No I am not suggesting that., there are a host of reasons some of which
are now coming out in the debate. If we were running libraries as a
business we would be looking at the whys, whets and how's, to increase
use, bring down the unit cost, and simply make ourselves more
accessible, more popular, more easy to use. There may be some non users
that are not worth pursuing, but there are others that obviously are not
using public libraries, but would if we could get them interested. See
Peter Gaw's email
f
-----Original Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David McMenemy
Sent: 07 October 2004 17:55
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Photo Identity
Then surely any registration system will need proof that the person is
indeed who they say they are, and that the address they give is
legitimate.
Can't see what's wrong with that myself. The ideal situation should be
reducing the red tape to just the level where the library feels
comfortable that they are not being conned, surely.
Are you suggesting that the 50%+ who don't use the library don't use it
as a
result of the complexity of joining? I find this hard to believe, but
am
happy to be proved wrong with some hard figures on it.
Cheers
David
-----Original Message-----
From: Frances Hendrix [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 07 October 2004 17:52
To: David McMenemy; [log in to unmask]
Subject: RE: Photo Identity
But no one is suggesting a free for all, and that books would not be
issued
surely., simply that there is less red tape about registering and
identifying yourself.
And more than 50% of council tax payers do not use their public library.
f
-----Original Message-----
From: lis-pub-libs: UK Public Libraries
[mailto:[log in to unmask]]
On Behalf Of David McMenemy
Sent: 07 October 2004 17:26
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Photo Identity
I think Robert's view is simply being realistic rather than being a sign
of
needing to loosen up. It's all well and good hammering a social
inclusion
agenda, but let's not forget that everyone who pays their council tax
and
income tax is actually paying for library resources. In the current
political climate there would be an outcry if a laissez faire attitude
prevailed. The 10,000 missing items for the BL is certainly an eye
opener.
What would be the actual price of this? I'm not asking in order to
knock
the BL, losing stock is an unfortunate reality for most libraries, but
put a
financial figure on it, and you could have a stick to beat the service
with
if you were that way inclined.
Introduce that scenario to a public library system, start to add up the
figures, and watch the tabloids go crazy. Some measure of access
control is
absolutely necessary if we are not to be accused of playing fast and
loose
with public money.
I wonder what the Coates report would have said if one of the findings
was
that the library service studied lost tens of thousands of pounds a year
in
stock....
Just my tuppence worth.
David
---------------------------------------
David McMenemy
Lecturer,
Department of Computer and Information Sciences, University of
Strathclyde,
---------------------------------------
|