[11215] in Public-Access_Computer_Systems_Forum
Re: Reply to Author Requests
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Public-Access Computer Systems For)
Mon Apr 14 21:09:12 1997
Date: Mon, 14 Apr 1997 19:48:19 -0500 (CDT)
From: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <LIBPACS@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU>
To: Multiple recipients of list PACS-L <PACS-L@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU>
Reply-To: Public-Access Computer Systems Forum <PACS-L@UHUPVM1.UH.EDU>
6 Messages, 154 Lines
*-----
Note: The following messages are in response to a recent posting to
PACS-L stating that the list looses much of its value when subscribers
are asked to "respond to author" on requests for information or advice.
It is the policy of PACS-L moderators to make the "respond to author"
request when a posting asks for information that is so specific it
is regarded as being useful to only a few people. Obviously, this
involves some judgment on the part of the moderators, so there may
be some inconsistency in its use.
Also obviously, many PACS-L subscribers seem to agree with the original
comment. For this reason, the moderators need to discuss this policy
and decide whether to modify it.
Please do not send any more comments on this issue to the list. If you
have more to add to this argument, please direct your email to
GMHoffmann@uh.edu. Once the moderators have discussed this issue,
we will post a summary of that discussion, and any decisions made,
to the list.
Thank you all for your cooperation and your input. This list belongs
to the 10,000 plus subsrcibers, and we certainly want to make it as
useful as possible to as many of you as possible.
Gretchen McCord Hoffmann
Associate PACS-L Moderator
*-----
From: Ray Duncan <rayd@voyager.co.nz>
Deb,
I agree with you 100%. I recognise recipients may summarise for the
subscribers but there are many who will either forget or are too busy to do
so. I hope you get support for your posting.
>
>I'm finding myself increasingly frustrated by "reply to author" instructions.
>Am I
>alone? I know we are all busy people bombarded by way too much email, but
>I feel the list loses its value when I have to email the recipient to find out
>what answers
>were received to queries like that below.
>
>One person's opinion,
>Deb Ludwig, Librarian
>Johnson Count Community College
Ray Duncan
Managing Director
Network Systems Limited
Post: PO Box 33 1203
Takapuna, Auckland
New Zealand
Tel: +64 9 486 5002
Fax: +64 9 486 3050
(Marketing specialists with emphasis on network software applications)
*-----
From: Jim Harrington <"jharrin@gte.net"@gte.net>
I agree with Deb's comments totally. I thought this was supposed to be a
discussion group, but too often it's only questions and no replies.
Jim Harrington
Parker College of Chiropractic
*-----
From: thom@indiana.edu (Thom Gillespie)
In the 'old' daze PACS-L was a true interactive communication forum. There
used to lots of noise but also lots of discussion, sorta like what web4lib
has today. The problem is the 'editor' metaphor which PACS-L has adopted
over time. Leads to no real discussion, just job and presentation ads
which are socially accepted forms of spammings.
You see the same thing happening to PACS-R as it become more 'academic'
and isolated from practical issues having anything to do with '_P_ublic
_A_ccess _S_ystems in _L_ibraries.
--Thom
*-----
From: duffyk@acy1.digex.net (Diane Hamilton)
I read PACS-L for its informational vaule but do not respond to posts or
post for exactly the reason below. Also, I may be able to dfind an answer
for someone who posted but how do I know they haven't already gotten the
answer I would give them. Also, when I have posted by posts were always
appended with reply to author. I feel the community value of a list or
newsgroup is lost in doing this.
diane
Diane Hamilton System Administrator
Cape May County Library Cape May Court House, NJ
(Standard disclaimer applies: opinions are my own)
"He adjusted himself to beams falling, and then no more of them fell, and
he adjusted himself to them not falling." -Dashiell Hammett
*-----
From: Birdie MacLennan <BMACLENN@uvmvm.uvm.edu>
The moderators of SERIALST (another library listserv forum) used to
have a policy of asking people to reply to the author when we felt that
replies would only be of interest to the author, or maybe to a handful
of other people. Then, one year I did a SERIALST Subscriber survey and
found there were several people who were quite frustrated that we were
too often directing replies away from the list. The moderators
subsequently loosened up and stopped requesting people's reply to
the original author -- except when original authors themselves request
personal replies -- or when the message obviously warrants a personal
reply (as in someone replying to a job announcement or service being
offered).
I think letting people make their own decisions about whether to reply
to authors of messages or to the list allows for more open dialogue
and free-flow of information.
However, I also realize SERIALST is a fraction of the size of
PACS-L and doesn't generate nearly as much mail for the moderators
to process. Sometimes it *is* a headache to figure out if some
messages are intended as private responses or for the whole list.
It might be just as easy to tell people to reply to the author.
I dunno.
At any rate, I respect the work that the moderators do with PACS-L.
Regards,
_______
| |
)* | Birdie MacLennan BMacLenn@uvmvm.uvm.edu
/ / Bailey/Howe Library BMacLenn@zoo.uvm.edu
) | University of Vermont Phone: 802-656-2016
| | Burlington, VT O5405 USA Fax: 802-656-4038
|__| Coordinator, Serials & Cataloging, SERIALST Listowner, etc.
*-----
From: Kathy Milfajt <kmilfajt@ccs.nsls.lib.il.us>
I am under the impression that the author we are replying to should post a
compilation of the answers to the list, alleviating both problems.
Kathy Milfajt
McHenry Public Library District
__________________________________________________________________________
The opinions expressed are not those of the McHenry Public Library
District.
*-----
