> If you remove the resources that'd do it, too. Seems like kind of an odd point for that person to have made.
The question is what combination or absence of resources is best for
students and/or patrons? It's clear that you could site any number of
desirable things, from database-access terminals to an ice cream
parlor, within the library building, it would make the library more
popular and there would be synergy and spillover effects. But there
are also costs, both to the library and potential costs to not putting
things somewhere else, or nowhere at all.
Video gaming is a classic case. It gets some people in the door, but
once the direct and opportunity costs are factored in, is it really
worth it? And leaving aside narrow library interests, might a rational
overseer decide, say, the student union was a more effective place to
put the activity?
In short, librarians are fond of saying there is "more to a library
than books." It's worth discussing the more, and thinking about
whether it will change over time. I for one am not at all convinced
that the historically rather brief practice of free computers in
libraries will continue forever.
Tim
Received on Thu Apr 29 2010 - 19:31:38 EDT