I personally don't think its necessary to have a separate list -- the
process of preparing serials for binding (and discarding duplicates) happens
usually around the same time each year, during the quietest time of year,
and the messages aren't overwhelming --- anyone who is not interested, can
delete after glancing at the subject line or forward the message to someone
else. The fewer lists, the better.
Jill Patrick, OCAD
-----Original Message-----
From: Mary Wassermann <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 12:34 PM
Subject: Separate serials list


>I agree with Greta and would support a separate list for serials swapping.
>
>Mary Wassermann
>Philadelphia Museum of Art
>
>Greta K. Earnest wrote:
>
>> I have oftened wondered whether it might be useful to have a separate
>> ARLIS-L list devoted exclusively to serials swapping. It seems there are
a
>> lot of messages devoted to serials swapping which is extremely useful to
>> those of us involved with that activity but add many extra messages for
>> those that don't have anything to do with periodicals in their libraries.
>> If this would be a feasible option would anyone find it desirable?
>>
>> Just a thought.
>>
>> Greta Earnest
>> Art and Architecture Librarian
>> Pratt Institute Library
>> 200 Willoughby Ave.
>> Brooklyn, NY 11205
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Maryly Snow <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wednesday, July 22, 1998 1:30 PM
>> Subject: Re: Reply to individuals, not the list!!!
>>
>> >I agree with Tracey whenever the issue at hand applies to procedures,
>> policies, how do you do it,
>> >and information requests that might serve to educate a large number of
>> folks. Maryly Snow
>> >
>> >Tracey Sams wrote:
>> >
>> >> Overall, I agree with Angela's point. However, I think it's also
equally
>> annoying to completely read through someone's request for assistance, or
to
>> read something of interest just to have that individual ask that the
>> response be sent to them privately when the information could be
potentially
>> beneficial to other colleagues who are taking the time to read their
>> requests in the first place.
>> >> Tracey Sams
>> >> Covington & Burling
>> >> Wasington, DC
>> >> >>> <[log in to unmask]> 07/22 10:53 AM >>>
>> >> Please, please, please can we show some common courtesy when
responding
>> to
>> >> queries which are of a personal nature or are of no interest to the
rest
>> of the
>> >> list. READ THE MESSAGE AND SEND YOUR REPLY TO THE INDIVIDUAL WHO
WROTE
>> IT.
>> >> Most of the time the sender asks that you do it anyway. Take the
extra
>> 10 1/2
>> >> seconds to actually type in an address rather than just typing
"reply."
>> While
>> >> reading personal responses is on a rare occassion funny - Jim Emmett's
>> >> preference for "a woman's neck over a man's bum" and his reference to
>> >> "dangly bits" - they are usually just plain annoying.
>> >>
>> >> Angela Binda
>> >> Brandeis University
>> >> [log in to unmask]
>