LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for PCCTG1 Archives


PCCTG1 Archives

PCCTG1 Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1 Home

PCCTG1  April 2003

PCCTG1 April 2003

Subject:

Re: SACO Mechanisms and Membership

From:

Hugh Taylor <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Program for Cooperative Cataloging <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 10 Apr 2003 07:17:38 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (40 lines)

Even as in "interim" recommendation, I have a problem with Jimmie's idea.
But first, I should say I have no problem with full vs funnel membership, or
using the latter as a means of allowing those without access to the
utilities to continue contributing. Or, indeed, using funnels as the way for
"occasional" contributors (who don't meet any sort of minimum contribution
threshold) to continue to enrich LCSH.

I'd even go so far as to say that, as a member of this group, I can quite
see the point of full membership requiring an institution to screen and
submit to our utility up to a certain number of proposals of funnel members.
But, wearing my own institution's hat, I don't think that will fly - evel
allowing for the deliberately mixed metaphors. Persuading our bosses that
the SACO work we do benefits our own institutions is one thing; persuading
them that doing other institutions' SACO work benefits our own institutions
to the same extent would be next to impossible. Yes, I could probably
compile a modest list of benefits (we might need the headings one day; we
benefit from the relationship with our funnel members; we increase our own
knowledge and education, and so on), but asking everyone to be a "minder"
(is that a term used in the US?) as a condition of membership is a step too
far, in my opinion. I think we'd have a hard time selling the concept, or
the practicalities, to the membership. If others disagree with that
analysis, then I would be perfectly willing to try, of course, but right now
I'd take some persuading.

Can someone with historical knowledge tell me, briefly, how the NACO funnels
got started. Was there just a call for volunteers? And is there anything we
can learn from NACO with regard to funnels?

Best wishes,

Hugh
--
Hugh Taylor
Head of Cataloguing, Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB3 9DR, England

email: [log in to unmask]   fax: +44 (0)1223 333160
phone: +44 (0)1223 333069 (with voicemail) or
phone: +44 (0)1223 333000 (ask for pager 036)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
August 2019
July 2019
May 2019
April 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
October 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
December 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
June 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
July 2000

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager