I'm with Frank and john. Most of the time I "lurk" on this list due to
the heavy demands of the questions here in person, physically, at the
FDIC. However, I always like to know what folks are asking for. I feel
it just goes with the territory of being in reference. But it is rare
for me to respond unless the question has to do with banking, or I have
a miraculous spurt of energy. (Or too much coffee?) The delete key is
always available....what's the big deal?
DeeClarkin
Sr. Librarian (Reference)
FDIC Library
On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, John D. Moore
wrote:
> Hmmmmm... Taking a cue from Frank Drake's message, how about this:
> If you want to answer a question, do; if you don't, then don't. If you
> want to subscribe, or post to the list, do; if you don't then don't. If
> you want to unsubscribe, you can do that too. If you want to risk being seen
> as giving legal advice over the 'net to someone, and you aren't really sure
> who they are, you can take that
> chance; if you don't, then ignore the message. In other words, how about if
> everybody decides for themselves the appropriate course of action, within
> the bounds of netiquette, of course. Personally, I could feel differently
> about helping a non-librarian on any given day, more depending on how
> much energy and time I have, and what the question is. But then, you may
> feel differently... Or maybe your library has a policy about who you help
> and what level of support you give to what class of patron, and you could
> let that be your guide to how you answer to the list. How about we talk
> about something else now, okay?
>
> On Tue, 8 Aug 1995, Anne Jochnowitz wrote:
>
> > Laura Raymond writes:
> > "Personally, I tend to ignore requests from unnamed or
> > non-librarian requestors, so perhaps that is the solution. If we
> > answer them, they will come. If we ignore them, maybe they'll go
> > away. . . .
> >
> > * * * * * * *
> > I think this is terrible! I'm a non-librarian who works for a publishing
> > company. Not answering us (non-librarians) is childish. It's not a
> > solution it's misleading! The types of questions as well as the "rules"
> > should be defined and updated as needed.
> > If non-librarians are not acknowledged, why are we allowed to join in the
> > first place? Ridiculous AND disappointing.
> > Anne
>
> John D. Moore
> U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Library
> jmoore@capaccess.org
>
---
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 14 2007 - 20:48:59 PST