[bksvol-discuss] Re: New 3 hold maximum in check out queue
- From: "Tracy Carcione" <carcione@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: bksvol-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 13:29:36 -0400
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.
Other related posts:
