Library Sales - I Give Up!

"michael adams" <mjadams28.TakeThisOut@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message news:<2m9sd3FkgqivU1.TakeThisOut@uni-berlin.de>...
> "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall.TakeThisOut@earthlink.net> wrote in message
> news:2navf0pdrkiva4jlu38t211hbg11vufscd@4ax.com...
>
> >
> > Early retirement of books is not an issue of profit but in our case to
> > maintain State accreditation (ie. funding) the books are to be changed
> > out with in a set time. Under new guidelines being drawn up, a
> > library's complete catalog could be turned over in as little as from
> > 3-5 years depending on how frequent a item is checked out. The library
> > will have to report this "weeding" rate annually.
>
>
> But presumably this is the lending stock.
>
> You also presumably have more permanent reference stock. Which in
> UK libraries at least, holds the best material.
>
> Also in the lending non-fiction field, presumably there's loads of
> material which simply isn't replaceable. In the field of biography
> for one. You're surely not suggesting that standard(ish) biographies
> in excess of 3-5 years old, are to be dumped as a matter of policy
> are you ?
>


It would be impossible for any library to save every book. Yes, that
includes libraries like THE BRITISH MUSEUM and THE LIBRARY OF
CONGRESS. I wish that libraries and universities were funded as well
as the defense establishment, but that is a dream world scenario.
Most libraries have constraints of time, staff, size, and funds. They
work hard to benefit the greatest number of users. Books that they
can't find room for can be ordered through interlibrary loan from
other libraries. Most libraries belong to networks and check to make
sure that they are not discarding the only copy of a book in the
region, etc.... I promise you that your professional library staff has
spent more time considering all of these arguments than ANY of you and
have come up with the best

> For another perspective, I _have_ recently considered getting a library card
> again....

The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....



David
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

"hollowayd" <drhbooks.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f60403e3.0407270435.68f17766@posting.google.com...

> The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
> dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....

How do you figure that? Since public libraries are government-supported
institutions, their policies are ultimately dictated by legislators and
administrators who may or may not be library users. Many of them probably
are completely aliterate.

Reducing the process to its simplest theoretical terms, I have just as much
say in library policy as any other citizen who votes -- or just as little
say as any other citizen who doesn't vote -- whether I use the library or
not.

And as I have already observed, when I say, "I have 20 years of formal
education, I speak and write very effectively, I have a network of
influential friends, I am actively concerned about public affairs, and I
think public funding of the library is a waste of money because it never has
any books I want to read," it is politically profoundly stupid for the
library to reply, "if you don't read our books we don't care what you
think."
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

This message is not archived
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

"hollowayd" <drhbooks DeleteThis @yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f60403e3.0407270435.68f17766@posting.google.com...
> "michael adams" <mjadams28 DeleteThis @onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
news:<2m9sd3FkgqivU1 DeleteThis @uni-berlin.de>...
> > "John A. Stovall" <johnastovall DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
> > news:2navf0pdrkiva4jlu38t211hbg11vufscd@4ax.com...
> >
> > >
> > > Early retirement of books is not an issue of profit but in our case
to
> > > maintain State accreditation (ie. funding) the books are to be
changed
> > > out with in a set time. Under new guidelines being drawn up, a
> > > library's complete catalog could be turned over in as little as from
> > > 3-5 years depending on how frequent a item is checked out. The
library
> > > will have to report this "weeding" rate annually.
> >
> >
> > But presumably this is the lending stock.
> >
> > You also presumably have more permanent reference stock. Which in
> > UK libraries at least, holds the best material.
> >
> > Also in the lending non-fiction field, presumably there's loads of
> > material which simply isn't replaceable. In the field of biography
> > for one. You're surely not suggesting that standard(ish) biographies
> > in excess of 3-5 years old, are to be dumped as a matter of policy
> > are you ?
> >
>
>
> It would be impossible for any library to save every book. Yes, that
> includes libraries like THE BRITISH MUSEUM and THE LIBRARY OF
> CONGRESS. I wish that libraries and universities were funded as well
> as the defense establishment, but that is a dream world scenario.
> Most libraries have constraints of time, staff, size, and funds. They
> work hard to benefit the greatest number of users. Books that they
> can't find room for can be ordered through interlibrary loan from
> other libraries. Most libraries belong to networks and check to make
> sure that they are not discarding the only copy of a book in the
> region, etc.... I promise you that your professional library staff has
> spent more time considering all of these arguments than ANY of you and
> have come up with the best
>
> > For another perspective, I _have_ recently considered getting a library
card
> > again....
>
> The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
> dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....


As it happens that last remark wasn't mine (michael adams) but was
made by Jonathan Sachs.

"Jonathan Sachs" <llm040609 DeleteThis @earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:<0BPLc.11684$Qu5.1584@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net>...

> For another perspective, I _have_ recently considered getting a library
> card again, in order to research a rather obscure aspect of politics in
> the run-up to World War II. If I find that my city's library follows this
> practice I won't waste my time; I will know that my chances of finding
> anything useful would be nil.


Not that I'm not perfectly capable of contradicting myself, but not in
this case I'm afraid. I'm not a book dealer, I've no direct interest in
the way US Libraries are run, and I've held and used a Library Card in
the UK for the past X0 odd years.

As I'm not familiar with the Library set-up in the US, I'm unable to
comment on any Inter Library Loan Service and other networks which
may operate in the US. But judging by some of the more pessimistic
contributions to this thread, one might never have realised such
provision existed. And so it's reassuring to discover otherwise.

atb


michael adams

>
>
>
> David
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

"John A. Stovall" <johnastovall.DeleteThis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:rtmcg0hvapqlcsv6l5lds0s2a11gc6j6f0@4ax.com...

> No, you don't have as much say, as anyone who votes. If you want of
> affect policy get on the Library Board or your state commission.
> That's where policy is set not by local voters.

The library board and the state commission are typically appointed by the
city's and state's elected officials, and are answerable to them. They are
obliged to operate within the limits of broad policies that are dictated to
them -- and within the constraints of the funding that is provided to them.

I am talking about funding here. It is scarcely an unfamiliar topic in
library circles, and the number of people who think there is too little seem
to outnumber those who think there is too much. I suggest that one reason
for that is that the very people who could be the libraries' most
influential advocates have no reason to defend them -- a situation which the
libraries themselves have created. Once again, I say that this is profoundly
stupid.

Let's turn your argument around. Suppose that, for whatever reason, public
libraries had developed as resources for the _most_ literate members of
their communities. Their shelves would be filled with Henry James,
Solzhenitsyn, and James Joyce, scholarly works on history, philosophy, and
law, and other arcane tomes. The rhetoric justifying such a policy would be
easy to devise, and would sound quite compelling if it were as familiar as
the rhetoric we now hear. When Joe Sixpack asked, "Where's the Sidney
Sheldon?" he would be told, "You have no right to criticize the operation of
the library! You never use it!"

Does that make sense? Just as much or as little as the current arrangement
does.
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

mjadams28.RemoveThis@onetel.net.uk wrote:

>As I'm not familiar with the Library set-up in the US, I'm unable to
>comment on any Inter Library Loan Service and other networks which
>may operate in the US. But judging by some of the more pessimistic
>contributions to this thread, one might never have realised such
>provision existed. And so it's reassuring to discover otherwise.
>
My own library use has gone way up in recent years, due to some extremely
sensible provisions by our local library. It is now possible to get a book from
any branch very easily, so that it is much easier for me to get to slightly
obscure titles that the library cannot justify keeping more than one copy of in
the system. Hence the circulation on such titles goes up and they are that much
less likely to be discarded.

I no longer do many inter-library loan requests, but I used to do a great many,
and they were extremely well handled.

--Helen
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

In article <f60403e3.0407270435.68f17766.RemoveThis@posting.google.com>,
drhbooks.RemoveThis@yahoo.com (hollowayd) wrote:

> "michael adams" <mjadams28.RemoveThis@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> > news:<2m9sd3FkgqivU1.RemoveThis@uni-berlin.de>...
> > For another perspective, I _have_ recently considered getting a
> > library card
> > again....
>
> The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
> dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....

I don't think I've had a library card since I was a kid, but I use
libraries all the time.
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

<barney.TakeThisOut@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote in message
news:ce63bm$a0v$1@thorium.cix.co.uk...
> In article <f60403e3.0407270435.68f17766.TakeThisOut@posting.google.com>,
> drhbooks.TakeThisOut@yahoo.com (hollowayd) wrote:
>
> > "michael adams" <mjadams28.TakeThisOut@onetel.net.uk> wrote in message
> > > news:<2m9sd3FkgqivU1.TakeThisOut@uni-berlin.de>...

> > > a) For another perspective, I _have_ recently considered getting a
> > > library card
> > > again....
> >
> > The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
> > dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....
>
> I don't think I've had a library card since I was a kid, but I use
> libraries all the time.


a) is in fact not me, that's Jonathan Sachs.

I have had a Library Card since I was a kid, and without one I wouldn't
nowadays be able to borrow items such as the Oxford Ed. of Swift's
Correspondence in 4 vols which my Local Library keeps in its Reserve
Stock for my sole benefit, by the looks of things.


michael adams
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

bookeditions.RemoveThis@aol.com (BookEditions) wrote in message news:<20040721150205.04587.00000118.RemoveThis@mb-m27.aol.com>...
  > >The sale books should
  > >be available on a first come, first serve basis to those
  > >willing to get off their lazy duffs and transport themselves
  > >in person to the library store and do their own scouting.
  > >
 >
 > Bill,
 >
 > I agree with most of your statements. However, as I work in a FOL bookstore I
 > constantly see our shelves behind the desk full of books being held for
 > customers who came into the store and didn't have enough money with them to pay
 > for their purchase and asked us to hold them for a day or so. Soem have been
 > there for weeks because the buyer never came back. We try to reshelve these,
 > but time is limited.
 > Les

When times were tough and I was clerking in a college bookstore, I
took a phone inquiry from a prospective customer wanting one of the
texts we stocked. I had a new book, shrink-wrapped, which the store
was offering as used because it had been bought back from a previous
customer. I offered it as such and the customer never came for it.
What a waste.

David Ames<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

> > .... I promise you that your professional library staff has
> > spent more time considering all of these arguments than ANY of you and
> > have come up with the best.

I let this go by the first time, but I think it deserves comment.

I may summarize the conclusion as, "Trust us, we're experts... we know
best."

Right, just like the policy wonks in the Pentagon did when they planned our
victory over the Viet Cong.

Just like the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission did when it assured us
that California's energy crisis would only be made worse by interfering with
the operation of the market, while Enron was busily milking the situation
for every penny it could get.

Just like the 1980s reduction in oversight of the savings and loan industry,
which led to widespread fraud and incompetence, caused several S&Ls to
collapse, and ultimately cost taxpayers over $2 billion.

Just like NASA's assurances that the space shuttle was perfectly safe...
twice.

Can you imagine how reassuring that is?
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

"Jonathan Sachs" <llm040609.RemoveThis@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:HJsNc.165$9Y6.135@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> "hollowayd" <drhbooks.RemoveThis@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:f60403e3.0407270435.68f17766@posting.google.com...
>
> > The idea that somebody who admittedly doesn't use the library should
> > dictate their policies is pretty ridiculous on the face of it....
>
> How do you figure that? Since public libraries are government-supported
> institutions, their policies are ultimately dictated by legislators and
> administrators who may or may not be library users. Many of them probably
> are completely aliterate.

But you're asking for the mission of the library to change so that it will
interest you, without concerning yourself with whether those using it now
can replace what you want to take away from them. In that sense, you are
less of a stakeholder than the current users.

>
> Reducing the process to its simplest theoretical terms, I have just as
much
> say in library policy as any other citizen who votes -- or just as little
> say as any other citizen who doesn't vote -- whether I use the library or
> not.
>
> And as I have already observed, when I say, "I have 20 years of formal
> education, I speak and write very effectively, I have a network of
> influential friends, I am actively concerned about public affairs, and I
> think public funding of the library is a waste of money because it never
has
> any books I want to read," it is politically profoundly stupid for the
> library to reply, "if you don't read our books we don't care what you
> think."
>
>

If you were representative of a large segment of the population, I would
agree, but I don't think you are. Most of my friends and acquaintances have
backgrounds and interests perhaps similar to yours as described, but the
idea that there are no books in the library of interest to them would raise
eyebrows. Certainly not _every_ book there is likely to interest them, but
there are plenty that do. Furthermore, my kids are using the public library
for many resources that I cannot provide, and I think it is in the public
interest for that to be possible. If a few people find no use for a public
service, that alone is not reason enough to take the service away or to
overturn the apple cart to match that group's desires.

- Todd T.
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

On 21 Jul 2004 19:02:05 GMT, in rec.collecting.books
bookeditions.DeleteThis@aol.com (BookEditions) wrote:

  >>The sale books should
  >>be available on a first come, first serve basis to those
  >>willing to get off their lazy duffs and transport themselves
  >>in person to the library store and do their own scouting.
  >>
 >
 >Bill,
 >
 >I agree with most of your statements. However, as I work in a FOL bookstore I
 >constantly see our shelves behind the desk full of books being held for
 >customers who came into the store and didn't have enough money with them to pay
 >for their purchase and asked us to hold them for a day or so. Soem have been
 >there for weeks because the buyer never came back. We try to reshelve these,
 >but time is limited.
 >Les

That's an example of why you set a hard limit to the time you'll hold
books.

Place a simple sign by the register/cashbox stating:

"HELD BOOK POLICY
effective date: x/xx/2004
In the interest of fairness to all of our customers, books may only be
held for customers until the end of the current business day, after
which they will be returned to the sales area."

Add a small note to it (that can be removed on the start date) that
says:

"All books currently being held for customers will be returned to the
sales floor on x/xx/2004, so please remember to purchase any books you
may have on hold."

Date them so that the start date is 3 weeks to a month away to give
people who have current holds have a month's warning.

Then, at the end of the specified day, sweep the hold shelves clean
and put the books on the "to shelf" cart/stacks and actually follow
the guidelines each day (either clear the shelf at the end of the day
or the first thing in the morning).

Think of it this way... which helps the FoL program more:

1) A book sitting on a shelf for days or weeks, collecting dust,
waiting for a buyer who may or may not return for the book

2) A book that was held, but then is returned to the shelf and
actually sells a few days later

Sure, there will be a few people who will feel that it's unfair, but
if someone legitimately doesn't have the funds to purchase their
entire stack of books, they can always try to check out copies of the
books that they cannot afford to purchase. After all, it's a library.


Bill
--
By working faithfully eight hours a day, you may eventually
get to be boss and work twelve hours a day. - Robert Frost<!-- ~MESSAGE_AFTER~ -->
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up! 

"Todd T" <tttNOSPAM.DeleteThis@megapipe.net> wrote in message
news:maRNc.22$Zn2.11@fe39.usenetserver.com...

> If you were representative of a large segment of the population, I would
> agree, but I don't think you are...

You are not expressing the idea in its most extreme form, but you are
advocating a principle of "majority rule" in the sense that because I
represent a minority of the library's potential users, I deserve none of its
resources.

No, I hear you say; you just think that I deserve a share of uts resources
in proportion to my numbers. Well, fundamentally I agree with that. But it's
not the logical outcome of the practices described here as high-level
official policy, and it what I'm getting.

I did not decide at some point that the public library doesn't have enough
books that interest me, so I won't use it any more. Here is what happened:
at some point I cleaned out my wallet and found that my library card had
expired several years before, and I hadn't even noticed. That's how I knew
what the library was worth to me. And it was not because I wasn't reading
books.
 >> Stay informed about: Library Sales - I Give Up!