Self Flagellation

Perhaps he made a mistake and didn't realize he could just delete the image.

(What I'd really like to know, however, is why three people seem to think that frog photos are appropriate author images.)

Oh, that one.

They may have been polite and flagged the cat "not a cover" themselves so it took less other people flagging it likewise before it stopped showing as a cover option for them ?

Well, because they want to use it themselves ?

Generic blank book covers can be fairly boring, and you can only define one IIRC, so no skin off my nose if someone wants a cat there instead though I hope in time such pictures can be set aside as probably not particularly useful to other users.

> 7

But can't they use it as their default cover without having it appear as a cover choice for the work?

9>

Because, as was said above, they want to use the cat image on their own books, but are polite enough to want to minimize the damage by not having it show up as a suggestion for others, which the not-a-cover flag should ideally do.

And, because it was a place holder from LONG ago, when I first started cataloging my books (that was 2008). Those covers have now become available, and I am going through and replacing Tama with the correct versions of the covers. Many of my books are of editions which are not current on Amazon, and I didn't want that Amazon cover representing my version. So, Tama was utilised, and tagged as 'Tama'.

I thought what I was doing was reasonable (because as lorax says, I don't want it showing up as a suggestion for someone else), but hey, if you want me to just remove it, I can do that.

>12 Collectorator: It is automatically replaced by the new image.

On your own entry. It will stay as an option if somebody else is using it as well. But that's unlikely in this case.

>14 Nicole_VanK: Yeah, I left that bit off figuring no one else would be using this distinct placeholder ;)

They are all gone but nine--because I have to either check the cover available, or I will need to photograph my own copy.

I will simply remove the image in the future.

I think that last bit is probably a caching thing. But maybe it no longer functions that way.

> 17

Another thing that has come to mind while looking at all of this is that although we flaggers have the problem that if an image is flagged because it is on the wrong book, it ends up showing as flagged on the right book.

I thought that had been fixed.

According tho the bug report (http://www.librarything.com/topic/139639#3651091): yes.

> 19
I think that's why I started flagging them in the first place. It seemed that even after 48 hours, I would still see some of the Tama covers even after I removed it. It was a long time ago, though, and I think I just fell into the habit of flagging them even after removing them, without realising that flagging didn't actually DO anything.

So, sorry if I've caused any trouble. If I'd known that flagging covers in the future wouldn't remove them I would never have loaded them!

>17 Collectorator:

A lot of covers I've loaded are for editions which apparently no one else has. I have just looked at my http://www.librarything.com/allyourcovers.php?sort=da and am amazed at how many books I have for which no one had the same edition. Most of my books on birds/birding, gardening, orchids, etc., have only a current edition cover showing. That's not MY book. I want the cover for MY book.

> 17

I did eventually wind up going to a default cover, which is why ALL of the Tama covers are from a long, long time ago. Tama is from 2008 and beginning of 2009. I think that's when I discovered that if I used the default cover, and go to 'your books' and list covers, I can find the ones which need to be replaced with the correct cover.

You'll all be glad to know that I have only 1292 covers to replace with the correct cover :) .