I would find designating some people as "expert" rather insulting. I've been a volunteer for 10 years now. I think I'm fairly "expert". I'm just not part of the hold-for clique on a regular basis. Tracy > Those religious books are anathema to me too. However, I don't know if I > like that expert designation for some volunteers. It is very much like > the impression I first got when I first started looking for a book to > proofread, that there was a certain exclusive clique among some > volunteers. That was only an impression, but a rule like that would > codify it. I think it would just be better to leave the current holds in > place and maybe extend the deadline for limits for a while to ease the > transition. Or, it might do just as well to re-institute a time limit on > holds and this time not forget about it after a month or so. > On 7/25/2012 9:54 AM, Regina Alvarado wrote: >> Ann and all: >> I would agree with the "special category" for those who give so much >> time >> and effort, but again, if there are no books to proof because a certain >> kind >> of book always has holds it gives the "normal" proofer only religious >> books >> to proof. Nothing wrong with religious books if you like them, but it >> is >> not my cup of tea! Maybe those working on series can have the >> "excellent" >> designation and those of us who do not have attachment to a scanner >> could >> work on good books in the collection or something? >> Reggie >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx >> [mailto:bksvol-discuss-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ann Parsons >> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:23 AM >> To: cherryjam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> Cc: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; madeleinel@xxxxxxxxxxxx; >> alisam@xxxxxxxxxxxx; mayrierenae@xxxxxxxxx >> Subject: [bksvol-discuss] Re: New 3 hold maximum in check out queue >> >> Hi all, >> >> Um, Madeleine, looks like we may have to do some negotiating here. I'm >> a proofer, and I have no problem perse with your new policy, but unlike >> some, I'm working, have other projects I'm involved in, and may take >> several weeks to proof a book. Fortunately I don't have more than one >> or two books on tap at any time. However, I totally agree with both >> Judy and Valery that something needs to be done here about this blanket >> policy. These women have spent hours doing difficult tasks. Cindy has >> also done some of this stuff, most notably in my case, The Redwall >> Cookbook. We need to make exceptions for special volunteers like >> these. Volunteers whose talents and expertise are vital to Bookshare. >> Could we somehow compromise on this? Could these folks be placed in a >> special category? Could volunteers be categorized in two groups, say >> regular and expert? Could these "expert" volunteers be given a special >> status whereby they are allowed more than three holds? >> >> Me thinks we need to compromise through some discussion. Could we >> maybe meet at Blind Cool Tech and discuss this? Could we meet on Skype >> or something? I'm afraid you may be losing some expert volunteers, and >> you sure don't want to do that. Please, Madeleine, let's discuss this >> before we write this in stone? >> >> Ann P. >> > > To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to > bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx > put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list > of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line. > > To unsubscribe from this list send a blank Email to bksvol-discuss-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx put the word 'unsubscribe' by itself in the subject line. To get a list of available commands, put the word 'help' by itself in the subject line.