and another in favour = 13.
happy friday.
Sue Lacey Bryant
Jason Harper writes:
> Please can you make that 12 in favour of splitting the list? Since this discussion took place, and the reminder to use the correct message header went out, there have been quite a few ILL requests sent to the list that have been incorrectly badged, and which my mail filter has not been able to pick up...
>
> With thanks,
> Jason
>
> Jason Harper
> Assistant Librarian for the Sciences and Social Sciences
> Templeman Library
> University of Kent
> Canterbury
> Kent CT2 7NU
>
> E-mail: [log in to unmask]
> Telephone: 01227 827608
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: UK medical/ health care library community / information workers [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Chris Fowler
> Sent: 05 June 2008 17:52
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Splitting the list to separate out ILL requests? An analysis of the replies
>
> Thank you for everyone who replied to me on this subject. Here are the results:
>
> Don't Split - 17 in favour
> Split - 11 in favour
> Don't mind - 2 replies
> Union list suggestions - 2 replies
> Use existing ILL list - 1 reply
> Use 'Digest' mode - 1 reply
>
> Many people commented on the need to maintain a strict format in the message header so that those folks who don't want to see ILL requests can set up email filters to remove them. Diane Job's email of 4 Oct 2007 refers.
>
> For the few who asked about UHMLG, this is the University Health and Medical Librarians Group whose pages are at http://www.uhmlg.ac.uk
>
>
> Chris Fowler
> University of Southampton library
> [log in to unmask]
>
|