SPAM-LOW: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries

Tue Jul 8 14:53:26 EDT 2008

I knew of the one connected to OCLC, but not of this one, Andrea.
Interesting. I wonder what would happen if it was commercially marketed like
Cha Cha.

chris

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 2:35 PM, Andrea Berstler - Director <
andrea.berstler at villagelibrary.org> wrote:

> Pennsylvania has such a program state wide - Ask PA.
> http://www.askherepa.org/
>
> I do not have the numbers here as to their success or "non-success" but it
> is a nice service to offer our rural population, where most things are not
> open 24/7.
>
> Andrea Berstler - Director
> The Village Library of Morgantown
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Kiess
> Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 2:03 PM
> To: Reeder, Norm
> Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> Subject: SPAM-LOW: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries
>
> Norm,
>
> I meant to send this to the list. Dave Clout also brought up some good
> points concerning this.
>
> Excellent points and you expose a fatal flaw in one of my arguments. Some
> of
> the best inventions have been reinventions of another technology and, in
> many ways, I think librarians have been adept at this.
>
> As for the virtual reference service, I think it can work. It just has to
> be
> marketed in the right way. Maybe if it were less associated with a single
> library and part of a larger "web experience." What if there was a
> consortium of libraries participating via a single interface for live
> interaction.
>
> See this article from Wired:
>
> http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_curator
>
> chris
>
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 1:11 PM, Reeder, Norm <nreeder at torrnet.com> wrote:
>
> > I guess I'd phrase things a little differently.  Most of the new
> > technologies that have come about didn't originate uniquely for
> libraries.
> >  We are just too small a market.  For instance we didn't invent the
> > barcode idea; it was adapted from the larger marketplace.
> >
> > Joan Frye Williams often remarks that when she looks for new
> > technologies or what is "coming", she doesn't look in our libraries.
> > She looks at the supermarket or the wider Internet to see what is
> > developing and then thinks "how could we use that".  Stephen Abrams
> > makes similar remarks.  Microsoft is infamous for its "embrace and
> > extend" philosophy (and look how much money they make because of it!).
> >
> > So I would think that adapting to, and extending the use of new ideas
> > and things is the way to go.  It does take some looking around (and
> > this listserv is one good way to keep abreast of what's going on too).
> > But just because we didn't invent it, or it wasn't taught in library
> > school doesn't mean it can't be significant or we can't play with it.
> >
> > I think a lot of libraries are playing with Web 2.0 technologies, but
> > there certainly at this point isn't a "default" or "standard" way to
> > implement the variety of things currently out there.  It's going to
> > take some time and trial balloons to see what is effective or not.
> >
> > One of the things to watch out for though here is the "greatest thing
> > since sliced bread" thingie that initially gets talked about in all of
> > the magazines; websites etc., that then doesn't meet the unattainable
> > expectations and is suddenly condemned for not doing so.  Many new
> > technologies take some time to find their true niche.  (Does anyone
> > remember "Java everywhere--Microsoft is toast!).  Didn't quite happen,
> > but Java is still a significant technology all the same.  I'd say the
> > same thing about
> > 24/7 live/Internet reference.  It was touted as the be all and end all
> > and all of our Reference sections were toast.  It didn't turn out to
> > be "all", and there's room for both the new way and old way.  I'm
> > seeing some info to indicate that it isn't all that successful and
> > some libraries are dropping it because of lack of patron input.  But at
> least they tried.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Norm Reeder
> > Torrance Public Library
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org [mailto:
> > web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Cloutman, David
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 08, 2008 9:28 AM
> > To: Christopher Kiess; Bill Drew
> > Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> > Subject: RE: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries
> >
> > > All right everyone. I'm going to play the Devil's advocate since I
> > > am
> > one of
> >
> > I sure hope, because this statement is crazy:
> >
> > > Librarians have not changed and they have simply reacted with the
> > > changing times; that is not true change
> >
> > Actually, I would consider that to be adaptation, the best kind of
> > change. Adaptation means that change is done is the context of
> > situational awareness. There are so many posts to this list about
> > Second Life, and IM chat, etc., and so little of it relates to the
> > actual demands of patrons and abilities of library staff. I cannot
> > project in measurable benefit of providing these technological solutions.
> >
> > As sad as it may sound, in some libraries (I'm not naming names,
> > here), getting the bulk of the reference staff to answer reference
> > questions by email can be a significant change for an organization.
> > Yes, the reference staff knows how to answer references questions.
> > Yes, they can write email. But for some reason, the bulk of them can
> > be resistant to doing both. If reference staff were more accessible by
> > email, it would certainly benefit the patrons, and it would be a
> > significant adaptation to the current situation. But it doesn't
> > happen, because the librarians are resistant to change.
> >
> > I'm sure the situation may different in an academic settings, but I
> > think for public libraries, and my library in particular, we needn't
> > be straining to implement bleeding edge technology. Simply
> > implementing well tested technology that many, if not most, of our
> > patrons already use, can provide significant return on investment.
> > And, yes, that is real change, even if it is only reactive.
> >
> > ---
> > David Cloutman <dcloutman at co.marin.ca.us> Electronic Services
> > Librarian Marin County Free Library
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org
> > [mailto:web4lib-bounces at webjunction.org] On Behalf Of Christopher
> > Kiess
> > Sent: Monday, July 07, 2008 2:49 PM
> > To: Bill Drew
> > Cc: web4lib at webjunction.org
> > Subject: Re: [Web4lib] Re: Future of libraries
> >
> >
> >
> > Email Disclaimer:
> > http://www.co.marin.ca.us/nav/misc/EmailDisclaimer.cfm
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Web4lib mailing list
> > Web4lib at webjunction.org
> > http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> C.L. Kiess, B.A., M.L.S.
> Information & Knowledge Specialist
> Columbus Regional Hospital
> Library & Knowledge Services
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Web4lib mailing list
> Web4lib at webjunction.org
> http://lists.webjunction.org/web4lib/
>
>

-- 
C.L. Kiess, B.A., M.L.S.
Information & Knowledge Specialist
Columbus Regional Hospital
Library & Knowledge Services