What your favorite author says about you ...

... from Huffpost Books is quite interesting. This site says that if you are a Kurt Vonnegut fan, then you "... have an original and slightly absurdist way of looking at reality..."

So it really isn't your favorite author speaking about you personally. After all, how many people could someone like Kurt Vonnegut actually have met. Considering the billions of Internet-enabled folk world-wide, any of whom might land on that website, statistically it's pretty unlikely that he'd know any of them. Particularly as he died in 2007.

Nevertheless, the site does give food for thought. Shame the list stopped at only 12 authors. I wonder what the analysis would be for a reader with a passion for Chaucer? Or perhaps Matt Drudge? Or those that retire to bed with Library Management Policies ....

Disaster Recovery Plans

Struggling with GMDs ...

In the never-ending quest for consistency, a whole stack of assorted GMD's got a thorough smacking today; CO (COmputer equipment) and SO (SOftware) got the old Global Change treatment and became ELs (Electronic resources). The two genuine SO (SOund) resources had a manual change back to the correct designation. "L" (Library equipment) joined the EQ (EQuipment) GMDs, and nary a grumble was heard.

Which I guess is one of the positive attributes of working with MARC record fields, as opposed to actual PE (PEople). Notably though, PE isn't a recognised SCIS-compliant GMD, although they are still pretty important.

Still unresolved is what to do about another all-sorts arrangements for what may be loosely referred to as "movies"; the MO (MOtion picture) variety which might be on a VI (video) tape, or as an EL (electronic resource) - although not a computer program. They ("movies") may also fall into the classification of FI (FIlm) if the content is mounted on a nitrate-style medium, as opposed to a "flicks" if on SL (SLides) flashed (FL if FLash-cards) at a high enough speed.

OK. That's it. I'm going to LE (LEave it alone) for a while, before my toenails start curling backwards.

Tomorrow I'll have another go at sorting it all out. Why, do I hear you ask? Because the web cats linked to the library software management program generate icons for our users so they can see what media they are not going to be allowed to access. Makes sense? No, I thought not. Glad to hear it's not just me on this one.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Web 2.0

They say "everything old becomes new again", and so it would appear to also be true in the matter of Online information dissemination. I've lost track of the number of hugely successfully authors (critically acclaimed as well as commercially viable) who stated their work is read because there's "something there to offend everyone" - or words to that effect.

And what better way to assess the effectiveness of Web 2.0 communication than to collate data as to what and why "advice" is given regarding the restriction of "certain information".

Whilst still contemplating the implications of the very recent verbal instruction that a certain person "did not expect to see their name mentioned" by me on "any website or listserv", and the confidential classification of The Meeting, and a prohibition on revealing the nature of the discussion, and the expectation of that none of the identities of the other parties would be revealed ... it occurs to me that perhaps I may have been the only one present that sees the true nature of the instruction.

We're not talking anti-terrorism strategies, national security policies, or even daytime television programming. This was a conflict resolution meeting regarding different perspectives on library management.

Can't tell you any more at this stage without appropriate clearances re identities, agenda, outcomes, determinations, etc. I'm already in trouble with the Fashion Compliance Unit, The Diet Council, and the Grammar Police. However, I'm reasonably sure that there isn't yet a prohibition on my "reflecting" or inviting comment on my reflections.

So pretty much it came down to an experienced, qualified and practicing Library Manager disagreeing with the principle of "non-accountability", unqualified, and precedent-reliant line managers determining policies which negatively impact on resource security, OHS issues, and pure and simple Human Rights.

Not to mention MLTU - the misinformed leading the uninformed ... to the exclusion of the only informed perspective. Such is the way of the world. Apparently.

And the stocktake begins ...

Yep, tomorrow stocktake ("inventory") starts for the Non-Fiction location. Having spent the last 4 months culling/weeding/deselecting, it's down to a mere 7K-ish volumes. Five days, 2 people ... hmmm. With one person scanning and the other screen-checking (with regular swapping under OHS), that's only 1400 books/movements per day, on and off shelves.

Over a five hour period (six hours, less 20 minutes morning break and 40 minutes lunch break), that's 280 per hour, or 4 per minute. But allowing for an average of one in ten resources - which was about the going rate for Fiction last year - having a problem that will require approximately 5 minutes to correct (eg catalog error, incorrect spine label, invalid barcode) that's an additional 140 books x 5 minutes work time. That's only another 12 hours work, or a little over 2 additional days.

If the equipment doesn't fail, the network doesn't go down (two power surges in the afternoon on last Friday), no one stops for any reason, like they die or something ...

NYE in Sydney; with or without Paris Hilton

Been checking out webcams over the world; seems a bit weird that I was in Times Square only 11 weeks ago. But New Year in Sydney is something else again ... apart from the expected 1.5 million souls lining the Sydney Harbor foreshores for tonight's fireworks, Bondi Beach was as crowded as Hades must get the day after Overdue Notices go out 'n' all those lies get told about what happened to the missing/lost/but-I-brought-it-back stories.

Quite a few cases of sunburn and dehydration, according to the news reports. A relatively quiet NYE here at Warrior Librarian Central. Grouchman got an invite to the Paris Hilton NYE Party, so we won't be seeing him until tomorrow, so at least Warrior Librarian is represented there. I hope he remembers the list of questions I want him to ask The Paris. Geez, the world really must want to know what she's reading at the moment; who her fav. author is; her funny little library anecdotes.

But it's good to hear that The Paris Person has been propping up the Australian Economy; $20K on clothes within the first few hours of arriving here. Strange she's not staying at a Hilton hotel; I guess she must have checked out wotif.com and got the cheap rates. Just guessing on that one though ...

From control to chaos, or maybe the reverse?

!
Now here's a dilemma; from the dictates of high order organisation - spine labels in some sort of standardised position, the fiction/non-fiction dichotomy, and let's not even mention AACR2 (unless you're a professional cataloguer (in which place go for it!) - to the 'controlled randomness' of scrap booking. Can there be room in one life for both?

Having almost mastered the skill of 'letting go' of straight lines and edges for scrapping's sake, the Big Dream Plan for the library sort of demands an ultra-extreme austerity of visual impact.

Probably best not to mention the feng shui catastrophe of my office. Never mind the ideal of having some running water in the proper corner of the room (a full-size Trevi Fountain replica would have been my first choice, but it wouldn't fit), or a picture of a mountain in the other part (which at least would be 'doable'). The shelves overflowing with the backlog of end processing are going to have to be cleared; not to mention the self-positioned trip hazards over the floor.

And yes, thanks for thinking "she should be doing that anyway". Very helpful. It often seems that more stuff gets into my office than goes out. Maybe it feels safe in there, or likes the ambiance?

But the stock-standard downside of a major clean-up is the problem of location identification - "finding stuff" after a Thorough Tidying. For some reason, this isn't a problem in the stacks, but once I 'file' my stick-it notes and other important information (which for some reason gets written on paper the size of oxygen molecules) they become very difficult to relocate. I believe this is most probably caused by mysterious cosmic powers executing "The Revenge of the Trees".

So with the feng shui-ness of positioning perils, I'll also be facing the wrath of air and water if I don't get the polarity right, or I somehow inadvertently create conflict between the Qi and Niao, or any of those similar pitfalls that can be cut-and-pasted off any website. Chaos will reign supreme.

Which I guess will leave my office in pretty much the same state it's in now.

Weeding, Culling, Stocktake and/or Inventory

Sure, you’ve got a whole document on your library’s policy for removing material from circulation, and the auditor’s are quite happy with statement’s like “damaged beyond repair” or “not borrowed for 50 years”. But let’s show some consideration for those future generations that follow in our footsteps, and may be in need of an Emergency Laugh. Why not demonstrate some creativity in our reporting?

1. Removed (with long tongs) due to malodorous fog surrounding item
2. Item contained photograph that resembled librarian’s ex-husband
3. Reading Circle members suggested that book be removed as an acceptable compromise to breaking staff’s kneecaps
4. Superceded by any of the last 20 editions of this encyclopaedia
5. Too many books on this shelf - something had to go. This was ‘it’
6. Critical accumulated mass of book lice residing in book found to exceed OSH maximum lifting recommendations
7. Font size too small; budget request for electron microscope reader refused
8. Hazardous Materials Team refused to handle item, so it could not longer be shelved

Ah well ...