Re: The Return of Cards?

Fair enough --- it does get a bit off-topic and troll-esque in here now and
then. I think that "voting by participation" -- by interjecting what we'd
actually like to discuss may be in order. For myself, I'm interested in
what real librarians are using and creating to accomplish some of the goals
discussed in this very thread. Are there products, developments, vendors,
software [ OSS or Proprietary ] that accomplish these goals or, at least
approach some of these goals. Any failures to report? What are the costs in
time and money? Is anyone personally hitting the streets with these
concepts and making a difference -- training and interacting with patrons
maybe?

Chad


On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:28 PM, <cupwonder3_at_aol.com> wrote:

> Chad
>
> Once people start slinging insults around, that's what bothers me.
>
> Julie
>
>
>  -----Original Message-----
> From: Chad Roseburg <croseburg_at_ncrl.org>
> To: NGC4LIB <NGC4LIB_at_LISTSERV.ND.EDU>
> Sent: Wed, Oct 9, 2013 3:26 pm
> Subject: Re: [NGC4LIB] The Return of Cards?
>
> The list has maybe morphed into a more general discussion about
> effective communication, UX strategies and information display rather than
> being tied to "next gen catalogs" ...I'm not bothered by this. The same
> essential issues and problems are still present: we got a bunch of data and
> stuff -- now how do we effectively communicate/display this "stuff" to
> others -- make it usable/findable -- maybe include relevant data from other
> sources. There's a lot of thoughtful dialog here, though it would be
> interesting to hear what folks are doing in practice.
> Cost benefits analysis --- product reviews -- developments underway
> ...etc..
>
> Lists are always filled with animated discussion -- the unsubscribe feature
> exists for a reason ...
>
> Chad
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 12:10 PM, john g marr <jmarr_at_unm.edu> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 9 Oct 2013, Julie Hankinson wrote:
> >
> >  Things are getting really nasty here, people. Is there a more reasonable
> >> tone that you can take to discuss your differences on this?
> >>
> >
> >  Hi Julie:
> >
> >   Thanks for your concern! Since the basic topic is communication itself,
> > particularly affective styles (e.g. manipulative), one of my prime personal
> > motivations is to **practice** avoiding being emotional as a result of
> > feeling threatened in such discussions (kind of a "vicious circle", isn't
> > it?).
> >
> >  As I may have previously said, an understanding of the "affectation"
> > potential of communication styles is relevant to designing information
> > systems capable of mitigating manipulative misinformation by teaching
> > "patrons" how to recognize manipulative tactics (e.g. logical fallacies,
> > glib speech, misdirection, compulsive lying, self-obsession, lack of
> > empathy, failure to accept responsibility for one own actions, and
> > sociological strategies and tricks used to deceive).
> >
> >  You might agree that "Things are getting really nasty here" might be
> > rather "affective" for being imprecise. Could you please cite the
> > particular "things" in my (our) posts that seem "nasty", perhaps with
> > suggestions for more civil ways to make the same points? Look for
> > underlying causes of emotional reactions too. We're human, so maybe an
> > interesting topic would be: "Should we avoid feeling emotional (and could
> > that mitigate "revolutionary" activities)?"  :)
> >
> > Cheers!
> >
> > jgm
> >
> >  John G. Marr
> >  Cataloger
> >  CDS, UL
> >  Univ. of New Mexico
> >  Albuquerque, NM 87131
> >  jmarr_at_unm.edu
> >  californiastop_at_hushmail.com
> >
> >     ** 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.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Chad Roseburg
> Automation Dept.
> North Central Regional Library
>
>


-- 
Chad Roseburg
Automation Dept.
North Central Regional Library