I'm sorry, but Tom's initial statements are right on target. There is
absolutely no need for a separate list. We are all one organization, and
the existing list is right there to be used by the librarian members just
like everyone else. Having a separate list serves no purpose but to
exclude. All the chat to the contrary is just diversion from this basic
fact, putting a nice face on something that isn't nice at all. This is not
national politics here--it's our treasured and esteemed organization at
stake.
As for librarians not understanding some of the technical or musical topics
that get discussed, what better way for them to learn, than from the
discussions that may catch their interest? If they have no interest,
that's a terrible thing. The "knowledge base" of the existing ARSC list is
truly amazing--there is nothing like it in world. It is a huge asset, not
something to be pushed away from or avoided. Or divided.
And it works the other way too. For those of us who are not librarians or
academics, it would be helpful to us and definitely to the organization as
a whole for us to see what people are thinking about and the issues that
concern them in areas in which we are not involved. Frankly, that has
always been one of the great things about ARSC--my exposure to separate
worlds of people who share the interest that I have in recorded sound, but
whose needs, issues and goals are different than mine. Starting the new
list is a statement that the librarians really don't care about my
understanding their issues, or we wouldn't need a separate list. It's
really that simple.
Just telling me to join the separate list is no answer. There shouldn't be
a separate list. We should think about the needs of our organization
first.
Sorry to be negative, but I think this is just a terrible step that is
essentially destructive to our organization. Just a bad idea, however you
dress it up. Frankly, I am very disappointed in those who did this. It is
very "un-ARSC-like."
Best,
John Haley
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 8:18 AM, Jenny Doctor <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Dear Tom
>
> Many thanks for your kind and thoughtful message. I will send this last
> response to both lists, because I believe that your message to me merits a
> response, and then I promise not to clutter people's mailboxes with any
> further discussion about the philosophy behind the new list.
>
> I simply want to say that I agree with what you say about cross-discussion
> between the two lists. It is inevitable, and I will certainly remain
> subscribed to both lists. ARSC has members with many different interests
> and areas of expertise, and it is indeed wonderful that we can learn from
> each other -- as we do when we gather each year for the annual conference.
> As Wendy pointed out, there we acknowledge through the categorization of
> the sessions the different areas of interest -- yet they are open to
> everyone. I certainly learn a great deal from going to sessions that
> correspond least with my background. Similarly that is why I have been
> subscribed for years to the main ARSCLIST, from which I learn much.
>
> The new list simply enriches the opportunity for meaningful discussion
> between ARSC members. There will undoubtedly be times when there is
> cross-discussion. But the main thing is that the new list provides a forum
> for a group of ARSC members who have requested a specific conversation
> space to discuss issues of audio archiving and preservation that are
> particularly relevant to their roles in libraries and archives.
>
> Now, rather than talking about what the list might accomplish, I'd rather
> we turn attention to the issues, as they say in politics.
>
> Thank you, Tom, for your good wishes for the new list -- and of course I
> join you in that.
>
> with best wishes, Jenny
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ARSC Library and Archives Discussion List [mailto:
> [log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Tom Fine (GMail)
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2016 7:19 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIB] ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic
> Discussion List
>
> Hi Jenny:
>
> I can see the reasoning behind this new list, even if I don't fully agree
> (no harm in that, it's OK to agree to disagree on some things). I plan to
> quietly monitor the goings-on, as I am not so expert in deep-dive librarian
> matters. My main purpose is to watch for topics of "cross-pollination"
> between the two lists.
>
> I remain concerned that a tribalism that some ARSC Members already say is
> present, could get worse, by splitting different interest groups into
> different e-mail "camps." Hopefully, many will subscribe to both lists and
> much cross-list discussion will take place when the topics warrant. There
> is much general interest, even deep in the technical weeds. For instance,
> it is useful for an archivist or librarian to remain in contact with those
> who may have expertise in their content and/or unique media. And, it is
> important for those with personally-curated collections, especially those
> who wish to donate those collections to an institution or library, to
> understand the mechanics, processes and issues involved with an institution
> or library taking in their collection. Another example is metadata -- it
> matters both at the institutional level and at the private digital library
> level.
>
> Until, proven otherwise, I will take a glass-half-full optimistic approach
> to this change, and wish the new list a type of success that is
> "force-multiplying" for ARSC.
>
> -- Tom Fine
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jenny Doctor" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 10:43 PM
> Subject: FW: ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic Discussion
> List
>
>
> >
> > Here are two messages (see below) that I attempted to send to this list
> earlier today.
> > Unfortunately, due to the fact that my computer is not very well at the
> moment and I’m using an
> > unfamiliar loaner with very small type, I mistakenly sent the messages
> to the ARSCLIST instead of
> > ARSCLIB but couldn’t tell ... Apologies that this didn’t enter the
> conversation earlier as I
> > hoped it would.
> >
> > with best wishes, Jenny Doctor
> >
> > From: Jenny Doctor
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 2:13 PM
> >
> > P.S. One last thing that I meant to say:
> >
> > Many, many thanks to Kim Peach and to Patrick Feaster, who were
> incredibly hard working and
> > persevering in getting this list up and running. They both deserve an
> appreciative round of
> > virtual applause!
> >
> > with best wishes, Jenny
> >
> > From: Jenny Doctor
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 2:08 PM
> > Subject: RE: ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic
> Discussion List
> >
> >
> > Many thanks, Jim, for copying me into this interesting discussion. For
> a technical reason, I am
> > not currently seeing the ARSCLIB discussion today (don’t worry, it’s my
> fault and I’m fixing it so
> > I can join in!). I appreciate very much that you have copied me in so
> that I can join the
> > discussion.
> >
> > The ARSCLIB list was formed: (1) after consultation through a survey
> that was circulated in 2014
> > to 100 ARSC members who are involved with caring for collections in
> institutions, (2) after a
> > lunchtime open meeting that took place at the annual meeting in Chapel
> Hill in 2014, and (3) once
> > a proposal for it was passed by the ARSC Board.
> >
> > There was decisive interest expressed by many ARSC members who care for
> collections in
> > institutions for a listserv that could focus on issues that are
> encountered with respect to the
> > care and preservation of sound recordings in libraries and archives
> today. They felt that such a
> > listserv would be extremely useful – and I have to say that as we have
> worked on mounting this
> > list over the past 18 months, there are quite a few times when I wanted
> to send an e-mail to it,
> > asking for advice from my library and archive colleagues about some
> specific issue or other.
> >
> > Many ARSC members who responded feel that their interests do not
> necessarily correspond with the
> > conversations that take place on the main ARSCLIST. They also feel that
> some of the technical
> > issues about metadata, short and long-term digital preservation, and
> current storage options (to
> > name a few examples) that are encountered in libraries and archives
> wouldn’t necessarily interest
> > those who regularly interact on the main ARSCLIST.
> >
> > But the list is not closed. That was established firmly at the open
> lunch meeting in 2014. Anyone
> > can sign up and participate. But the nature and tenor of the two
> discussions will be different,
> > given that the focus of discussion of the ARSCLIB list is, by
> definition, about sound recordings
> > held in Libraries And Archives – the name of the committee that we soon
> aim to form in place of
> > the old AAA.
> >
> > I hope this helps to answer a few questions! And I’d like to welcome
> everyone to this new list!!
> > I can’t wait until we get down to business and begin to discuss the ins
> and outs of collaborative
> > ventures that we might consider, new storage options for delaminating
> lacquer discs, and other fun
> > stuff.
> >
> > with very best wishes to all,
> >
> > Jenny
> > ______________________________________________________
> > Dr Jenny Doctor |
> > Associate Professor, Department of Television, Radio, Film
> > S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications
> > Director of the Belfer Audio Archive, Special Collections Research Center
> > Syracuse University Libraries
> >
> > 222 Waverly Avenue
> > Syracuse, New York 13244-2010
> >
> > t 315.443.6158 e [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> w
> http://library.syr.edu/belfer/
> >
> > SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY
> > syr.edu
> > ______________________________________________________
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Jim Sam [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 1:38 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>; Sam Brylawski
> > <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> > Cc: Jenny Doctor <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> > Subject: Re: [OFFLIST] ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic
> Discussion List
> >
> > Well said, Sandy and Sam. I look forward to this new list. It's quite
> needed.
> >
> > Jim
> >
> > P.S. Hopefully I see you guys at IASA in September. Alas, budgets are
> keeping me from Bloomington
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 9:53 AM, Rodriguez, Sandy
> > <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> > Agree with Sam here. Jenny Doctor may chime in as the person who
> initiated this effort, but one
> > could simply see this as reviving the AAA - Associated Audio Archivists
> message board and moving
> > it to another platform - from moderated web-based forum to unmoderated
> listserv. Again, the
> > intention is not to exclude anyone from the list, but to narrow the
> focus of the discussion. There
> > is value in both listservs.
> >
> > Sandy
> >
> > --
> > Sandy Rodriguez
> > ARSC Online Media Committee, Co-Chair
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List
> > [mailto:[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
> Behalf Of Sam Brylawski
> > Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 11:09 AM
> > To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives
> Electronic Discussion List
> >
> > I don't understand the issue here, Tom. Both lists are open to everyone.
> > The new one is intended to concentrate on issues of specific interest to
> those of us who work for
> > institutions, but it's open to all.
> >
> > Sam Brylawski
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Tom Fine
> > <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> According to Bill Klinger's earlier post:
> >>
> >> "ARSC would like to thank Jenny Doctor for spearheading the creation
> >> of ARSCLIB. We also wish to thank Matthew Barton, Bryan Cornell, and
> >> the ARSC Online Media Committee. And as always, we thank the Library
> >> of Congress for hosting our listservs."
> >>
> >> So hopefully Jenny Doctor, Matt Barton or Bryan Cornell will answer
> >> some of these questions.
> >>
> >> One man's opinions -- I think it's generally not a good idea to split
> >> off conversations within an organization, because it leads to
> >> divisions, rivalries and discontentment. All of this is just human
> >> nature. No one wants to think discussions are going on behind their
> >> back, or that others within an organization have some "secret mood
> >> ring" entitling them to separate knowledge from everyone else. Even if
> >> discord and tribalism is not the intended consequence, it will be the
> >> actual outcome. Do we really want a bunch of "stovepipes" within ARSC?
> >> Does that track with the original founding intentions?
> >>
> >> Regarding Karl's post, if "content" is not part of being a librarian,
> >> then what exactly is the job description? Is not the purpose of
> >> archiving and accessability the underlying content? Even if a
> >> librarian/archivist is job-centered on organization, classification,
> >> preservation and similar "process," wouldn't they, as a curious human
> >> being, wish to learn as much as possible about the content on which
> they are performing these
> >> processes?
> >> Perhaps I'm being naive here?
> >>
> >> Finally, since we are an organization centered around Recorded Sound
> >> Collections, don't we all wish to know about, talk about and share
> >> knowledge about recorded sound? And is not recorded sound, inherently,
> >> "content"?
> >>
> >> -- Tom Fine
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Karl Miller" <
> >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> >> To: <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> >> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2016 11:00 AM
> >> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives
> >> Electronic Discussion List
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> While I am not one who expressed interest in such a list, I can see it
> >> as a logical development. Librarians and archivists are increasingly
> >> less interested in "content" than they are in the "how to." Consider
> >> the nominee for the head of the Library of Congress. In the past, that
> >> position was held by a scholar, someone who had an interest in
> >> content. The nominee is a public library librarian.
> >>
> >> My guess is that most in the position of dealing with archives have no
> >> interest in the source for a reissue of a particular recording. Nor do
> >> they have interest in things like restoration. These are subjects
> >> which often figure into the discussions on the ARSClist. I would also
> >> wager that the bulk of the technical discussions on the ARSClist are
> >> far beyond the comprehension of most librarians. While those who join
> >> the new list might have interest in the "how to," I can't see anyone
> >> straight out a library school having any notion of even something as
> >> basic as an equalization curve. While they might outsource their
> >> digitization, they are not likely to be in a position to evaluate the
> quality of the work.
> >>
> >> A new list, devoid of any issues of "content" could be seen as a
> >> possible attempt bridge some of the gap in the education of librarians
> >> and also demonstrate the need for specialized education in library
> schools.
> >>
> >> I will be most interested to see what is posted on the new list.
> >>
> >>
> >> Karl
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Tuesday, March 29, 2016 10:28 PM, Hugh Paterson III <
> >> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Ditto @Tom,
> >>
> >> Sure there is a lot of chatter about things I am not interested in,
> >> but I have one location to go to to ask my questions.
> >>
> >>
> >> - Hugh Paterson III
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 4:33 PM, Tom Fine
> >> <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am curious about the background on this new list. Perhaps some of
> >> those
> >>> "increasing expressions of interest" members could chime in? I
> >>> thought the whole purpose of ARSC, and the ARSC List, was to bring
> >>> librarians in contact with those who have expertise in the content
> >>> which they oversee, as well as to connect collectors and scholars
> >>> with those who oversee archives and collections which will aid in
> >>> their education, research and other information-gathering. Why
> >>> segregate the parts of ARSC? Doesn't that inevitably predict
> >>> organizational cleavage? And don't librarians already have one or
> >>> more librarian-specific organizations with their own message boards
> >>> and e-mail lists?
> >>>
> >>> Bottom line, I'm wondering, why an isolation booth in the big tent?
> >>>
> >>> -- Tom Fine
> >>>
> >>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Nathan Georgitis" <
> >>> [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> >>> >
> >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 29, 2016 12:19 PM
> >>> Subject: ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic Discussion
> >>> List
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> -- INTRODUCING ARSC'S NEW LISTSERV: ARSCLIB --
> >>>
> >>> ARSCLIB: The ARSC Library and Archives Electronic Discussion List
> >>>
> >>> In response to increasing expressions of interest by ARSC members for
> >>> an additional listserv to facilitate information sharing on topics
> >>> specifically related to audio preservation and archiving, ARSC is
> >>> pleased to announce ARSCLIB!
> >>>
> >>> ARSCLIB has been created to be a forum for discussing issues of
> >>> concern to individuals who are responsible for caring for recorded
> >>> sound collections within institutions. The discussions are expected
> >>> to have a narrower professional focus than the main ARSCLIST, e.g.,
> >>> members may ask for advice or share current best practices with
> >>> respect to environmental conditions storage, collection policies and
> >>> deaccessioning, cleaning and digitization practices, digital
> >>> archiving, outsourcing, metadata collection, cataloging practices,
> >>> streaming delivery, professional conferences and workshops, and other
> >>> issues that specifically concern the care of collections held within
> >>> institutions.
> >>>
> >>> To Subscribe to ARSCLIB:
> >>> 1. Send an email to: [log in to unmask]<mailto:
> [log in to unmask]> 2. Leave the
> >>> "Subject:" blank 3. As the body of the message, enter: subscribe
> >>> arsclib 4. Following this text, enter your name (e.g., "subscribe
> >>> arsclib Joe H.
> >>> Smith")
> >>> 5. Send the message normally and you will be subscribed to the list.
> >>> Only subscribers may post to the list.
> >>>
> >>> For full details about ARSCLIB and ARSCLIST, please go to:
> >>> http://www.arsc-audio.org/listservs.html
> >>>
> >>> ARSC would like to thank Jenny Doctor for spearheading the creation
> >>> of ARSCLIB. We also wish to thank Matthew Barton, Bryan Cornell, and
> >>> the ARSC Online Media Committee. And as always, we thank the Library
> >>> of Congress for hosting our listservs.
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
>
|