > to deal with the issue. Of course the person may repost under an alias. > Then complain to his or her service provider. But the first stage of > defense against spam should be a vigilant list owner. I note that some > lists suffer far more from this kind of thing than others. On a > Central Asia list we got email all the time from "Olga" offering all > we dull scholars various sexual favors next time we were in Moscow (that > I should have the youthful energy to even think of such things again). I > gave up and departed (the list that is, not for Moscow). Paul D. Buell > ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 20:01:39 +0100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Liza Weinkove Subject: Scheduling indexing work Over the last few months I seem to have been constantly overloaded with work because I have agreed to take on more indexing projects than I should. I haven't missed any deadlines yet, but that is because I have been working at weekends (when I didn't want to) and because page proofs have arrived later than expected. I have now decided that I must organise myself better, and wonder if Index-L subscribers have any useful tips. Until now, when a publisher calls with a request for an index I have written it down in a notepad by the phone. I found I could keep track of work "in my head", and by flipping through the notebook - but no longer. I have just made a list of the books I've agreed to index in the next 2 to 3 months - it comes to 15, and I can't keep track of that in my head any more (creeping middle age doesn't help). My current idea is to compile a table, with a list of books I've agreed to index, and brief details about expected time needed, deadline, contact name etc, and keep it updated when work comes in or is dispatched. Will this work any better? Calendar-based methods don't seem to be flexible enough and can't cope with large books that arrive in batches over several months. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 16:04:07 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work At 08:01 PM 7/15/97 +0100, you wrote: >Over the last few months I seem to have been constantly overloaded with >work because I have agreed to take on more indexing projects than I should. >I haven't missed any deadlines yet, but that is because I have been working >at weekends (when I didn't want to) and because page proofs have arrived >later than expected. > >I have now decided that I must organise myself better, and wonder if >Index-L subscribers have any useful tips. Wish I did. I've just been in a similar situation. I started with three projects, 400 pages each, nicely scheduled at one per week. Project A slipped into project B. OK, I can do 800 pages in a week. Then both slipped into project C. At that point, I had to make a decision whether to cancel one, and decided not to. Subsequently, Project C slipped, leaving me back to A and B in the same week. Both A and B have been late, though staggered enough so as not to conflict. I should now finish all of them without a problem. I feel like I dodged a bullet. The really safe action would been to turn down the potential triple booking, but that would have cost a substantial piece of change. I got away with it this time. Next time, who knows? > >Until now, when a publisher calls with a request for an index I have >written it down in a notepad by the phone. I found I could keep track of >work "in my head", and by flipping through the notebook - but no longer. I >have just made a list of the books I've agreed to index in the next 2 to 3 >months - it comes to 15, and I can't keep track of that in my head any more >(creeping middle age doesn't help). I have a scheduling program called FastTrack. It produces Gantt-chart schedules that graphically illustrate overlaps and conflicts. Dick Evans ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 16:09:28 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth Subject: Help for indexers of scientific materials Lynn Moncrief sent a list of interpretations of the verbiage in scientifi= c papers. Brilliant, Lynn! I'm an arts person and don't get to see a lot of technic= al writing, but it's lovely to see pompous excuses and euphemisms so cleverl= y exposed, in whatever field. Christine *************************************************************************= * Christine Shuttleworth - Indexing and Editorial Services Flat 1, 25 St Stephen's Avenue, London W12 8JB Tel/Fax (+44 181) 749 8797 email ChristineShuttleworth@compuserve.com or 106234.1745@compuserve.com *************************************************************************= * ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 14:10:00 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "P. Buell" Subject: Re: Indexing Olga In-Reply-To: <199707151813.LAA26703@mx5.u.washington.edu> Alas, I did not same any of the messages nor download the heavy breathing so you are on your own. It was on CENASIA-L, as I remember. You understand that you have to go to Moscow to collect? Paul D. Buell PS: What Olga offered is not unknown in Indiana. Remember the scandal of a decade or so back regarding the professor who was running the call girl service out of his Goodbody Hall office? Keywords: CENASIA-L; Olga; Indiana University: sex scandals. Spam. See also sex. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 15:17:42 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John Heinlein Subject: Re: Junk email In-Reply-To: <199707151804.LAA14038@diana.sfsu.edu> >In a message dated 97-07-15 03:02:31 EDT, you write: > >> Re the long message about earning $50,000 dollars in three months. I didn= >> 't >> want to read it the first time - why are people posting it back to the li= >> st >> again, in full? >> >> Christine > >Christine, > >The first time that message downloaded, I deleted it without reading based on >the title as obvious spam. When two replies to it downloaded this morning, I >was annoyed that they were merely copies of the same stupid spam. I think >that those who posted the message "replies" aren't legitimate Index-L >subscribers but kamikaze spammers who joined the list specifically for that >purpose. (I was even more annoyed that by posting them as replies, I was >conned into wasting time by opening them to read.) I noticed that the "name" >of one of the senders was that of a famous science fiction author. The email >address of the other looked as if it came from a university (an .edu domain) >but suspiciously had "mailbox" before the domain name. > >Lynn Moncrief >TECHindex & Docs >Technical and Scientific Indexing Dear Lynn and Index-l list, All right, uncle, I confess! I am not a spammer, honestly. I am not a famous science fiction author (would that I were). I am merely a beginning indexer who recently joined the list and whose husband (John Heinlein) innocently read the junk mail and returned it to the sender, thinking that he would irritate the sender and not the entire list! Many mea culpas. Whew! Too bad my first message to the list is an apology. Can we start over? Peace, love, and suchlike, Patricia Heinicke (c/o Heinlein@sfsu.edu) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:22:01 +0100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Woodruff Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work In-Reply-To: <868993831.0918997.0@listserv.cuny.edu> Liza wrote: > >I have now decided that I must organise myself better, and wonder if >Index-L subscribers have any useful tips. > The system I've found works best is extremely simple, and works as follows: Using the back of a long-section of (used) continuous-feed printer paper (folded into managable A4 sections), I write out (yes, By Hand) the next four weeks as a vertical list of dates down the LHS, w/e's distinguished in red, with horizontal lines to distinguish the beginning and end of each week. Indexing jobs are now added by drawing circles, each one containing the code used for the book being indexed, its length, and the initials of the publisher. These circles *start* somewhere on the imaginary horizontal line alongside the date the proofs are expected, and then have a continuous vertical line downwards until another circle is drawn at the date when the job *must* be sent by, with the words END inside. Once a book arrives I put a tick inside the top circle. I can now see at a glance all ongoing work, which jobs should have arrived but haven't, which of the next few weeks is going to be the most crowded, whether I can accept new work, and when I must work extra- hard to not miss a deadline, or to get ahead because I want e.g. a clear w/e. A large book which arrives in batches over several months becomes one continuous long line..looking very uninspiring (just like the job?) and reminding me that a certain number of hours have to be committed each week to this job. As time passes I add-in new weeks to the chart, and turn over the completed pages. Whenever I send a job off I take immense pleasure in putting a large tick through the END circle. Obviously it's not just the number of jobs on the go which have to be considered, but also the difficulty of each job itself..but I find the code-name of the encircled job rapidly conjures up this information in an unwritten way ("oh yes, that's the heavy-going liver book/that's the sex book/that's the easy A-level biology one"). When an editor phones I reach for this work schedule and know quite quickly if I can say yes or have to say no to their job. Although I also have a diary for organising the rest of my life, I find I also add- in significant committments to the work schedule when I know these will affect the hours I can expect to work that day/that week. I shall be very interested to read of other methods of scheduling work. Karin Woodruff, Indexer Leicester (UK) LE2-1SA Tel/Fax: (+44 116) 270 2661 e-mail: woodruff@bison.demon.co.uk ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 17:17:24 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: David Robert Austen Subject: Re: Junk email In-Reply-To: <199707152116.QAA29420@cayman.ucs.indiana.edu> Alright, we forgive you this time . . . if you forgive us this time. Alright? (Grins . . . and don't worry about it. Must be the weather or somethin!) Uncle David ----------- On Tue, 15 Jul 1997, John Heinlein wrote: > >In a message dated 97-07-15 03:02:31 EDT, you write: > > > >> Re the long message about earning $50,000 dollars in three months. I didn= > >> 't > >> want to read it the first time - why are people posting it back to the li= > >> st > >> again, in full? > >> > >> Christine > > > >Christine, > > > >The first time that message downloaded, I deleted it without reading based on > >the title as obvious spam. When two replies to it downloaded this morning, I > >was annoyed that they were merely copies of the same stupid spam. I think > >that those who posted the message "replies" aren't legitimate Index-L > >subscribers but kamikaze spammers who joined the list specifically for that > >purpose. (I was even more annoyed that by posting them as replies, I was > >conned into wasting time by opening them to read.) I noticed that the "name" > >of one of the senders was that of a famous science fiction author. The email > >address of the other looked as if it came from a university (an .edu domain) > >but suspiciously had "mailbox" before the domain name. > > > >Lynn Moncrief > >TECHindex & Docs > >Technical and Scientific Indexing > > Dear Lynn and Index-l list, > > All right, uncle, I confess! I am not a spammer, honestly. I am not a > famous science fiction author (would that I were). I am merely a beginning > indexer who recently joined the list and whose husband (John Heinlein) > innocently read the junk mail and returned it to the sender, thinking that > he would irritate the sender and not the entire list! Many mea culpas. > > Whew! Too bad my first message to the list is an apology. Can we start over? > > Peace, love, and suchlike, > Patricia Heinicke (c/o Heinlein@sfsu.edu) > ------------------- David Robert Austen Masters Degree Program in Information Science Indiana University, Bloomington Indiana 47405 U.S.A. Telephone 812 335 8835 Fax 812 335 8598 -------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 19:20:43 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Junk email In a message dated 97-07-15 17:44:39 EDT, Patricia Heinicke wrote: > Dear Lynn and Index-l list, > > All right, uncle, I confess! I am not a spammer, honestly. I am not a > famous science fiction author (would that I were). I am merely a beginning > indexer who recently joined the list and whose husband (John Heinlein) > innocently read the junk mail and returned it to the sender, thinking that > he would irritate the sender and not the entire list! Many mea culpas. Oooops (on my part)! So much for my amateur sleuthing and theories. ;-D Now, how could I ever hold a grudge with anyone who a) has the last name reminding me of one of my favorite beers; and b) has a husband with the name of a great science fiction author? Not hardly. ;-D > > Whew! Too bad my first message to the list is an apology. Can we start over? Tabula rasa in my book. :-) And, please feel free to ask questions here (I noted you said that you're a beginning indexer)! Welcome to the list and to indexing! No need to feel like a Stranger in a Strange Land, even on our weirdest days here. (Sorry, I couldn't resist! ) Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 20:17:25 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Jan C. Wright" Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work I've been using SideKick as my calendar system and address book program. You can schedule a multi-day event (a book or a part of a book) and it appears on the calendar as a banner over several days. As the dates change on your piece, you update the calendar and it moves the banner. A true scheduling project would probably do it easier, but could be too much trouble. The easiest method is to schedule everything, then print it out 3months in advance. Then I pencil changes on the print outs until things get too messy, update the online stuff, and reprint it out. But the double and triple booking part is really scary. I have been doing that this year as well and thus far it has worked, but I feel as though I am dodging bullets too! One little mis-step and the entire house of cards will come tumbling down! Not one piece has arrived on time except for my largest client's, who has taken time to really work with me on scheduling. And even then, THEIR scheduling software has taken to changing dates when no one is looking, so I have spent two months arguing about agreed-upon dates with all concerned. Scheduling has got to be the biggest issue I have in this business. No one can predict their dates, and there are weeks when -if I had not double-booked- I would be sitting and not earning money due to massive delays. I have one large project that has slipped 12 months thus far... and just slipped another 4. I no longer even expect that one to ever come down the pike. I often wonder just how I could write protection for these delays into a contract, so that I would not have to book so tightly and do two or more things at once. But I cannot come up with language that works.... Jan C. Wright -- Wright Information Indexing Services -- -- jancw@aol.com -- http://users.aol.com/jancw/wrightinfo.htm -- "One has two duties: to be worried and not to be worried." -- E. M. Forster ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 21:16:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Marjanovic Mirjana Subject: cindex help, removing multiple page refs Hi indexers, writing to you from a humid and hot Montreal, waiting desperately for some rain to come... still waiting, and waiting... meanwhile, I can't find the way to remove a bunch of references from my index, all coming from one single chapter. My page references are a bit unusual : VII.AQ:1-7 or VII.AQ2102:1 VII is a volume number, AQ is a chapter name (!sic) as well as AQ2101 I couldn't escape using AQ because there's another VII.2101:1 (and so on) then comes the page number They removed the whole chapter and I have to remove it too. I have tried with alter/cut/page=VII.AQ2101- and alter/cut/page=VII.AQ2101:1- to remove everything from that page, but Cindex tells me that my formula is wrong. Any suggestions? P.S. There is no link between that chapter and the rest of the chapters. If you dont want to bother the list,please answer directly to me and thanks a lot. P.P.S. I adore that bit of humour that's floating lately ... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mirjana Marjanovic - (Martic) ~~~@ marjanom@ere.Umontreal.ca ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ LA VIE EST BELLE -- ZIVOT JE LEP (IF YOU WANNA MAKE IT THAT WAY) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 20:21:05 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: FED EX/UPS Hi Everyone (from humid Boston...where the humidity almost matches the temperature!) Does anyone have suggestions about the best way to mail packages from one state to another? I'll be sending a fairly heavy package to a client in southern New Hampshire by the end of this week and am unsure which method is the best to use, if there is one, i.e., Fed Ex, UPS or other options. Any suggestions? Thanks, as usual. Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (Enjoying the thread on scheduling indexing projects, and hoping that those of you with tooooo many projects at one time will think of us wannabe's when you have to say no to a publisher......Sorry about that....I couldn't resist, since I'm obviously envious of anyone with multiple indexing projects.....) ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 19:15:39 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Charles R. Anderson" Subject: Re: Junk Email There is also a nifty program available for download from the Web called "Spamhater." The downloadable version apparently is free, with an encouragement to get the Gold version with more bells and whistles. It searches out the upstream providers through which the Spam has passed and sends various levels of complaint back - included one that references the USC section on unwanted junk mail. Sorry, I don't have the URL here, but if you use something like Yahoo in the Computer index and search for "Spamhater" it should turn up. Charles Anderson Charles Anderson c.anderson.seattle@worldnet.att.net ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:32:38 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Ann Norcross Subject: Re: Junk Email Here's the URL: http://www.compulink.co.uk/~net-services/spam/ Ann Charles R. Anderson wrote: > > There is also a nifty program available for download from the Web > called > "Spamhater." The downloadable version apparently is free, with an > encouragement > to get the Gold version with more bells and whistles. It searches out > the > upstream > providers through which the Spam has passed and sends various levels > of > complaint > back - included one that references the USC section on unwanted junk > mail. > > Sorry, I don't have the URL here, but if you use something like Yahoo > in the > Computer index and search for "Spamhater" it should turn up. > > Charles Anderson > Charles Anderson > c.anderson.seattle@worldnet.att.net ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 23:02:06 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Locatelli@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work What I suggest you check into is getting a scheduling program. Those are more flexible than calendars and allow you to track multiple projects. You might find some at http://www.shareware.com. That's a source I often use for finding programs. Fred Leise Between the Lines Indexing and Editorial Services ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:18:14 -0500 Reply-To: davidaus@indiana.edu Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: david robert austen Subject: Re: Indexing Olga The giggle we needed on a hot day. Cheers. David ----- P. Buell wrote: > > Alas, I did not same any of the messages nor download the heavy breathing > so you are on your own. It was on CENASIA-L, as I remember. You understand > that you have to go to Moscow to collect? Paul D. Buell > > PS: What Olga offered is not unknown in Indiana. Remember the scandal of a > decade or so back regarding the professor who was running the call girl > service out of his Goodbody Hall office? > > Keywords: CENASIA-L; Olga; Indiana University: sex scandals. Spam. See > also sex. ========================================================================= Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 18:11:05 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Rica Night Subject: Re: Junk email >Whew! Too bad my first message to the list is an apology. Can we start over? Dear Patricia: Of course we can. Everybody gets to make *one* mistake before getting roasted over hot coals. Seriously, I think it was incredibly brave of you to own up to and apologize for your husband's boo-boo. (I'd probably have made *my* husband apologize for himself! ) Welcome to the list. Hope you'll enjoy your involvement. I know I've gotten a great deal out of reading and participating in it. Yes, it requires time--*and* I would have killed to have a resource like this available when I was starting out 15 or so years ago. Cheers, Rica >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (Ms.) Rica Night rnight@inforamp.net * Freelance Copyeditor, Proofreader, Indexer * Seminar Leader: _Networking With Integrity_ and _Romance Meets Reality: Becoming Your Own Boss_ Toronto, Canada 416-463-EDIT "My own boss: when I talk, *I* listen!" <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 08:35:16 +0000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wolfgang Schapat Subject: Re: computer manual question Hi Sarah, >I am preparing the index for a second edition of a Windows 3.1 and Windows >95 manual. ..... in my oppinion b) is the choice. Make the commands themselves the entries. The user know the actuell OS and therefor how to read the index. Wolfgang Schapat ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ulmenweg 12, D-91325 Adelsdorf, Germany; Technical Writer on contracts (Measuring Techniques, Software); Voice: +49-(0)9195-4039; Fax: +49-(0)9195-7982; wolfgang.schapat@erlangen.netsurf.de; 100330.3046@compuserve.com ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 04:25:46 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth Subject: Re: Junk email Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Help for indexers of scientific materials In a message dated 97-07-15 19:12:50 EDT, Christine wrote: > Lynn Moncrief sent a list of interpretations of the verbiage in scientifi= > c > papers. > > Brilliant, Lynn! I'm an arts person and don't get to see a lot of technic= > al > writing, but it's lovely to see pompous excuses and euphemisms so cleverl= > y > exposed, in whatever field. Hi Christine, I can't take personal credit for them, though I wish I could. :-) They appeared on a list called "evolution" where, oddly, that's the only thing that appeared today despite last week's newsworthy announcement of the sequencing of mtDNA from a Neandertal specimen (which has other lists and newsgroups OTOH atwitter). Perhaps the list has reached the same evolutionary dead-end that the Neadertals did. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 09:46:20 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Amy Harper Subject: WI ASI Chapter Announcement To: Index-L Subject: WI ASI Chapter Announcement Wisconsin ASI Chapter Meeting Date: July 19, 1997 Time: 11-2 Place: East Library Branch, 1911 E. North Ave., Milwaukee, WI Topic: "Marketing for the Shy: Alternatives to Cold Calling" by guest speaker, Carol Roberts. Please e-mail me, Amy Harper, at lookitup@execpc.com if you need more information or travel directions. Hope to see everyone there! ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 08:19:43 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "P. Buell" Subject: Re: FED EX/UPS In-Reply-To: <199707160204.TAA14724@mx3.u.washington.edu> Around here (Seattle area) I have found UPS to be a little slower but to offer the best service. You can pay more for faster. The problem I found with FedEx was that they delivered one time of the day and only one time of the day and if that was not convenient too bad. UPS, on the other hand, has been very convenient and they will even make a special trip if necessary. For rapid delivery too Airbourn Express has a good reputation. But they have cut service a bit so I don't know now. Don't use the Post Office unless you want your package late and probably smashed. Paul D. Buell ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 09:14:55 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sonsie Subject: Re: FED EX/UPS At 08:21 PM 7/14/97 -0700, Willa MacAllen wrote: >Does anyone have suggestions about the best way to mail packages from one >state to another? I'll be sending a fairly heavy package to a client in >southern New Hampshire by the end of this week and am unsure which method >is the best to use, if there is one, i.e., Fed Ex, UPS or other options. >Any suggestions? I've found that UPS is less expensive across the board that using the Post Office, and also seems to deliver faster. I get overnight service to areas as much as 300 miles (or more) away from me, even though I don't generally feel the need to pay the extra fee to guarantee it. And their rates (particularly for heavy packages) are lower. If you absolutely, positively MUST have something there the next day, FedEx (or UPS, depending on how convenient it is for you to get there) is the best bet. In my area, there are FedEx drop boxes on nearly every corner and I can put something in there at 4 PM and it will arrive 200 miles away by 10:30 the next morning. I don't even have a FedEx account; I use a credit card for the billing information you need on the routing ticket. Here is a little-known but extremely useful tip in an emergency: If you have Greyhound bus service in your area (and who doesn't?), they have a "package express" service that will get your parcel to its destination city on the very next bus. Sometimes I've been able to send something in less time than it would take me to drive it there myself! The caveat is that you must have a client willing to pick it up at the station (or send someone to do so), which may not be an option. But if you really need four-hour turnaround, this is miraculous--and cheap. =Sonsie= ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 12:36:36 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Barbara S. Littlewood" Subject: Scheduling index work Book schedules slip and there's not much on indexer can do except expec= t it to happen. I do a couple things to stay sane. First, at the start of each month I phone editors of late manuscripts and ask for a new schedule= =2E Often, they forget to keep the indexer updated. Second, I tell editors up= front that I need ten business days after the final pages arrive to complete the index. For a large project, I'd make that three weeks. Third= , if I decide to take a vacation during the project I inform editors as soo= n as possible. Fourth, I never agree to Monday due dates; one can often "ga= in a weekend" by having stuff due on Tuesdays. Barb Littlewood ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:22:10 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: speaker wanted in OR A representative of the Oregon Library Association who's enthusiastic about indexing asked if I would help her to find an indexer to present a 90-minute workshop on indexing for the OLA meeting in Eugene next spring. It's probably going to be in April (exact dates not set yet). The organizer is a very pleasant woman who seems easy to work with and wants librarians to know more about indexing. The OLA could pay transportation from within Oregon. If you're interested, please get in touch with me and I'll give you her email address. Do Mi Stauber DStaub11@aol.com 541-461-5085 ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:34:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Seth A. Maislin" Subject: Re: FED EX/UPS In-Reply-To: Sonsie "Re: FED EX/UPS" (Jul 16, 9:14am) Basically, I think the difference between UPS and FedEx is that UPS uses lots of trucks, and FedEx tend to use airplanes. I remember reading an article a while ago that was comparing the two package transport companies, and from an energy perspective, it was determined that FedEx was more expensive. In other words, for every pound of package that is shipped, Federal Express uses a lot more gasoline, creates a lot more exhaust, et cetera. This is because UPS prefers ground transport over air transport. What this means to you is that UPS is generally going to be cheaper, but that FedEx tends to be more reliable when you are sending packages for long distances in a very short time. A package from coast to coast overnight must go FedEx; a package to an in-state client really ought to travel by UPS (also overnight). The UPS office will let you know the length of ground transport time required to send a package from your location to another location. (In fact, they publish these maps for your area, if you call them: 1-800-PICK-UPS, or check them out on the Web: http://www.ups.com.) If you are sending something to the next state, it often requires an extra day (two days total) -- unless the states happen to be relatively small and close together (like New Hampshire and Vermont). UPS will also send packages by air, and they are cheaper, but I tend to like FedEx's reputation for reliability when it comes to long-distance, hurried shipping. Here's some more information about delivery times. If you live in a business district, there are more deliveries. If you live in a residential area, there is probably only one delivery time, later in the day. Therefore, the "by 8AM" and "before 8:30am" guarantees may not hold true if you live in a residential area (although from experience, UPS manages to hold to their promise). If you are willing to pick the package up yourself at the neighborhood UPS or FedEx office, however, it will be there bright and early, every day. Look into your local office to learn how packages can be shipping and stored there for your pickup. Finally, in addition to the Greyhound same-day shipping idea (which is a good thing to know! Thanks Sonsie!), if you don't mind packages taking a longer time, you might look into U-Haul. - Seth -- Seth A. Maislin (seth@ora.com) O'Reilly & Associates Focus Publishing Services 90 Sherman Street 89 Grove Street Cambridge MA 02140 Watertown MA 02172-2826 (617) 499-7439 phone (617) 924-4428 (617) 661-1116 facsimile smaislin@world.std.com URL: http://www.ora.com/people/staff/seth Webmaster, Amer Soc of Indexers: http://www.well.com/user/asi ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:54:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@AOL.COM Subject: Diana, Princess of ? Hi, everyone, This is a really weighty question - well, all right, it's not but I want to get it right. Now that Charles and Diana are divorced, I know that she is still called Princess Diana but cannot use the 'royal highness' title. But does her treatment in indexes change? I used to index her as Diana, Princess of Wales Is that how her name should still appear or should it be Diana, Princess alone? This is an index for a trade book and she's only mentioned once, but I want to use the appropriate wording. I almost hesitate to ask this question in the current environment of humor on the list but will take a risk ;-) Any off-color suggestions should be sent to me off-list or better yet just told to your friends in real life. TIA, Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 13:55:42 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: MaryMort@AOL.COM Subject: Re: How suite it is Hi, Dick, >When indexing such a book, is it desireable to create a primary entry for >each product under which the product is fully indexed? All subentries would >be cross posted. In similar books, I have created main entries for the applications, but only for topics that apply to the entire application, like starting and exiting, or an introductory description of the application. I then index the bulk of the information under the particular topics, with the main 'objects' of each application (databases and tables, for example, for Access) being the main focus. For example: Excel exiting starting ^See also^ worksheets PowerPoint exiting starting ^See also^ presentations presentations creating viewing [many subs] worksheets creating printing [many subs] (All of these are flipped as well.) For features or activities that are discussed in multiple sections of the book, I follow your example: >word wrap > presentation graphics > spreadsheet > word processor except I would probably word it as: word wrap in slides in spreadsheets in word processing documents Cheers, Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 14:26:07 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chris Carr Subject: Re: thanks! In a message dated 97-07-16 01:37:33 EDT, you write: > Welcome to the list. Hope you'll enjoy your involvement. I know I've gotten > a great deal out of reading and participating in it. Yes, it requires > time--*and* I would have killed to have a resource like this available when > I was starting out 15 or so years ago. > Just wanted to let all of you experts out there know that the beginners *really do* appreciate all the time you put into this discussion!!! I would feel lost without you. :-) Chris Carr ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 12:30:53 -0800 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: John Heinlein Subject: Re: Junk email In-Reply-To: <199707152330.QAA01180@diana.sfsu.edu> >Lynn Moncrief wrote: > >Oooops (on my part)! So much for my amateur sleuthing and theories. ;-D Now, >how could I ever hold a grudge with anyone who a) has the last name reminding >me of one of my favorite beers; and b) has a husband with the name of a great >science fiction author? Not hardly. ;-D > > >Tabula rasa in my book. :-) And, please feel free to ask questions here (I >noted you said that you're a beginning indexer)! Welcome to the list and to >indexing! No need to feel like a Stranger in a Strange Land, even on our >weirdest days here. (Sorry, I couldn't resist! ) > >Lynn Moncrief >TECHindex & Docs >Technical and Scientific Indexing _________________ Thanks, Lynn and all who wrote re: the spamming episode. I feel initiated. (I worked as an acquisitions editor before I got smart, so let me know if I can ever offer any insights into the editorial perspective.) Patricia Heinicke ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 14:28:13 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Chris Carr Subject: Re: Help for indexers of scientific materials I had a geology professor who explained his education to the entire class (about 200) this way: Well, you know what B.S. is. M.S. is more of the same. Ph.D. is just piled higher and deeper. ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 14:41:48 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work In-Reply-To: <199707160415.XAA20041@mixcom.mixcom.com> >Calendar-based methods don't seem to be flexible enough >and can't cope with large books that arrive in batches over several months. Shoot, I was going to suggest the calendar method. Well, I will anyway, for the benefit of others. On my wall calendar, I mark a line (with a colorful, thick marker) through all the dates I will have the book in my hands. If the schedule is actually longer than the time I think I'll need (it does happen occasionally), then I use a thinner line for the time I think I probably won't need. I use a different color for each book within the same month. I like this method because it shows me very quickly where the overlaps are, how booked I am, where my jobs overlap with family plans, etc. I don't like to have to look in a notebook or anything when a client asks me whether I can take on a project. For each colorful line, I also write the name of the press and the name of the book or the subject, so I don't get 'em mixed up. When production schedules shift, I use extra-coverage white-out to redo the lines as needed. When things are tight, I have to do more than rely on the calendar to keep me on track. I write out a schedule for each book: a list of dates and what page I should be up to on each date. >I often wonder just how I could write protection for these delays into a >contract, so that I would not have to book so tightly and do two or more >things at once. But I cannot come up with language that works.... This is what I use (when I'm using a contract): "If the pages are late, I would have to tack on a comparable number of days to the due date; if they are very late--say, more than a week--we would have to renegotiate the job, otherwise the quality of the index could be jeopardized." Sometimes I even include mention of a kill fee for the situation in which the schedule slips so far that I have to turn down the book. Use whatever polite language for these you like, so long as you make it clear that slipped schedules have repercussions. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | I'm not into working out. My Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | philosophy: No pain, no pain. Milwaukee, WI | -- Carol Leifer http://www.mixweb.com/Roberts.Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 14:40:12 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Anne Taylor Subject: Re: Diana, Princess of ? At 01:54 PM 7/16/97 -0400, you wrote: >Hi, everyone, >This is a really weighty question - well, all right, it's not but I want to >get it right. Now that Charles and Diana are divorced, I know that she is >still called Princess Diana but cannot use the 'royal highness' title. But >does her treatment in indexes change? I used to index her as > Diana, Princess of Wales > >Is that how her name should still appear or should it be > Diana, Princess >alone? > >This is an index for a trade book and she's only mentioned once, but I want >to use the appropriate wording. I almost hesitate to ask this question in >the current environment of humor on the list but will take a risk ;-) Any >off-color suggestions should be sent to me off-list or better yet just told >to your friends in real life. > >TIA, >Mary >-- >* Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com >* Lawrence, Kansas, USA Find a copy of "Whitaker's Almanac", the Brit version of "World Almanac"/"US Stat Abstract". The most recent edition should list Diana's correct title. Anne Anne Cleester Taylor University of Missouri-St. Louis Thomas Jefferson Library Reference sactayl@umslvma.umsl.edu http://www.umsl.edu/~ataylor ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 16:14:06 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Cheryl Jackson Subject: Re[2]: How suite it is Mary, Your suggestion for indexing books about suite applications is *exactly* how I and several of my collegues index Microsoft Office titles. It's nice to know that there are others out there who use this approach for such titles!! Cheryl Jackson Sams Publishing, a division of Macmillan Publishing USA ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: Re: How suite it is Author: MaryMort@AOL.COM at Internet Date: 7/16/97 1:55 PM Hi, Dick, >When indexing such a book, is it desireable to create a primary entry for >each product under which the product is fully indexed? All subentries would >be cross posted. In similar books, I have created main entries for the applications, but only for topics that apply to the entire application, like starting and exiting, or an introductory description of the application. I then index the bulk of the information under the particular topics, with the main 'objects' of each application (databases and tables, for example, for Access) being the main focus. For example: Excel exiting starting ^See also^ worksheets PowerPoint exiting starting ^See also^ presentations presentations creating viewing [many subs] worksheets creating printing [many subs] (All of these are flipped as well.) For features or activities that are discussed in multiple sections of the book, I follow your example: >word wrap > presentation graphics > spreadsheet > word processor except I would probably word it as: word wrap in slides in spreadsheets in word processing documents Cheers, Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 17:29:38 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Cynthia Bertelsen Subject: Re: Diana, Princess of ? The 1997 Whitaker's has her listed as Diana, Princess of Wales. An Associated Press story giving the details of the official divorce settlement stated that she kept the title Princess of Wales. (I found this last news report on the Net, which can often be a good source for current information.) At 02:40 PM 7/16/97 -0500, Anne Taylor wrote: >At 01:54 PM 7/16/97 -0400, you wrote: >>Hi, everyone, >>This is a really weighty question - well, all right, it's not but I want to >>get it right. Now that Charles and Diana are divorced, I know that she is >>still called Princess Diana but cannot use the 'royal highness' title. But >>does her treatment in indexes change? I used to index her as >> Diana, Princess of Wales >> >>Is that how her name should still appear or should it be >> Diana, Princess > >Find a copy of "Whitaker's Almanac", the Brit version of "World >Almanac"/"US Stat Abstract". The most recent edition should list Diana's >correct title. > >Anne >Anne Cleester Taylor ***************************************** Cynthia D. Bertelsen--Indexer cbertel@usit.net Web page: http://www.vt.edu:10021/B/bertel/ndx.html ***************************************** ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 17:20:40 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Noeline Bridge Subject: Diana, Princess of Wales This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC920C.95A1C100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Diana, Princess of Wales is correct--as it always was during the time = she was married. FYI, Princess Diana was and is not correct, just an = informal way of referring to her, because she was not born a princess. Noeline H. Bridge ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC920C.95A1C100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Diana, Princess of Wales = is correct--as=20 it always was during the time she was married. FYI, Princess Diana was = and is=20 not correct, just an informal way of referring to her, because she was = not born=20 a princess.

Noeline H. Bridge 

 

 

  ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC920C.95A1C100-- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 19:48:13 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Noeline Bridge Subject: FED EX/UPS/Greyhound This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC9221.327F2260 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I can echo what Sonsie said about the usefulness of Greyhound. You have = to know, of course, that a bus is running between the two points and the = sender and recipient have to be willing to go to the station, but it can = amount to a same-day service and can save even more time when a weekend = is involved. Where I live, in Edmonton, Canada, the major couriers' = offices are closed over the weekend and alternatives are shockingly = expensive. Recently I spent a few days in Banff to write, and when I got there = found that I'd left the box of disks I wanted to use at home. This was = Friday afternoon, and couriers would not be able to deliver until Monday = at the earliest. However, my husband put the package on a Greyhound bus = leaving Edmonton on Saturday morning and it was available for my pickup = that evening in Banff, same-day service for about $10. Moving away from the subject of indexing, it's also very useful if = you're having perishable goods sent and can choose this option. The = Greyhound parcel office will call you, and you can hop down and rescue = those delicate plants that may otherwise have languished in an office = overnight or more. Noeline H. Bridge, nbridge@planet.eon.net ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC9221.327F2260 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I can echo what Sonsie = said about the=20 usefulness of Greyhound. You have to know, of course, that a bus is = running=20 between the two points and the sender and recipient have to be willing = to go to=20 the station, but it can amount to a same-day service and can save even = more time=20 when a weekend is involved. Where I live, in Edmonton, Canada, the major = couriers' offices are closed over the weekend and alternatives are = shockingly=20 expensive.

Recently I spent a few = days in Banff to=20 write, and when I got there found that I'd left the box of disks I = wanted to use=20 at home. This was Friday afternoon, and couriers would not be able to = deliver=20 until Monday at the earliest. However, my husband put the package on a = Greyhound=20 bus leaving Edmonton on Saturday morning and it was available for my = pickup that=20 evening in Banff, same-day service for about $10.

Moving away from the = subject of=20 indexing, it's also very useful if you're having perishable goods sent = and can=20 choose this option. The Greyhound parcel office will call you, and you = can hop=20 down and rescue those delicate plants that may otherwise have languished = in an=20 office overnight or more.

Noeline H. Bridge, nbridge@planet.eon.net

 

  ------=_NextPart_000_0000_01BC9221.327F2260-- ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 22:49:47 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Marjanovic Mirjana Subject: The End of a story: "cindex help, removing page refs" In-Reply-To: Hi indexers, special thanks to Pauline Sholtys and Kari Bero who helped me with my problem. They have suggested to use FIND to find all records with refs VII.AQ, then to make a GROUP, and at the end to delete all. The simplest and easiest way (is it the only?) to manage those weird references. Yes, CUT does not work because of Roman numerals (VII), like the manual says. Thanks again and wish you all a nice summer (where on Earth can we use FIND for "25 C, 60% humidity, cool night, enough work but not to much" followed by GET IT?) > VII.AQ:1-7 > or VII.AQ2102:1 > > VII is a volume number, AQ is a chapter name (!sic) as well as AQ2101 > I couldn't escape using AQ because there's another VII.2101:1 (and so on) > > then comes the page number > > They removed the whole chapter and I have to remove it too. I have tried > with alter/cut/page=VII.AQ2101- > and > alter/cut/page=VII.AQ2101:1- > to remove everything from that page, but Cindex tells me that my > formula is wrong. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Mirjana ~~~@ LA VIE EST BELLE -- ZIVOT JE LEP (IF YOU WANNA MAKE IT THAT WAY) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 22:58:37 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Barbara Kempf Subject: Re: speaker wanted in OR In-Reply-To: <199707161728.KAA24259@smtp2.nwnexus.com> >A representative of the Oregon Library Association who's enthusiastic about >indexing asked if I would help her to find an indexer to present a 90-minute >workshop on indexing for the OLA meeting in Eugene next spring. It's probably >going to be in April (exact dates not set yet). The organizer is a very >pleasant woman who seems easy to work with and wants librarians to know more >about indexing. The OLA could pay transportation from within Oregon. If >you're interested, please get in touch with me and I'll give you her email >address. > >Do Mi Stauber >DStaub11@aol.com >541-461-5085 Hi there, I'd like to get her email address. I'm an online indexer at Microsoft and I'm a former librarian. tia, Barb Kempf zeldakem@halcyon.com >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< Greenwood Gallery Seattle, WA 206-782-4407 206-782-4220 (fax) grnwdgal@halcyon.com http://www.halcyon.com/grnwdgal "The social responsibility of the artist is to reunite people with their reality." "I-Ching" Hexagram 59: Reuniting (R.L. Wing interpretation) >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>><<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 04:57:01 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: FED EX/UPS Thanks to everyone who responded to my question. Your comments have all been thoughtful, as usual! Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (Thankful I'm not leading a hiking trip today or tomorrow....) ========================================================================= Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 05:06:32 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: Humor: Thesaurus Spotted this joke at work yesterday, and decided to share it with you all: Two trucks loaded with a thousand copies of Roget's Thesaurus collided as they left a New Hampshire publishing house last Thuursday, according to the Associated Press. Witnesses were stunned, startled, aghast, taken aback, stupefied....... Couldn't resist this one , and wondered if anyone can come up with additional words?... Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (Pretty weighty sense of humor so early on a hot, humid morning.....) ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 22:40:17 +1100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Australian Society of Indexers Subject: AusSI Medal 1997 entry details (shades of Web indexing...) Hi Here are the details from our July 1997 Newsletter. (BTW a Web indexing prize is in the pipeline for 1997 again... details to come.) http://www.zeta.org.au/~aussi/medal97.html carries a copy of the stuff below too... INDEXERS MEDAL 1997 The Australian Society of Indexers is again offering its annual Medal for the most outstanding index to a book or periodical compiled in Australia or New Zealand. The Medal will be presented to the indexer responsible for the best index submitted, if it is of sufficient quality, and the publisher of the winning index will be presented with a certificate. The presentations will take place at the Society's conference, The Futureproof Indexer, at Katoomba, on 27 September 1997. To be eligible for the award, the index must be in print and must have been first published after 1994. It must have been compiled in Australia or New Zealand even though the text to which it refers may have originated elsewhere. For the award, indexes are judged at the level of outstanding professional achievement, thus sufficient material is required, both in quality and quantity, for appraisal. The index should be substantial in size, the subject matter should be complex, and the language, form and structure of the index should demonstrate the indexer's expertise, as well as serving the needs of the text and the reader. Publishers, indexers and all interested persons are invited to nominate indexes which meet the above criteria, and which they regard as worthy of consideration. Indexers are encouraged to nominate their own works. Please send recommendations, with bibliographic details, and if possible together with a copy of the book (which will be returned), to: The Secretary, Australian Society of Indexers, PO Box R598, Royal Exchange, Sydney, NSW 1225 Australia as soon as possible, but no later than Thursday 31 July, 1997. For further information, please contact Alan Walker, telephone: 02 9368 0174, fax: 02 9358 5593, email: alan.walker@syd054.aone.net.au ------- Dwight Walker Webmaster and Editor Australian Society of Indexers +61-2-91304206 (h) +61-2-94393750 (w) W-F, fax +61-2-94383729 (w) URL: http://www.zeta.org.au/~aussi ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 10:03:11 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Eileen Lutzow Subject: Re: Diana, Princess of ? Thought the current and former librarians on the list would like to know that the Library of Congress Name Authority File lists her as "Diana, Princess of Wales, 1961- " with cross refs from "Spencer, Diana Frances, Lady, 1961- " and "Di, Lady, 1961- ". Not that LC is noted for its speed in making changes, but that's how she'll appear in library cataloges that follow LC practice. Eileen Lutzow (a cataloger thinking about moving into indexing) Charleston, SC ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi, everyone, This is a really weighty question - well, all right, it's not but I want to get it right. Now that Charles and Diana are divorced, I know that she is still called Princess Diana but cannot use the 'royal highness' title. But does her treatment in indexes change? I used to index her as Diana, Princess of Wales Is that how her name should still appear or should it be Diana, Princess alone? This is an index for a trade book and she's only mentioned once, but I want to use the appropriate wording. I almost hesitate to ask this question in the current environment of humor on the list but will take a risk ;-) Any off-color suggestions should be sent to me off-list or better yet just told to your friends in real life. TIA, Mary -- * Mary Mortensen * marymort@aol.com * Lawrence, Kansas, USA ========================================================================= Date: Thu, 17 Jul 1997 10:25:07 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Lindsay Gower Subject: Re: FrameMaker book At 11:54 AM 7/12/97 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 97-07-11 06:26:05 EDT, you write: > >> Can anyone recommend a good book on FrameMaker, in particular, one which >> has a good explanation of *indexing* in FrameMaker? I've found FrameMaker for Windows (a Visual Quickstart Guide) to be helpful on indexing as well as other topics. (Part of the reason I like it is it's smaller than the FrameMaker 4 manual, so it's easier to handle!) I got it at Barnes &Noble for about $20. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Lindsay Gower | email: lindsay@persistence.com Technical Writer | phone: 1.415.372.3606 Persistence Software Inc. | fax: 1.415.341.8432 1720 S. Amphlett Blvd., Suite 300 | http://www.persistence.com San Mateo, CA USA 94402 | ---------------------------------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 01:07:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Suzanne Stevenson Subject: Pricing I hope you don't mind me posting to this list to ask a pricing question of something other than indexing - please respond privately so we don't muck up everyone's mailboxes with mail which doesn't interest them. I have an opportunity to do some proofreading/minor re-writing of business letters, class syllabuses, etc. for a professor. He wants to pay by the page - what in the world do I charge? Does $1.50 per page sound right? I've always had full-time, paid-by-the-hour proofing jobs . . . just starting to work from home while taking my USDA course & raising kids! ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 07:55:49 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah H Lemaire Subject: Frame indexer tool (fwd) To Index-l readers: Here's some information about an indexing tool for FrameMaker users if anyone is interested. I successfully downloaded and installed it. I just haven't had time to figure out how it integrates with FrameMaker. Sarah Lemaire --------------------------------------- To: shl@world.std.com Subject: Frame indexer tool Sarah This was on the Framers mailing list. Do you want to try out an evaluation copy and let me know if it would speed up your work? I can supply you with more Frame files. ===================================================================== --------------------------------- Subject: Indexicon for FrameMaker, beta testers We are seeking beta testers for our new FrameMaker version of Indexicon, especially anyone who would be willing to set aside time to test the product within the next two weeks. Description: Indexicon is an automatic indexing tool that works within FrameMaker. Indexicon automatically scans your document and marks the indexable terms, then uses FrameMaker's built-in-facility to compile the index. You can vary the degree of comprehensiveness of the index, exclude portions of the document from indexing, edit index entries, and create your own personal lexicons to alter what appears (or does not appear) in your index. System Requirements: FrameMaker 5.0 or better, Windows 95 or NT, 8 MB RAM (16 MB recommended) If you are interested in being a beta tester, here's where you can download the Indexicon for Frame beta program: http://iconovex.com/.garm/idx-frm.exe. This is a self-extracting file. Simply save it to a temporary directory and then "run" idx-frm.exe. ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 08:53:35 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Erika Millen Subject: book purchasing research Here are the Web sites for the market research studies I mentioned earlier: http://www.mcp.com/cybertrends97/Blake/sld001.htm http://www.mcp.com/cybertrends97/Blake/sld029.htm The studies found that, for the computer book market, the index is a book's most important marketing tool (see slide 46 -- http://www.mcp.com/cybertrends97/Blake/sld046.htm). :) If you're interested, http://www.mcp.com/cybertrends97 lists a number of other publishing-related market studies you can check out. Erika ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 00:21:04 +1100 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Australian Society of Indexers Subject: new address for Alan Walker, Indexers Medal contact Hi Alan's email address should read: alan.walker@s054.aone.net.au As we all know a single letter out and the mail won't get through. Dwight ------- Dwight Walker Webmaster and Editor Australian Society of Indexers +61-2-91304206 (h) +61-2-94393750 (w) W-F, fax +61-2-94383729 (w) URL: http://www.zeta.org.au/~aussi ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 08:17:58 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Trish Wittenstein Subject: Friday Hi, Mary, I apologize for dropping out of sight. Right after we last spoke I got a call from my mother's caregiver and she has developed some kind of infection that has spread and she's now in the hospital. To complicate matters, I must find a *real* nursing home for her as she's weak and they can't care for someone who is bedridden. The hospital is pressuring me to do this today! To further complicate things, the So. African book is so dense I'm averaging 12 entries a page and it's slow going. I may have to call H. to ask for an extension, which is something I've never done and absolutely am revolted at the thought. I'm trying to see it positively and realize emergencies arise, OTOH, he may never hire me again! (See how positive I'm being!) OK, I just wanted to let you know what's up. I'll check in as soon as things calm down. Trish ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 09:23:19 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Al Stewart Subject: Re: Pricing At 01:07 AM 7/18/97 -0400, you wrote: >He wants to pay by the page - what in the world do I charge? >Does $1.50 per page sound right? I'd be interested in answers to that one also. Have a similar situation. Al --------------------------------------------- Al Stewart -- stewarta@kootenay.awinc.com -- stewarta@impact.ca Stewart Information Services -- Helping YOU Communicate ---- Text Conversion - Scanning/OCR - DTP WP Format Conversion - Typing Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Robin Hilp Subject: webring for technical communicators I posted this on techwr-l and the responses I got have all been very positive. So I'm also posting it here and on winhlp-l and to my local chapter of the STC. That's all the lists I'm on. If this webring is of interest to people on other lists, someone else will have to mention it there. Folx, I hope this doesn't count as spam. I'm not selling anything; it's a free thing and doesn't (supposedly) get you on any email lists. I've started a webring for technical communicators. From the Webring Home page (http://www.webring.org): "[A webring] allows web sites with similar interest to form "rings" of sites, allowing netizens a fast and efficient way to find content and a great way for sites to build traffic and gain exposure." If you surf much you've probably seen a webring. It appears as a block or table on someone's page with buttons for "next site" "random site" etc. Any web surfer can travel through a community of one to umpty-hundred linked sites by finding the webring block on each site and clicking one of those buttons. Anyway, if you're interested, the Technical Communication Home page is at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4537/twring.html. To join the ring, you would put some HTML code (a table of links) on your page and submit a form registering your url (of the page with the new table) at the webring "central" site. Technical Communication Ring membership is open to any personal, professional, or commercial site containing something specifically relevant to technical communication. Oh, and member sites must be "G-rated". I found out a couple days ago, there's also a way to do paid banner ads in the webring system, but I don't know how it works. If you're a commercial site and interested in that sort of thing, you can look it up on the webring.org site. And if this is spam in your opinion, I'm really sorry and you can flame me if it eases your annoyance. Like I said, I don't get anything out of maintaining a webring except that I think webrings are a neat concept. Mine isn't a commercial site, so increased traffic, although cool and definitely ego-boosting, doesn't make any "material" difference to me. Robin Hilp rolybear@usa.net ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:57:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "(Pamela Venneman)" Subject: Re: marketing studies I tried to access www.mcp.com/cybertrends97 for the publishing marketing studies only to find you need a password. P. Venneman Lighthouse Indexing Services ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 14:39:53 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Erika Millen Subject: Re[2]: marketing studies << I tried to access www.mcp.com/cybertrends97 for the publishing marketing studies only to find you need a password.>> Oh, sorry! I accessed it from work, so I didn't realize it was password-protected to outside users. I've been trying to find whether this study is confidential or if it's public domain info... I guess now I know. Again, sorry! Erika ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 21:41:22 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: INDEX-L Digest - 11 Jul 1997 to 12 Jul 1997 > > Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 01:34:38 -0400 > From: Christine Shuttleworth > Subject: Re: Deadlines > > Carol Roberts writes: > > . > > My experience has been the same. If necessary I try to make it clear that= > I > don't like to have to refuse a job, but I would rather refuse it than ris= > k > not meeting the deadline, or do a rushed job which would not do justice t= > o > the book. If it's someone I haven't worked for before, I offer to send th= > em > my resume (or CV as we say here) for future reference. This offer is > usually gratefully accepted. (I don't do this if the work they have to > offer sounds totally boring, but people just starting out may not want to= > > be that fussy.) When the editor starts off by saying, "are you available= > > to do an index?" I usually try not to commit myself one way or the other > before I know more about the schedule, the kind of book, number of pages,= > > etc. Then if I don't like the sound of it, I can say I don't really think= > I > can fit it in, or it's not my sort of subject and they would be better > advised to get a specialist, etc. (sorry about all the etcs.) > > I too find that if the editor is told you are busy for the next ? weeks, > she or he will assume that you must be good, or you wouldn't be getting t= > he > work, so ultimately it works in your favour and they do try you again nex= > t > time. Of course, they would probably give up and try someone else first i= > f > you were unavailable several times in a row. > > In the interests of indexerly solidarity, when refusing a job I sometimes= > > ask if they know someone else they can contact, or would they like me to > recommend someone? Of course, this way you run the risk that they will go= > > to the other person in future rather than you, but generally I think this= > > is a positive thing to do, and likely to work in your favour as well as > giving work to a colleague who may need it; it could well increase the > chance of the index being done as proficiently as you would like to have > done it yourself, and in that case it benefits the cause of raising and > maintaining high standards of indexing. > > Christine > > *************************************************************************= > * > Christine Shuttleworth - Indexing and Editorial Services > Flat 1, 25 St Stephen's Avenue, London W12 8JB > Tel/Fax (+44 181) 749 8797 > email ChristineShuttleworth@compuserve.com > or 106234.1745@compuserve.com > *************************************************************************= > * > ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 22:42:40 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "D. Shaw" Subject: INDEX-L re: UPS I've had a problem or two with UPS. I live in a community in forest, and they rarely find my house. A couple of years ago, they left a package for me on my neighbor's porch. Normally, this would not be a problem, but my neighbors were in Denmark for eight weeks and their son had come by and taken it inside before I knew to rummage around there. Meanwhile, UPS swore up and down that it had been delivered to my house; I don't know why they delivered it sans signature. I had to get it replaced and I didn't find out what had really happened until my neighbors came home and found it in their pile of mail. To top it all, it was a surprise present that I didn't know was en route. My friend waited for me to say something, until he finally broke down and asked me. (But this was after UPS had told him erroneously that I had received it.) Just this past Monday, someone sent me a package via UPS from D.C., which is a 5-hour drive. Due to delivery problems with UPS in the past, I'd asked the sender to mark it "call for pick-up," with my phone number. On the way home from the grocery store this afternoon, I stopped by the UPS depot (it's three miles away) on impulse. They had had it for two days, boldly marked with my phone number, and NEVER called--and I have voice mail, so I get messages even when I'm online. On the other hand, we've had the same postal carrier on our rural route for more than 20 years. I'd have asked that this week's delivery be mailed, except that it was a video tape and I didn't want it sitting even five minutes in the metal mailbox in 98oF heat. I've used Greyhound, too, with good results--including picking up a package on Sunday morning. Cheers, Deborah shawd@mindspring.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 20:18:32 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Pam Rider Subject: Re: INDEX-L re: UPS As helpful as sharing information can be, I find it dangerous to generalize about such things as postal delivery services. In years of mailing and receiving manuscripts, I am convinced that services vary greatly by local offices and substations. I always check on which is the best delivery means for someone I am mailing to. I currently have the extraordinary good luck to have execellent US Postal service, UPS, and FedEx service. In more than a year at my present address--service from all and each has done nothing but get better. The only general rule I tend to follow is not to mail through university mail systems. I realize there are likely superior services, but I have been burned so many times, that I request academics receive materials at their homes. Pam Rider Trying to walk cheerfully on the Earth prider@powergrid.electriciti.com prider@tsktsk.com ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 06:35:03 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: Considering a move to New Hampshire Hi Everyone: I've been researching the possibility of moving to New Hampshire from Massachusetts and wondered if anyone who is on this list & who lives in New Hampshire could write me off line with some info? I'm trying to document that it actually is less expensive living in NH than in "Taxachusetts". Also, it appears as though NH is more friendly to business in general than Massachusetts. It also looks as though the economy in southern NH is doing really well, unlike a few years ago. Would anyone who lives in NH (and has a homeased business) mind taking a few minutes to write me off list? Thanks, in advance. Hope everyone has a pleasant and productive weekend... Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 06:47:41 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "Laura M. Gottlieb" Subject: Re: pricing 19 July 1997 For the two people who are considering doing proofreading, letter-writing, and other assorted tasks for a professor, I would hesitate to work *by the page* on projects as indefinite as described and would insist on an hourly wage. When the nature of the work is as unclear as you describe, it seems to me that you need to ensure, first of all, that you will be paid a rate that you're comfortable with--a rate that means that you won't be or feel exploited. Remember that this professor is not asking you for a favor but hiring you for a service. It's quite businesslike and professional to have a definite idea of what your time is worth and to ask to be compensated fairly for it. Hope this helps! --Laura Moss Gottlieb, Freelance Indexer ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 10:39:14 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: Scheduling indexing work I keep meaning to put my scheduling on the computer, but I never get to it and my paper method seems to work all right. I'm usually working four or five jobs at a time and am booked several months in advance, so like you I have a lot to keep track of. Here's what I do: I have a small bulletin board that lives along the edge of my filing cabinet. I pick up the whole thing and put it on my desk when I need to look at it. On it I have a small card for each job, arranged in order of due date. The card looks like this: Publisher approximate number of pages Title of book price per page Dates, including flow date Contact name Date to mail, circled. I find that it's those mail dates that really determines my schedule. So I also put them on my monthly calendar (in my Dayrunner-type notebook), also circled. When I get really busy or overwhelmed I start a "planning" computer file (in Wordperfect) in which I record the total number of pages in each book, how many pages per hour I'm indexing, how many pages per day I should do, and any other details that will make me feel in control! I used to use a giant wipe-off calendar, one month per row, and draw a line in a different color for each index. That did help me to see what I was doing--except that sometimes pages flow to me for six weeks and I don't really index the book till the last two weeks (because I work very fast and for textbooks I'd rather do it all at once so I don't forget what I'm doing). So the lines didn't always portray my workload accurately. I stopped doing that when I reorganized my office and couldn't reach the chart as easily, but I may start it again on a smaller scale. Now, if I could only stop taking on so many jobs....which is my REAL scheduling problem!!!! Do Mi ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 08:49:30 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Trish Wittenstein Subject: Apology Hi, everyone, My turn to apologize for a personal note mistakenly addressed to the list. Thanks for the private messages alerting me and saying not to worry. Trish Wittenstein ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 12:13:27 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: JPerlman@AOL.COM Subject: Re: webring for technical communicators Robin, The info re webrings wasn't spam at all ... to me. Thanks for posting it! Janet Perlman Southwest Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 10:56:06 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: Scheduling Hope that I can jump in on this thread, even though I'm not yet scheduling indexing projects. However, as an Information Broker, I've been getting a variety of other types of work, i.e., research, cataloging, proofreading, and, yes, hopefully, sometime some indexing (especially if that contract I recently wrote ever gets approved!) While I'm not scheduling indexing projects, yet, I do have to meet deadlines for each of these other types of projects. I used to use one of those wipe-off calendars and keep it on my wall. I'd use a different color marker for each project, whether it was a professional job, an AMC trip, church, or just friends. The only problem with that was that the wall calendar wasn't with me when I was scheduling things away from home and I'd have to write things down twice. Lately, I've been using a Franklin Quest calendar, which includes a monthly calendar at a glance as well as a daily calendar. When I'm scheduling things in, I write things in both calendars. That way, I know what deadlines I have to meet for each project on a monthly basis. And can fill in my daily schedule a week or two in advance (i.e., where I have to be when). The calendar also provides a place to keep track of things to do on a daily basis, monthly expenses, etc. The other thing I try to do is make a list each nite before I go to bed of the things I have to do the next day. This helps to jog my memory and helps me to sleep better at nite, knowing that I've written down all the things that need to get done the following day. It also helps me to pull together anything I might need to take with me to do the next day, to mail, xerox, call, etc. I've been looking for a calendar like the Franklin Quest for a long time, and this one finally seems to meet my scheduling needs. I haven't had to use it to schedule indexing projects yet, but the calendar is my bible in terms of helping me remember where I have to be a on a specific day each week, as well as what projects and deadlines I need to meet.... What other calendars do people use? As usual, I'm learning a lot.... Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (BTW, I won't get a commission on plugging Franklin Quest calendars...) ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 13:44:39 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Caroline Parks Subject: New Mexico ASI Group Fall Indexing Conference In-Reply-To: <199707191643.KAA29379@Rt66.com> ********************************************* **** Indexing Up, Up, and Away! **** ********************************* The New Mexico Group of the American Society of Indexers will hold its first annual Fall Indexing Conference on Friday and Saturday, October 3rd and 4th, 1997. October 4th is also the first day of the Albuquerque International Balloon Fiesta, so if you haven't experienced the sight of 700 hot-air balloons flying at dawn, now is the time! SCHEDULE: The conference will kick off late Friday afternoon with a tour of Access Innovations, an Albuquerque company specializing in converting printed materials to online formats such as HTML, SGML, CD-ROM, document management systems, and customized databases. Access Innovations (http://www.accessinn.com) has pioneered a specialized indexing software package, with vocabularies that are customized and fine-tuned for each client. The hour-long tour will be followed Friday evening by a wine-and-cheese reception for the conference speakers and attendees. Saturday's conference activities will feature two workshops, and lunch will be provided. "Embedded Indexing" The morning session will be presented by Jan C. Wright, of Wright Information Indexing Services in Seattle. This workshop will focus on planning and resolving issues for embedded indexing, using MS Word as an example application. Hands-on activities will be included, so bring a laptop if you have one (a limited number of computers will be available as well). Jan, in business as a freelance indexer since 1991, has built indexes in Word, PageMaker, and several arcane tools for both print and online materials. Lunch will be served, and will include a short discussion on the Wilson Award by Janet Perlman, who was an alternate judge this year. "The Business Of Being In Business" In the afternoon session Janet Perlman, of Southwest Indexing in Phoenix, will focus on such topics as marketing your business, financial record keeping, managing your time, and handling contracts and estimates. Janet, who is on the American Society of Indexers' National Executive Committee, helped found the Arizona chapter of ASI, and just completed her term of office as its first president. Janet has been a technical and scientific indexer for more than 20 years. COST: The cost of the conference, which includes lunch on Saturday, will be $45.00 for registrations postmarked by September 1st, and $50.00 thereafter. Of course, non-ASI members are welcome. Please note that this cost is for Saturday's events only; the tour of Access Innovations and the Friday evening reception are complementary. Also, we regret that we cannot accept credit cards, and we'll need to have your registration on paper, rather than by email. Thanks! BALLOON FIESTA: If you've ever thought about coming to Albuquerque for the Balloon Fiesta (upwards of 700 balloons in the sky at once!) , this is your chance to make it a business trip. But MAKE YOUR PLANS SOON if you'll need to stay in a local hotel, as rooms fill up *very* early for that week. Plan to stay through Sunday morning to enjoy the mass ascension at dawn (check out the balloon fiesta on the web at http://www.aibf.com). Please see below for phone numbers of some local motels, as well as the web address for the NM Central Reservations service. REGISTRATION: For more information, contact Caroline Parks, caroline@rt66.com, or 505-286-2738 (between 9:00 am and 7:00 pm MST, please). Or fill out the form below and send it with a check for the full amount to Caroline Parks, 8 Calle Dorada, Tijeras, NM 87059. Make checks payable to Linda Nelson / ASI. LODGING: *** For lodging information in Albuquerque: *** New Mexico Central Reservations, 800-466-7829 or http://www.nmtravel.com Albuquerque B & B Association Reservations, 800-916-3322 B & B Southwest Reservations, 800-762-9704 Days Inn Motels 800-325-2525 Super 8 Motels, 800-800-8000 (the Bernalillo Super 8 Motel, 505-867-0766, has lots of smoking rooms and a *few* non-smoking rooms open for that weekend, as of 6/2. It's located about 20 miles north of town, but may be a good last-ditch option.) REGISTRATION FORM: ======================================================= Please print out and mail to: Caroline Parks 8 Calle Dorada Tijeras, NM 87059 Name ______________________________________________ Address _____________________________________________ _____________________________________________ Telephone ______________________ Fax _____________________ Email ____________________________________ Vegetarian or other special dietary considerations? _________________________________________________________________ Can you bring a laptop? ______________________________ Mac or PC? _________________________________ Do you have Word _________ or Pagemaker ___________ installed on it? Will you be planning to attend the tour of Access Innovations on Friday afternoon? _______________ ======================================================= ____________________________ Caroline Parks -- Indexcellence Indexing and Editorial Services Tijeras, NM 505-286-2738 caroline@rt66.com ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 15:58:55 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: ROBJRICH@AOL.COM Subject: Proofreaders' List Hi, all - I have been asked by a colleague if anybody on Index-L knows of a proofreaders (not editors) discussion group or list. Thanks, Bob ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 16:47:50 -0500 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carol Roberts Subject: Re: wrong attribution In-Reply-To: <199707190409.XAA22626@mixcom.mixcom.com> I didn't write any of that. Not that I disagree with it. But please folks, be careful who you attribute what to. >> >> Date: Sat, 12 Jul 1997 01:34:38 -0400 >> From: Christine Shuttleworth >> Subject: Re: Deadlines >> >> Carol Roberts writes: >> >> . >> >> My experience has been the same. If necessary I try to make it clear >that= >> I >> don't like to have to refuse a job, but I would rather refuse it than >ris= >> k >> not meeting the deadline, or do a rushed job which would not do justice BTW, I wonder why this was reposted at all. There doesn't seem to be anything added to it. Cheers, Carol Roberts, indexer and copy editor | I'm not into working out. My Carol.Roberts@mixcom.com | philosophy: No pain, no pain. Milwaukee, WI | -- Carol Leifer http://www.mixweb.com/Roberts.Indexing ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 13:11:17 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DStaub11@AOL.COM Subject: Re: INDEX-L re: UPS I use Federal Express, and have never had a single problem with them. Airborne has also been fine. I haven't had problems with UPS, but I always have my express service pick up packages, and it's much cheaper with Fed Ex unless you're shipping something every day--UPS charges by the week instead of the pickup. On the other hand, I've had recurring problems with the US Post Office. Their "express service" often takes up to a week; they can't guarantee any particular delivery date (even when they say they can). I tell my clients strongly not to use them for mailing page proofs to me. Do Mi Stauber ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 12:42:10 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "P. Buell" Subject: Re: INDEX-L re: UPS In-Reply-To: <199707201855.LAA02569@mx2.u.washington.edu> The problem I had with the Postal Service was not just slow delivery but outright loss of mail, lots of it, including one shipment going out that I thought had gone out but which my son found wet in the street a week later. This is not the first instance of this kind of thing and we know it is the postman since we have observed him dropping letters and even packages on a fairly regular basis. Then there are the things mailed at the postoffice that just disappear and the numerous misdeliveries. Almost always this is first class mail. Around here if you don't want UPS to leave something you just put up a sign, as my neighbor does regularly. Since I live in a city they find the house fine, although it is not numbered. We have had, by the way, the same UPS delivery men and women for years. In the case of Airbourn express I am even on a gossip basis with the delivery lady since we have done so much business over the years. There is much to be said for personally knowing the people you do business with. It All helps. Paul D. Buell ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 15:51:37 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Christine Shuttleworth Subject: Re: wrong attribution Carol Roberts quoted a quote misattributed to her and added: < I wonder why this was reposted at all. There doesn't seem to be anything added to it. I was puzzled about this as well. The quote apparently attributed to Caro= l was snipped from a message of mine, which was in reply to one of hers. T= he message to which Carol refers made it look as though she had said what I said. And no, there didn't seem to be any comment added. I don't know wha= t went wrong here, but maybe we should just forget about it. Christine *************************************************************************= * Christine Shuttleworth - Indexing and Editorial Services Flat 1, 25 St Stephen's Avenue, London W12 8JB Tel/Fax (+44 181) 749 8797 email ChristineShuttleworth@compuserve.com or 106234.1745@compuserve.com *************************************************************************= * ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 20:58:30 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: DTDIGGS@AOL.COM Subject: UPS/FED X I'm a die-hard FedX fan. First, as others have noted, if you want reliability, forget the post office. The only packages I've ever had lost were sent through the U.S. postal service. And they don't even guarantee a 2-day delivery using their "2-day" service. UPS is better, but since I've yet to receive a UPS package that I was required to sign for, I'm never sure where or when they're dropped off. For about six weeks, my UPS delivery guy had my address confused with my next-door neighbor's (both are clearly marked); every couple of days my neighbor would trot over with my boxes. I would hate to think that packages I'm sending are being treated the same way. And packages sent by UPS ground service often take a looooong time to reach their destination. As for FedX being more expensive, I haven't done a systematic study, but I'm not convinced this is the case, at least not for 2-day service. Several clients have said: "We were going to tell you to use UPS since it is cheaper, but having received your bill with the shipping charges, we realize FedX does not cost more." I do, however, usually take my packages to a drop-off box or location, which reduces the cost. Finally, I don't know if this is still the case, but when I first started by business ten or so years ago, UPS would not open an account for me, saying I had to guarantee a pick-up every day. FedX immediately gave me an account, which means that they will deliver to my door--free--all kinds of neat self-seal shipping boxes and envelopes. (Does UPS even have shipping boxes? I admit this is a big plus for me, since I hate messing with tape, etc.) And they will also send, again free, their nifty software that can be used to print out mailing invoices and maintain clients' addresses, as well as track the progress of your shipment. The software simply connects, automatically via modem, to the FedX main office and downloads each stop your package has made: when dropped off, when picked up from office, when loaded onto the plane, when taken off the plane, etc., etc., until you get to see who signed for the package -- nifty! Teddy DIGGS EDITORIAL SERVICES ========================================================================= Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 19:33:09 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: Fed Ex Hi Everyone: My package went Fed Ex Friday afternoon for a Monday morning arrival. Thanks for your thoughtful comments. I learned a lot. Hopefully, the client will learn a lot from the contents of the package! Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (Now....if only you could organize my social life for me....) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:37:06 +1000 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Jonathan Jermey Subject: Re: Wrong attribution My apologies to both Carol and Christine for the post which said "Carol Roberts writes" and went on to repeat part of one of Christine's posts. I sent this inadvertently when printing a portion of Christine's reply to Carol's post from an Index-L digest. Sorry, Glenda Browne. ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 09:03:00 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sharon Wright Subject: INDEX-L re: UPS -Reply I had similar problems with UPS. I live in a second floor apartment with a balcony that overlooks the parking lot. Because of the landscaping, the balcony is a good 15-20 feet up from the sidewalk. I came home from work one day about a year ago and found a UPS package on my balcony! I thought that was odd, but didn't think much about it until the next week, when I found another one on the balcony in the middle of one of my plants, which, needless to say, was broken to pieces. I called UPS and demanded an explanation. They calmly explained that the driver had seen that I wasn't home, and so had THROWN the package onto my balcony from the sidewalk! I asked them if it had occurred to them either that A) whatever was in the package might be breakable or B) that I might have something breakable on my balcony! Aparently it hadn't. I told them about the broken plant, and said that if it happened again I was holding them liable for any damage that might occur to the package or its contents, anything on the balcony or the sliding glass door adjoining it. They agreed to tell their driver not to do that anymore. In case you're wondering, it's a garden style apartment complex and the outdoor stairs and landings are sheltered, so he could have just left the package outside of my door. I'm just glad my cat wasn't napping out there at the time! :-) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:29:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: Re: UPS/FED X In a message dated 97-07-20 21:00:13 EDT, Teddy wrote: > I'm a die-hard FedX fan. So am I!!!! > > > UPS is better, but since I've yet to receive a UPS package that I was > required to sign for, I'm never sure where or when they're dropped off. For > about six weeks, my UPS delivery guy had my address confused with my > next-door neighbor's (both are clearly marked); every couple of days my > neighbor would trot over with my boxes. I would hate to think that packages > I'm sending are being treated the same way. And packages sent by UPS ground > service often take a looooong time to reach their destination. I've never used UPS for business and don't dare to unless a client ships a package to me. I've never signed for a UPS package because their delivery personnel seemed to be genetically unable to deliver them to my door, even when I was home. When I was living in one apartment complex, the delivery man would walk to my very door and stick a yellow note in it saying that I had a package that he left at the office of the complex!!!! In another apartment complex, the delivery man never even bothered to knock on my door or leave a note. He simply left $800 worth of RAM (back when RAM was expensive) in the complex office!!!! I've heard horror stories from others about packages being left with neighbors who refused to own up to having received them (keeping the merchandise) and UPS, in turn, being very difficult about reimbursing the person who was supposed to receive the package. (This was many years ago, to give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps they've improved.) > > > Finally, I don't know if this is still the case, but when I first started by > business ten or so years ago, UPS would not open an account for me, saying I > had to guarantee a pick-up every day. FedX immediately gave me an account, > which means that they will deliver to my door--free--all kinds of neat > self-seal shipping boxes and envelopes. Not only that, but with a Fedex account, you receive shipping labels with your name, address, phone and account numbers already filled in. As someone who haaaates to fill out forms, this is a big plus for me. Airborne does the same, but will cancel your account if you don't use it for a few months. >And > they will also send, again free, their nifty software that can be used to > print out mailing invoices and maintain clients' addresses, as well as track > the progress of your shipment. The software simply connects, automatically > via modem, to the FedX main office and downloads each stop your package has > made: when dropped off, when picked up from office, when loaded onto the > plane, when taken off the plane, etc., etc., until you get to see who signed > for the package -- nifty! That does sound nifty! I opened my Fedex account before they were supplying the software, however, you can do this online from their Web site (according to a book I indexed) if you don't have it. Lastly, they have cool commercials. ;-D Lynn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 11:26:30 -0700 Reply-To: greenhou@erols.com Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "S. Greenhouse" Subject: Re: Shippers I have to jump in here and defend UPS. I live in a small community outside of Annapolis. I have never had a problem with UPS. Their regular drivers are friendly and efficient. I have to sign for my packages, and the drivers make sure I do. The packages have been left with neighbors but the driver leaves a note telling me so. My regular route man even recognizes me at the local shopping center or driving along the community streets, and says hello or waves. The FedEx personell have been fine, except for the gypsy drivers they hire in unmarked vans. I'm not very secure about handing over a package to a guy in an unmarked van who isn't even wearing a FedEx shirt. Their regular drivers are great, and there are lots of perks (pick-ups, and delivery of mailing supplies). Airborne, on the other hands, has questionable service. While I was temping this summer (at a friend's indexing office) the Airborne driver forgot where the office was and didn't deliver a package for several days (even though I saw him walk right past the office in the mornings). I think the best service should be determined by the receiver (I wouldn't mind a package from UPS, but I always send stuff via FedEx because they pick it up at the house). Shelley Greenhouse greenhou@erols.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 08:50:37 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Al Stewart Subject: Re: UPS/FED X Well, even the marvelous FEDEX is populated by those error prone of all creatures -- humans. They managed to lose an important package of mine for 5 days -- no one knew where it was, until it finally showed up. The post office has good days and bad days. UPS I avoid whenever possible -- they've messed up pretty effectivley at times and billed me for packages for some company 600 miles away whose name had not even the slightest resemblance or connection to myself. Besides they had ridiculous office hours (for my purposes - open early and late but not in the middle of the day.) So far the only one I haven't got any complaints against is Airborne but their day will probably come also. I hear rumor they also use humans. Anyway for those who want the website for tracking FedEx shipments, this is what I have on that. http://www.fedex.com/track_it.html Al ----------------------------------------- "Stewart Information Services" Al Stewart -- stewarta@kootenay.awinc.com ----------------------------------------- ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 11:20:09 -0600 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: rossa Subject: Re: FedEx software The free FedEx software can be found at: http://www.fedex.com/get_fedex_ship.html They have PC and Mac versions. Happy shipping, Mike Rossa ************************************* Michael C. Rossa =8B=8B=8B Allied Editorial indexing, proofreading, & typesetting ************************************* ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:32:48 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Helen Schinske Subject: Proofreading prices In a message dated 97-07-20 01:09:57 EDT, Laura Gottlieb writes >For the two people who are considering doing proofreading, letter-writing, >and other assorted tasks for a professor, I would hesitate to work *by the >page* on projects as indefinite as described and would insist on an hourly >wage. If anybody missed it, I will be glad to forward Rica Night's screed on proofreading that came through a few days ago (she asks folks not to copy without (a) asking and (b) crediting her). But if you know your likely speed, you can convert a desired hourly wage to a per-250 words (or 500, or whatever) rate, thus getting around the problem of proofing pages with larger than average amounts of text for the same per-page fee. Other miscellaneous secretarial tasks can expand indefinitely (as we all know), so a real per-hour is probably best. Mark My Words suggests that reliable proofreading speeds are usually from about 2000-4000 words per minute, hardly anyone being able to do more than 4000 without decreasing accuracy. Rica mentioned a Canadian editing firm -- I looked up their web page and discovered their MINIMUM proofing fee was two cents (Canadian, natch) per word, which would be $5 Canadian per MS page of 250 words (they also had a job minimum of $35, I think). I believe that works out to more than many indexers get per word (I remember about a penny per word [U.S.] coming up as a reasonable guesstimate for indexing). Helen Schinske HSchinske@aol.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 09:51:58 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: "P. Buell" Subject: Re: UPS/FED X In-Reply-To: <199707211600.JAA24524@mx2.u.washington.edu> UPS billings: that does seem to be a weak point. They have tried to collect payments already made twice and I have been contacted by a collection agency to recover the debts of a company that wasn't even in the same city. I had to talk for 20 minutes to convince the agency of this. A pain. Paul D. Buell ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 14:06:21 -0400 Reply-To: yoshi66@ibm.net Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Kathleen Yukishige Subject: Re: UPS/FED-EX Since so many indexers seem to be raking UPS over the proverbial coals, would it be of any value to let the company itself know what a group of professionals who depend on couriers think of their service? My personal horror story regarding UPS involves my graduate school roommate who sent herself a package containing a couple of saucepans and a frying pan. When the package arrived at our apartment in due time, stained with unmistakable truck tire treads and only about a third as large as when she sent it, UPS's verdict was "poorly packed" and we had to go shopping. Would I trust something I really value to them at this point? Uh-uh. Kathleen Yukishige Wildefire@AOL.COM wrote: > > In a message dated 97-07-20 21:00:13 EDT, Teddy wrote: > > > I'm a die-hard FedX fan. > > So am I!!!! > > > > > > > UPS is better, but since I've yet to receive a UPS package that I was > > required to sign for, I'm never sure where or when they're dropped off. > For > > about six weeks, my UPS delivery guy had my address confused with my > > next-door neighbor's (both are clearly marked); every couple of days my > > neighbor would trot over with my boxes. I would hate to think that > packages > > I'm sending are being treated the same way. And packages sent by UPS > ground > > service often take a looooong time to reach their destination. > > I've never used UPS for business and don't dare to unless a client ships a > package to me. I've never signed for a UPS package because their delivery > personnel seemed to be genetically unable to deliver them to my door, even > when I was home. When I was living in one apartment complex, the delivery man > would walk to my very door and stick a yellow note in it saying that I had a > package that he left at the office of the complex!!!! In another apartment > complex, the delivery man never even bothered to knock on my door or leave a > note. He simply left $800 worth of RAM (back when RAM was expensive) in the > complex office!!!! I've heard horror stories from others about packages being > left with neighbors who refused to own up to having received them (keeping > the merchandise) and UPS, in turn, being very difficult about reimbursing the > person who was supposed to receive the package. (This was many years ago, to > give them the benefit of the doubt. Perhaps they've improved.) > > > > > > > Finally, I don't know if this is still the case, but when I first started > by > > business ten or so years ago, UPS would not open an account for me, saying > I > > had to guarantee a pick-up every day. FedX immediately gave me an account, > > which means that they will deliver to my door--free--all kinds of neat > > self-seal shipping boxes and envelopes. > > Not only that, but with a Fedex account, you receive shipping labels with > your name, address, phone and account numbers already filled in. As someone > who haaaates to fill out forms, this is a big plus for me. Airborne does the > same, but will cancel your account if you don't use it for a few months. > > > >And > > they will also send, again free, their nifty software that can be used to > > print out mailing invoices and maintain clients' addresses, as well as > track > > the progress of your shipment. The software simply connects, automatically > > via modem, to the FedX main office and downloads each stop your package > has > > made: when dropped off, when picked up from office, when loaded onto the > > plane, when taken off the plane, etc., etc., until you get to see who > signed > > for the package -- nifty! > > That does sound nifty! I opened my Fedex account before they were supplying > the software, however, you can do this online from their Web site (according > to a book I indexed) if you don't have it. the URL from a towering stack of page proofs--I don't even remember the name > of the book> Lastly, they have cool commercials. ;-D > > Lynn ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 14:13:03 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Wildefire@AOL.COM Subject: HUMOR: but related to a recent thread I thought the following would be an eye-opener on this Monday morning. ;-D Lynn Moncrief TECHindex & Docs Technical and Scientific Indexing A young lawyer dies and is sent to heaven. (Ha Ha) Upon his arrival, he meets St. Peter at the Gate. St. Peter asks the lawyer his name and looks up his entry in the Great Big Book. St. Peter then looks at the lawyer and says, "You look very good for being 138 years old." Astonished, the lawyer replies, "There must be some mistake, I am only 32." St. Peter responds, "Not according to your billable hours." ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 12:00:52 PDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Julie Maitlund Subject: No messages coming I apologize for having to take up space on the listserve. But like some others in the recent past have posted, I, too, am suddenly not receiving any email from the list. The last messages I received were from July 15th. I have spent most of this day trying to contact a person at binghamton and apparently all I am getting is an automated response to preset commands. Can someone please help me get back on the list? Contact me directly at my email address. TIA Julie Maitlund jmaitlund@hotmail.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 10:21:28 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Shirley K Warkentin Subject: Re: UPS/FED X >I'm a die-hard FedX fan. Count me in on that vote. The one time FedEx was late (hour and a half) , they admitted it was their mistake and said they would reimburse the cost. ( I let the publisher know, since they paid for delivery.) > >Finally, I don't know if this is still the case, but when I first started by >business ten or so years ago, UPS would not open an account for me, >saying I had to guarantee a pick-up every day UPS has changed on this. I sent one package UPS because the publisher enclosed a return envelope. Not long after that UPS called me and asked if I wanted an account number and a get-started package of envelopes (all at no cost to me.) I said ok, and I now not only have an account number and pre-printed forms, but I also have stacks of envelopes (two sizes each of one- and two-day delivery envelopes; 25-50 of each). Enough for years. Thanks for the FedEx software information. I think I will try to open an account with them. The publisher I work for most gave me their account number, which I use on return shipments. The driver gives me all the envelopes, boxes, and forms I need. This saves me billing hassles, but I may need my own account in the future. I agree that the best service probably depends on the region. I receive packages quite regularly via ground UPS for our AWANA (kids) Club and haven't had any problems. OTH I can't quite count on their one-day service. Shirley Warkentin Cornerstone Indexing indexer@juno.com ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 18:01:59 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Richard Evans Subject: Re: UPS/FED X FWIW, I recently had a FedEx package clearly marked Saturday Delivery delivered the following Monday with no explanation. Even as I write this, I am waiting for a package that was sent Friday for Saturday delivery and is currently floating around Georgia somewhere. Dick ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 15:30:44 PDT Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Monica Smersh Subject: new indexer seeking advice Hello, I am a recently established indexer and I have subscribed to index-l hoping to find this to be a resource for information and advice from experienced indexers. About 1 month ago I indexed a small book for a New York publisher. This was my first and so far only job and I am anxious to get more work. Over the last 2 months I have sent query letters to over 300 publishers nationwide offering my services. As is to be expected I have received several (mayby 25) "thanks for your letter, we will kep your resume on file" responses, meaning I'll never hear from them again but they are at least being polite by acknowledging my existence. I realize now that I may have been unrealistic about my expectations regarding having job offers flowing into my office but I am a true optimist and I really believe that there must be work out there somewhere. What I am asking my fellow indexers who have been in the field for awhile is if any of you wonderful people have any advice regarding hpw to get indexing assignments. I realize I might be asking the unaskable, but I would greatly appreciate any advice, names, phone numbers or other information that anyone might be willing to pass on. thanks for "listening". You can E-mail me personally at MSMERSH@BRIGADOON.COM ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 15:45:23 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Carolyn Weaver Subject: Re: new indexer seeking advice In-Reply-To: <199707212231.PAA28885@mx4.u.washington.edu> My advice: Be patient. It takes TIME to build up a clientele. It took six months after I sent out my initial batch of letters to get the first job out of that batch; and it took at least three more years before I was getting enough steady work to keep me really busy (as a moonlighter). So to quote somebody famous (can't remember who): "Don't give up your day job!" And oh, yes: TWO YEARS after that original mailing, I was contacted by somebody in the original batch and have since done 3 indexes for that publisher. So ya never know... Carolyn Weaver Bellevue, WA. On Mon, 21 Jul 1997, Monica Smersh wrote: What I am > asking my fellow indexers who have been in the field for awhile is if > any of you wonderful people have any advice regarding hpw to get > indexing assignments. > > thanks for "listening". You can E-mail me personally at > MSMERSH@BRIGADOON.COM > ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 18:40:51 -0300 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Nancy Anderman Guenther Subject: Re: new indexer seeking advice Monica Smersh wrote: > As is to be expected I have received several (mayby 25) > "thanks for your letter, we will kep your resume on file" responses, > meaning I'll never hear from them again but they are at least being > polite by acknowledging my existence. I'm sure many have suggestions but one of the major ones is patience. I used to believe that placing my resume "on file" meant that large circular file we all know. I have been indexing since 1983 & have been amazed at the number of times through the years that publishers truly did call me years after I sent a letter. I've learned to place a date on any mailing inserts I send so that I can determine from the caller how recent their information is. Nancy Guenther nanguent@chesco.com http://www.chesco.com/~nanguent ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 17:27:45 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Indexing Proposal (Yet Another!) I just had an unexpected phone call to index a catalog for one of the lcoal colleges in this area. Besides getting samples from the school, is there anything else that I should ask for, before I write the proposal? What is a reasonable rate for something like this? I have 4 pages that appear to equal about 1/4 picture and 3/4 text in 2 columns. This year's catalog is around 120 pages and the previous index has approximately 560 entries. Should I estimate based on last year's index or ask for more sample pages from this year's catalog before deciding on a rate? Is it appropriate to ask to see a sample of last year's index as I"m writing the proposal? Sorry about all the questions, but I decided that tapping into this list would help me write a better proposal. I'd like to have the proposal finished by Thursday, if possible. If I write enough of these proposals, I'll actually get an indexing job....right? Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Service Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net ========================================================================= Date: Sun, 20 Jul 1997 17:16:10 -0700 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Willa MacAllen Organization: MacAllen's Information Service Subject: Re: Fed Ex/UPS The other issue, besides geographic location is convenience. When I mailed my package on Friday (yes, it was a day late, but the pakage made it on time this morning....) I discovered that Kinko's in Harvard Square has a Fed Ex station, which I was able to use after putting the package in a nice neat bundle for presentation! (Nothing like one-stop shopping!) I was in Portsmouth, NH yesterday with friends (I seem to gravitate there frequently) and noticed that both UPS and Fed Ex had units at the local Chamber of Commerce, but that the last pick up there was at 5:30 pm weekdays. I think the nearest UPS station for me is Watertown (which I have to get to by taking 2 buses since I'm carless in Boston). So, unless UPS had gotten better reviews, UPS seems really inconvenient to me. So it seems as though we can't make general assumptions about either one without doing some research and talking to our friends, and deciding what fits our immediate needs...... Willa MacAllen MacAllen's Information Services Librarian/Technical Writer Boston macallen@tiac.net (BTW, I've noticed that the local bank is now sending new checks by UPS. Is this a new development? It's probably a good idea, but we just had a major bank merger in this area, so I don't know if it's just this bank getting smarter, or an overall bank trend....) ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 16:19:07 -0700 Reply-To: mclaughb@cgs.edu Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Bonny Mclaughlin Organization: cgs.edu Subject: Re: new indexer seeking advice Monica, Be sure to network with the indexers in your local or regional ASI chapter. These wonderful people have many contacts and are frequently looking for someone to recommend for a job that they cannot work into their schedule or that falls outside of their area of specialization. Let them know that you are available and what kind of indexing jobs you are looking for. The Southern California chapter has a networking directory just for that purpose. If your chapter doesn't have such a directory, volunteer to take on the project. It will give you something to do while you wait for the jobs to come in! Bonny McLaughlin ========================================================================= Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:37:11 -0400 Reply-To: Indexer's Discussion Group Sender: Indexer's Discussion Group From: Sarah H Lemaire Subject: Re: Fed Ex/UPS In-Reply-To: <199707212324.AA12457@world.std.com> Here's my FedEx horror story. It's probably just an anomaly and will never happen to anyone but me! I finished a project, the client was in a hurry, I dropped it off Thursday in a local FedEx box I'd used many times. The client called when it didn't arrive the next day. I called FedEx who had no record of the airbill number. After some discussion, they read me the addresses of all the FedEx boxes in my town, none of which matched the address of the box I'd dropped it in. They asked me to drive by and make sure that it was a FedEx box. I felt a bit insulted but drove by anyway and called several times, trying to describe where the box was. They thought I was completely insane. After many tries, I ended up on the phone of the local (two towns over) dispatcher. Again he claimed there was no FedEx box at that location. I was starting to get very frustrated. As it happened, a driver walked by the dispatcher during our conversation and said "Maybe it's that box on Arlington Street." Eureka! Of course, by now it was Saturday afternoon and they agreed to send out a driver on Monday. They agreed not to charge the client for the delivery. They seemed to think that was some reason, that box fell off the computer so no pickups were scheduled. Needless to say, I have NEVER used that box again. The client, who was in a hurry, was very sweet about the misunderstanding and said "From now on, I'll pay to have packages picked up at your house." Sarah L.