I think this strand of the discussion has moved on to loan periods, which is
a different can of worms again. I don't think it's unreasonable to have a
fixed period loan, if only to establish the fact that it *is* a loan and not
a gift. If borrowers just took one book each on unlimited loan our shelves
would soon be denuded of all the popular titles.
And as I grow older and crankier with age I'd be in favour of extended the
fines we currently impose. Our staff have long since lost count of the
number of times they've been told by senior citizens that they "don't have
to pay any attention to the date that's been stamped on the book because we
don't pay fines". Ironically, this is the same group that would be most up
in arms if we did away with date stamps. Personally I'd much rather the
money spent on labels, stamps, date stamp holders, slugs, ink and all the
other paraphernalia was spent on books.
Steven
Steven Heywood
Systems Manager
Rochdale Library Service
Wheatsheaf Library
Baillie Street
Rochdale, England OL16 1JZ
Tel: 01706 864967
Fax: 01706 864992
Feeling glum? Go to
http://www.rochdale.gov.uk/living/libraries.asp?url=pageOfFun and see what
real misery looks like!
> ----------
> From: Frances Hendrix[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To: Frances Hendrix
> Sent: 18 January 2002 14:30
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Date stamps
>
> I don't think I for one minute suggested browsing was not to be
> encouraged?
> And surely what prevents your shelves emptying is the restriction on the
> number of books a borrower has at a time, not the time he/she has an item
> for?
>
> I am afraid I do not understand your logic. I am all for more innovative
> ways of getting readers to extend their interests and taste, as some of
> the
> innovative and interesting work now being done is illustrating. But none
> of
> this involves or affects date stamps!
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Sheffield Libraries, Archives & Information"
> <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Friday, January 18, 2002 12:46 PM
> Subject: Re: Date stamps
>
>
> > It does matter when material comes back. The bulk of borrowing is not
> done
> > by reservations (this needs a degree of purpose on the part of the user
> in
> > knowing what they want). Most borrowing is done either by browsing for
> > something to read, or through a need to find the best items in a general
> > subject area. How many book purchases are also made on the principle of
> > browsing? A great deal otherwise the book shops would not invest so
> much
> > effort into displays etc. Apart from this, the obvious reason why we
> need
> > to insist on a return date is that if we did not then there would be
> nothing
> > left on the shelves! Not much of an experience for someone browsing the
> > shelves.
> >
> > This is the 21st Century and I for one still want the experience of
> > browsing, selecting and handling a wide choice of books in my local
> library.
> >
> > John Murphy
> > Group Manager, ICT Development
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: A forum for discussion of the issues arising from implementing the
> > Internet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Frances
> > Hendrix
> > Sent: 18 January 2002 10:23
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: Date stamps
> >
> >
> > I have been following this debate now for a week or more, and have to
> say
> am
> > amazed at the detail, passion, concern, etc. But I do wonder if the
> actual
> > date has any use for any one other than the borrower, and if only the
> > borrower, does it actually matter when they bring it back, unless there
> is
> a
> > waiting list? Most people do bring stuff back (at some stage), and all
> this
> > effort for stamping and charging fines, is it really cost effective?
> When
> I
> > borrow books from professional bodies of which I am a member , I simply
> get
> > a polite letter if they need it back. Are we hanging on to 'old'
> practices
> > for no good reason than we do not want to move on, and like the
> 'authority'
> > of the date stamp, and the excuse we may need the data?
> >
> > This is the 21stCentury isn't it?
> >
> > I have however enjoyed the debate, learnt a lot, and it speaks volumes!
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "John Usher" <[log in to unmask]>
> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2002 7:05 PM
> > Subject: Re: Date stamps
> >
> >
> > > Date stamps - like a lot of things in libraries (*and* other
> > organisations,
> > > commercial as well as public, lets not kid ourselves, or beat
> ourselves
> > up),
> > >
> > > "Dead, but won't lie down"?
> > >
> > > In my 'umble opinion, technology is changing things (phone renewals =
> > > technology?), and some of the old tools and processes still do useful
> > jobs, but
> > > we just don't cost them out, because they're already there. Can we
> still
> > > actually afford them?
> > >
> > > It was very useful and practical to shelf-check the Brown Issue (yes,
> I'm
> > that
> > > old...) against the shelves before sending overdues, in case items
> were
> > not
> > > discharged properly (or snuck back on the shelves by a user to prevent
> > fines),
> > > but we stopped doing that when we automated loans and overdues, many
> moons
> > ago.
> > >
> > > Staff wanted to check a printout (Line Impact printed, continuous
> > feed,15"x11",
> > > green music-ruled, 3" thick...) before automated overdues were sent
> out,
> > so we
> > > tried it - but two weeks later the reports hadn't been checked (what a
> > > surprise...), so, out went the overdues!
> > >
> > > The problems (or should I say challenges?) that the pre-overdues shelf
> > checks
> > > addressed were shifted about (generally to customer complaints), but
> > they're
> > > still there. Perhaps we should address the real problem of Quality
> Control
> > on
> > > discharge? and have book security systems work on entry as well as
> exit?
> > >
> > > Perhaps we sometimes aren't actually concerned with being pro-active
> in
> > the
> > > "Modernisation" (aargh! - apologies, had a funny turn there...) of our
> > services,
> > > but prefer to allow them to wither on the vine, and accept the
> > consequences?
> > >
> > > Or we take firm measures to remove old ways, whether staff like it or
> not
> > (and
> > > whether we've considered it properly or not), and accept the
> consequences?
> > >
> > > I suggest that, *IF* we *want* to phase out date stamps, we need to
> ensure
> > that
> > > that:
> > >
> > > The systems we deploy to create and extract Management Information
> (MIS)
> > are
> > > simple to use and cost-effective, like an OPAC - not a set of techie
> tools
> > like
> > > BusinessObjects, Crystal Reports etc. (bit of a challenge to the
> suppliers
> > > lurking on the list - e.g. Dan at Geac earlier on).
> > >
> > > That we have a management commitment to provide *all* front-line staff
> > with
> > > fingertip access to timely, current, MIS (not just managers or
> > supervisors), in
> > > the format necessary for their purposes, just as we do Circulation and
> > OPAC
> > > systems, and the cost-benefits can be demonstrated to wean staff off
> the
> > desire
> > > to keep date stamps/labels.
> > >
> > > This would also demonstrate that staff have been given the tools to
> manage
> > their
> > > stock properly. If any question arises that this is not being done
> > properly, the
> > > technology cannot be blamed.
> > >
> > > However, suspect we'll do some mix of all of this, the human condition
> > being
> > > what it is!
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > John
> > >
> > > ps. Is a handful of 5"x3" catalogue cards still probably the best way
> to
> > > shelf-check the catalogue? Answers on 2nd class snail-mail postcard,
> > please!
> > >
> > > -------------------------------------------
> > > John Usher
> > > ICT Development Manager
> > > Islington Library & Information Service
> > > Education Department
> > > Central Library
> > > 2 Fieldway Crescent
> > > LONDON N5 1PF
> > >
> > > Tel: +44 (0)20 7527 6920
> > > Fax: +44 (0)20 7527 6926
> > > Switchboard: +44 (0)20 7527 6900
> > > mailto:[log in to unmask]
> > > http://www.islington.gov.uk/libraries
> > >
> > > This email account may be opened by others in the owner's absence
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> **************************************************************************
> **
> > ************
> > > This email and any files transmitted with it may contain information
> > > which is privileged and confidential, the disclosure of which is
> > > prohibited by law and intended solely for the use of the individual or
> > > entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in
> > > error please note any dissemination, distribution or copying of this
> > > message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately
> > > if you have received this email by mistake and delete it from your
> > > system.
> > >
> > > Email transmissions cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as
> > > information can be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive
> late
> > > or incomplete, or contain viruses. The sender therefore does not
> accept
> > > liability for any errors or omissions in the contents of this message
> > > which arise as a result of email transmission. If verification is
> > > required please request a hard copy version.
> > > Thank you for your co-operation.
> > >
> >
> **************************************************************************
> **
> > ************
>
|