The e-publishing support group

[Flyspeck23]

Or we have no NDA and you post rules opinion questions at your own risk. Nothing found in a rulebook is really that unique or new. (What did Shakespear say about this?)

I don't know. What did Shakespear say about rulebooks?

Many forums will result in fewer posters/readers.

I didn't say "forums" - I said "lists". "One forum to rule them all", but different lists for the publishers in this forum.
(Remember: I'm not sure it's a good idea. It's just a possibility, not more.)

If they are truly that inexperienced, then the act of mocking up the layout to ask questions about it will probably teach them more about layout than anything we will tell them. The inexperienced layout maker probably has only thought about the layout of the single product being worked on. Forcing them to mock up other text in order to ask questions doubles their experience.

Good point.

This also points to another problem with the NDA. Forcing a newbie publisher to sign an NDA is forcing them to spend money on their lawyer. It's bad enough they have to ask the mods for permission to get into the forum. Now they also have to have access to a scanner to send a signed NDA? Also, not everyone has access to a scanner, who is going to receive these NDAs and hold on to them?

Ok, then: no NDA, and a general "proceed at your own risk". Fine by me (same goes for a NDA), but probably not by everyone else.
No scanner? Well, I'd say even a would-be publisher should have access to a scanner, or else... but we had a similar discussion about layout software, so we should leave it at that (although sooner or later a publisher will need a scanner, if only to get his/her signature digitized).

"Is this balanced" is more of a possibility, but isn't House Rules a better forum for that?

Generally? Yes. For (would-be) publishers? No. IMHO, of course.
And I'd say it's more about "balance" (etc.) than "ideas". You should have your own ideas - I can't imagine a publisher granting you any ideas ("Here, boy, take these. They're too lame for us, maybe they'll suit you"???).

 

[tensen]

I don't know. What did Shakespear say about rulebooks?

Perhaps:
"I shake'a the spear at it and hope it goes away."
or maybe
"We don't need no stinkin' rulebooks."

This was Rockeatter Shakespear, the great Orcish Chief, right?

 

[Dimwhit]

Hmm, interesting thoughts here. How's this for a suggestion (and only a suggestion):

So the forum will allow e-publishers to discuss...well, whatever they want. Layout, etc. No NDA. You can post a mock-up pdf and ask for comments and advice, you can discuss general rules, etc.

If you want to have someone take a look at a file that contains details of your project, don't post the file. Just post a message asking who would be willing. Then it can be handled through email at that point. We could even go so far as to have a voluntary NDA list. For example, I would be more than happy to sign an NDA. If someone has a question or needs to show a file with info they don't want out there to anyone, they can ask for NDA's to look through it. Something like that. I can maintain a list in the stickie of who did an NDA and who didn't. It certainly wouldn't be required.

Other than that, the forum stays a little more general with, I guess, a "gentelman's agreement" not to swipe layout ideas without permissions, or something to that effect. Honestly, I don't think that would be an issue here. We'll need to know, at the very least, which companies we all work for, so I don't think someone will risk hurting their reputation just to swipe someone else's fancy border or anything. And it would be very easy to boot someone from the forum at that point.

So how does that sound? An optional NDA for those who want to help with more sensitive items (as I would be willing to do) and otherwise, we keep the forum a little more generic. Put filler text in your layouts, etc.

 

[tensen]

Other than that, the forum stays a little more general with, I guess, a "gentelman's agreement" not to swipe layout ideas without permissions, or something to that effect. Honestly, I don't think that would be an issue here. We'll need to know, at the very least, which companies we all work for, so I don't think someone will risk hurting their reputation just to swipe someone else's fancy border or anything. And it would be very easy to boot someone from the forum at that point.

Actually depending on what those layout ideas are, they may fall under trade dress.... I think that would cover it a bit stronger than a gentleman's agreement, so it shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Flyspeck23]

So how does that sound? An optional NDA for those who want to help with more sensitive items (as I would be willing to do) and otherwise, we keep the forum a little more generic. Put filler text in your layouts, etc.

Fine by me. I'm still in

 

[Dimwhit]

Morrus, did you get my second email from last weekend? I figure you're either really busy or not getting my email. I'm using the address from the 'email me' link on the main page.

 

[jmucchiello]

So how does that sound? An optional NDA for those who want to help with more sensitive items (as I would be willing to do) and otherwise, we keep the forum a little more generic.

Someone write the NDA first and I'll consider it. Explain who the parties of the NDA are and who is going to collect and hold the signed copies of the NDAs.

 

[Morrus]

Morrus, did you get my second email from last weekend? I figure you're either really busy or not getting my email. I'm using the address from the 'email me' link on the main page.

Yup, got it. I'll set it up in the next day or so.

 

[Dimwhit]

So I imagine that will the last day's events, and now a ton of CS accounts to create, Morrus will be a little busy and we'll have to wait. But that's fine. I'm still excited about the group, though we have some details to work out.

Congrats again Morrus. Glad we could all help out.

 

[Flyspeck23]

The "Growing PDF awareness"-thread reminded me of the Support Group ('cause such a group could help increase the overall quality of published books for all parties involved).
So how about it?