ACQNET v7n016 (April 7, 1997) URL = http://www.infomotions.com/serials/acqnet/acqnet-v7n016.txt ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 16, April 7, 1997 ======================================== (1) FROM: Eleanor Cook, ACQNET Editor SUBJECT: Newsletter or Listserve? You Tell Me (23 lines) (2) FROM: Mary Kay SUBJECT: ACQNET Structure: Should It Change? (37 lines) (3) FROM: ACQNET SUBJECT: Subscriber Survey: Stay the Same or Change? (23 lines) (1)---------------------------------------------------------------- Below is a posting from a long-time subscriber which I would like everyone to read and think about. ACQNET, being one of the earliest library-oriented electronic lists, began as a newsletter more than a true listserve. Mary Kay makes some good points. The ACQNET Editorial Board and I are skittish about making this change to a true listserve because subscribers (at least some) have been vocal about preferring the edited and therefore "delayed" format. It does make us unique, but the down side is that questions are often delayed for two weeks or sometimes even longer. If ACQNET changed to a listserve (still moderated, of course), the postings would come out quicker and the whole thing would be less work. However, if we do this, ACQNET would probably need to change its name because as it is right now, it is an electronic newsletter, that is, a serial. A listserve is a different creature altogether. It's a matter of structure. I think it is a serious matter for subscribers to ponder. We have grown so much and I know some people out there do not care about this - but please, even if you barely even read ACQNET, I would appreciate your "vote." AT THE END OF THE SECOND POSTING IS A PLACE FOR YOU TO INDICATE YOUR PREFERENCE - PLEASE READ ON: (2)---------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 31 Mar 1997 05:23:14 -0800 (PST) From: Mary Kay (Humboldt State U.) Subject: ACQNET Structure: Should It Change? Gentle readers, I'd like to request some discussion of the current ACQNET newsletter-style format. For myself, I find that when I want to pose a question to acquisitions colleagues, I am hampered by the lack of interchange and immediacy afforded in the moderated listserve environment which is so prevalent for other library topics. I would benefit from the direct ability to post a question and participate in real discussion, and for others' questions, I think it is helpful to see the stream of answers, even if they are only to say "I don't know and would like to find out also." Surely we all agree that via interactive discussion we develop connections with others and can combine efforts to solve problems that may overwhelm an isolated worker. To me, an edited newsletter is a good format for short articles, while a listserve is a more functional way to gather information on current practices. So I am wondering whether there are other readers who would appreciate access to a more interactive forum for our specialty. It seems to me that at minimum a listserve capability could be added to ACQNET to augment the newsletter format and better serve our information needs. I am very appreciative of our editor's ongoing efforts to edit and post ACQNET in its current form, as are we all. She does a fine job with the limited newsletter format and obviously gives much personal time to this task. But as we all know, our profession is in the throes of transformation, and a tool that was effective five years ago is not necessarily so today. What do others think? Should the ACQNET newsletter be augmented or even replaced by an interactive forum? Mary Kay Acquisitions/Collection Development Humboldt State University Library (3)---------------------------------------------------------------- Please mark the following and return to The Editor, ACQNET Eleanor Cook: cookei@appstate.edu 1. Leave ACQNET as it is _____ OR: 2. Consider changing ACQNET to a listserve format _______ (moderated postings as they come in, regardless of topic) OR: 3. Other: Please add your own ideas of how we should handle this: I will tally results and allow discussion at some length before a decision is made. Thanks in advance to all who participate: ACQNET is what you want it to be! ****** END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 7, No. 16 ****** END OF FILE ******