0On Thu, 14 Mar 2013, James Weinheimer wrote:
> And of course, all of your statements are none of those things! :-)
Of course. :)
No, really, if I want to get some concrete thing (like ending obesity)
accomplished, I'll be constructive, write "working hypotheses" and test
them. If I want to get people *interested* in accomplishing some concrete
things, I may be "manipulative", just to raise awareness. But I'm not
likely, consciously, to try to do anything that in any way discourages
accomplishing anything worthwhile, although I might ask for concrete proof
of the relative worthiness in a concept.
> I was assuming that you had listened to my podcasts
We need to eliminate one word from the language-- "assume".
If I only had time-- sorry about that-- I really WANT to listen to them.
I have an "ecological niche" theory for explaining problem-solving, and I
can definitely see it in what you are trying to do as well. It is that
there is a finite amount of energy needing to be controlled surrounding
any problem (or in the "niche"), and the amount of that energy any
individual can confront constructively is inversely proportional to the
number of people working on the problem. Thus the origin of frustration.
OTOH, some people (back to the manipulative media again) can
intentionally increase the amount of obstructive energy in the "niche" in
order to obviate solutions.
> It seems as if many catalogers prefer to keep going in the same
> well-trodden paths
Hmmm, could that have something to do with the nature of the people who
tend to become catalogers? We could change that by having catalogers take
more responsibility for relating to the public and to the problems
surrounding information dispersal in general.
> bring people back to the catalog
If some left, they did it for positive reasons relating to some other
form(s) of access, so let's discuss those and incorporate them into our
catalogs.
> Many out there believe that the catalog is simply inadequate for modern
> society
The place to start to fix anything is to identify what the broken items
(catalogs and societies) are best purposed to do and what is broken or
breaking them that prevents that. So, let's formulate lists of what modern
society needs and how the needs can be met (perhaps even by us) AND how
they might also be corrupted (by others).
> and want to do away with it.
Revolutions never work. Controlled evolution using "working
hypotheses" can, but we have to sell that approach while it's still
unfamiliar to some folks.
> Others just hate the catalog on general principles,
> http://scholar.google.it/scholar?hl=en&q=why+opacs+suck
That's a lousy link. I couldn't figure out by looking at the search
results what you wanted us to see. Google sucks on general and specific
principles. Try keyword-searching "schneider how opacs suck" on AltaVista.
> it can be fixed instead of just trashed.
And try thinking about fixing parts rather that the whole thing at once.
Look for the causes of ruptures and at changing them. Fixes of the
ruptures will follow. It's like looking for the common causes of common
destructive behaviors rather than ranting about their effects. For
example, peace itself can't be achieved directly, but aggressive
narcissism as the common cause of conflict can be addressed.
> I think it could serve in some small way to helping the world out there.
Don't over-focus on one thing. Maybe we can help the world in more direct
and immediate ways while we're working on fixing what we are used to being
obsessing with.
> By the way, if you wait for people to complain before you decide that
> people have problems with your product, you'll be waiting a long, long
> time.
Don't wait, involve your customers in the evolutionary design of your
product. Make it theirs and they will come!
> It is wrong to believe that people complain when they are unhappy.
Did you mean to say "always" complain? So encourage them: "Tell us how we
can improve our product".
> When you create something that no one wants and they can find something
> they prefer someplace else, people don't complain--they just go away.
In our "broken" society, people invent useless stuff and then con people
into wanting it (let's call it the "Cabbage Patch Doll syndrome"). Maybe
the problem with catalogs is that someone is telling people that they need
what the someone invented (and can profit from), not catalogs.
Maybe that's the problem with RDA-- we can't go anywhere else and we
can't change it so all we can do is complain! Solution? Expand the right
to change it!
> When I go to a lousy butcher or a lousy restaurant here in Rome ... I
> don't complain. I just choose a better one.
Sounds like what is happening to marriage too. :)
Thus does instant personal gratification trump collaboration for
improvement.
We do the same thing with commercial OPACs instead of collaborating to
influence the manufacturers. That keeps the lousy products on the market
and the wheels of manipulative advertising greased.
Cheers!
jgm
John G. Marr
Cataloger
CDS, UL
Univ. of New Mexico
Albuquerque, NM 87131
jmarr_at_unm.edu
jmarr_at_flash.net
** Forget the "self"; forget the "other"; just
consider what goes on in between. **
Opinions belong exclusively to the individuals expressing them, but
sharing is permitted.
Received on Thu Mar 14 2013 - 16:35:32 EDT