Frances Hendrix wrote:
> Well if a renewal by the same person is counted as a new issue to a
> different borrower, that is misleading. There has been an indication
> of this in the responses. off line there have been far more worrying
> trends mentioned that inflate or massage the figures of use etc which
> have been happening for many many years, and quite honestly astonishes
> and disappoints me. I know we live in a number crunching world (but
> these practices seemt o pre date that),where performance tick box data
> is the norm, but I just thought libraries were different and better.
>
> It would appear my 'thought out of the blue' was correct.
>
> I look forward to reading your thoughts and comments in the Guardian.
>
Oh I doubt she'll find anything useful in what I sent, I think she was
hoping that I'd denounce you all as wimps and demand the return of the
stocks or the lash for anyone who returns a book a day late. In reality
I am sympathetic to your point of view, if not necessarily your
reasoning. What concerns me more than fining people for returning books
late is charging them for reserving them, which we do in our authority
for everything that isn't junior stock. That's the charge I'd much
rather do away with, as it's a disincentive to people to look for
different books, and unfairly discriminates against the people who can
only make it to their small local libraries and those who can make it to
the large town centre libraries. Really, the only charges should be for
interloans.
So as we're asking questions at the moment, did anyone reduce/abolish
reservation charges and see an increase in reservations, or bring in
reservation charges and see a decrease?
--
- --
Loz
"Dora The Explorer tastes like brain damage."
- http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20070803.html
"I support gay marriage because I believe they have a right to be just
as miserable as the rest of us." - Kinky Friedman
|