Have a New You by Friday inadequate TOC

Have a New You by Friday needs a proper TOC.

The current TOC only has 4 entries: Cover Page, Title Page, Begin Reading, and Copyright Page.

This makes it impossible to create a reading plan for the book (unless you plan to read the content of the book in a single setting).

Since the book does have chapters, and (bold heading) sections within each chapter, would someone please either correct any conversion issues, or get an updated version from the publisher which properly tags the chapters and sections?

Thanks!

Find more posts tagged with

Resources

Comments

JT (alabama24)

This makes it impossible to create a reading plan for the book (unless you plan to read the content of the book in a single setting).

This isn't correct, although things are much simplified when there are either chapter headings (or better, page numbers). You can create a "custom reading plan" by selecting the text for each reading. I'll see if I can find it in the wiki.

Simon’s Brother

Well you are meant to read it before Friday.

Seriously though I am not surprised of a report of another Vyrso book not meeting basic customer expectations.

Kenute P. Curry

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873413#Comment_873413

I tell you Disciple of Christ (doc)

VYRSO is on a "Downward Spiral" despite the MVPs trying to defend VYRSO with the same lame excuses over and over, and over again. I AM SICK OF IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873412#Comment_873412

This makes it impossible to create a reading plan for the book (unless you plan to read the content of the book in a single setting).

This isn't correct, although things are much simplified when there are either chapter headings (or better, page numbers). You can create a "custom reading plan" by selecting the text for each reading. I'll see if I can find it in the wiki.

Much simplified (when there are chapter headings or page numbers) is right!

I didn't realize that it could tediously be done by hand, but would think that the program should be able to intelligently do it for me. The fact that it can't when chapter/section headings and/or page numbers are missing, seems to be an oversight.

It seems like there are two proper solutions, either of which would solve the problem:

Vyrso would add (or require publishers to tag) headings and/or page numbers, which Logos can utilize, or
Logos would be able to automatically divide an unpaginated Vyrso text into the desired number of smaller readings.

I'm sure I'm not the first person to discover this shortcoming, or to make a suggestion.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873454#Comment_873454

same lame excuses

In these forums, one person's lame excuse is another person's reason:

[quote]

A reason simply refers to a cause or explanation. It explains why someone did something or why something happened. An excuse, on the other hand, is also a type of reason that specifically justifies or defends a fault. In this sense, the key difference is that while a reason is merely an explanation, an excuse specifically focuses on justifying a fault.

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873454#Comment_873454

despite the MVPs trying to defend VYRSO with the same lame excuses over and over, and over again

I thought you were against personal attacks? [:^)]

JT (alabama24)

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873459#Comment_873459

I didn't realize that it could tediously be done by hand,

Glad you figured it out! I looked but didn't find the instructions, then got called away. Sorry!

would think that the program should be able to intelligently do it for me. The fact that it can't when chapter/section headings and/or page numbers are missing, seems to be an oversight.

Agree. Reading plan improvements have long been on my list of priorities.

Kenute P. Curry

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873494#Comment_873494

That is not a personal attack alabama24

If it sounded like one to you, I do apologize. I was trying to point out that the MVPs give the same excuses time after time whenever anything needs fixing or something goes wrong. I have seen it and I have read it time after time in the forums. It comes off to me as if the MVPs are always trying to defend FAITHLIFE, whether they are right or wrong.

I have gotten to the point where I just message Kyle (Faithlife Employee), and he either gives me advice or corrects the situation. And it gets done! [:D]

I am not trying to stir up any trouble here. Don't want any of that. Am just voicing my opinion and how I feel, which a lot of other people in the forums do as well.

NB.Mick

Have a New You by Friday needs a proper TOC.

The current TOC only has 4 entries: Cover Page, Title Page, Begin Reading, and Copyright Page.

This has been corrected in today's updated version - thanks everyone who made this possible so fast!

Simon’s Brother

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/875642#Comment_875642

Thank you.

Have a New You by Friday needs a proper TOC.

The current TOC only has 4 entries: Cover Page, Title Page, Begin Reading, and Copyright Page.

This has been corrected in today's updated version - thanks everyone who made this possible so fast!

PetahChristian

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/875660#Comment_875660

That was quick! Thanks very much!

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/873498#Comment_873498

I was trying to point out that the MVPs give the same excuses time after time whenever anything needs fixing or something goes wrong. I have seen it and I have read it time after time in the forums. It comes off to me as if the MVPs are always trying to defend FAITHLIFE, whether they are right or wrong.

From this MVP's point of view, they have to explain the same reasons over and over which is what they expect because of the number of new or infrequent users of Logos forums. Reasons are precisely that - reasons - and say nothing about whether they like or defend the reasons. What is annoying is to be attacked for answering a question by giving the answer ... especially if the person asking is someone we know has asked the same question many times.

What some forum members do not understand is that a number of MVPs have been with Logos for a very long time and (a) understand the history of why things are the way they are (b) have enough IT background to understand the difficulty in making particular changes and (c) as beta testers may know something of what is coming down the pipe. So when users want to be able to highlight in footnotes we understand why that is a big project, when users want high definition scalable images we know where that is possible and where it is not, etc. As a result, we may convey everything from great news to near deal killers to any particular user.

From my personal experience as an MVP there are three kinds of forum posts that waste my time - what I mean it is a waste of my time to read and respond not that the posts don't belong on the forums:

Posts that could easily be reported through the channels given under help - typo function, revint@logos.com, syntax@logos.com, data@logos.com and logosbug@logos.com But I recognize that the typo function is the only one easily used and understand why the forums have become the place many of these errors are reported. And, yes, often it takes the discussion in the forums to verify that there is an error to report
Posts telling Logos how to run their business - sorry but I simply have no interest in the business end - and other posts that it is unreasonable to expect fellow users to have the information to answer.
Threads where the user is unwilling to consider changing their practices to match how Logos works to provide the information that they want. All software requires the user to make accommodations to the software. This is very different from the case where Logos cannot provide the information that they want where a forum discussion may help define the problem sufficiently to make it a uservoice item.

All of which boils down to MVPs are human - you may take our advice or ignore it - but attacking MVP's for doing their job is never productive. Remember that terms like "excuse" and "defend" are most often the reader's evaluation not the writer's intent.