HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Brigham Young University
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 10:02:01 MST
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
Comments:     Warning -- original Sender: tag was NETNEWS@BYUVM
From:         Laurie Cardon <LIBLXC@BYUVM.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: fines

All borrowers at BYU are assessed overdue fines EXCEPT faculty and adminis-
trative staff.  Fines are $.25/day to a maximum of $5/item.  We have a 10-day
grace period, so the minimum fine assessed by the computer is $2.75 (11th day).

Recall fines for graduate students are $5 on the 8th day after the recall
notice was mailed, increasing at $.50/day to a maximum of $10/item.
Faculty recall fines are exactly double graduate recall fines.

Non-returned items are declared lost after varying lengths of time
(dependent on the patron category) generally after nonresponse to 3
overdue notices.  We bill the patron the replacement cost of the item
+ a $15 processing fee.  The default replacement cost if we can't find
it anywhere else is $30.  Sampler (usually paperback fiction) items are
assessed a $3 replacement fee and $5 processing fee -- we don't attempt
to price these items, as they are usually short-lived popular reading
and we often 'replace' them with other titles.

We will accept replacement items in lieu of replacement charges.  The
rule is that they have to be the *identical* edition/printing as the lost
book.  I frequently forgive a portion of the processing fee when the
patron brings in a replacement item -- it depends on the circumstances.

I also often forgive the processing fees when the items were 'lost'
through no fault of the patron (apartment fires, theft, etc.).  I feel
that I have the freedom to do this because the fees that we collect don't
actually return to the library.  The University assigns us a replacement
budget on a yearly basis.  This fund also covers replacement of items that
become damaged through normal circulation or are missing.  The monies we
collect are returned to a general University fund.  There is no relation
between the two amounts.

This begs the question of how many librarians have their hands figuratively
tied in negotiating fines/fees because the money is needed to support
library operations.  In these days of shrinking budgets, I suspect the
number is rising rather than falling.

                                      Laurie

*********************************************************************
Laureen Cardon     8-6144     |
HBLL Circulation              |  Truth is an approach to living,
Brigham Young University      |  not just an approach to knowing.
LIBLXC@BYUVM (VM.BYU.EDU)     |                   (Parker Palmer)
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 14:51:00 EST
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         "Barbara Auchter, UMBC Library,
              (410) 455-2354" <LIB0001@UMBCADMN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: fines

        The following fine policy is in effect at the Albin O. Kuhn Library
& Gallery at the University of Maryland Baltimore County in Maryland:

        All categories of borrowers are fined for overdue books EXCEPT
Faculty and Staff on our campus.
        Fines are $.25 per day per item, with a maximum of $5.00 per
item.  No fines under $1.00 are assessed, thus saving some staff time
and paperwork and creating some good PR if a borrower returns the book
before the 4th day overdue.
        One overdue notice is sent when items are 10 days overdue.
        When an item is 35 days overdue, the borrower is sent a bill
for a LOST BOOK.  This bill includes a replacement cost for the book
based on Call number, a $21.00 Processing Fee, and the $5.00 overdue
fine.  (Most books come back after the borrower sees the total on
this bill, especially if he/she has a large number of books charged out.)
        If the LOST BOOKS are not returned within 14 days, the charges
are added to the person's account at the Comptroller's Office of the
University and from that point on, the borrower is billed from that
office.  Registration, grades, graduation, and transcripts are all
blocked until the bill is paid or until the books are returned.
        A person with 5 or more LOST BOOKS is blocked from further
borrowing privileges on the system.
        Faculty and staff are not charged overdue fines. However, they
are billed for items 35 days overdue (LOST BOOKS).  Again, the system
blocks borrowing privileges if a person has 5 or more LOST BOOKS.
        The nice part of all this is that our automated system generates
all these notices and bills for us and calculates all the charges.  We
also have a direct connection into the Student Accounting System so we
can transfer and rescind the fees ourselves instead of relying on staff
at the Comptroller's Office.
        We find this a very workable and efficient system.  It is
certainly one which satisfies the auditors.

        Hope this helps.  Good Luck!

           Barbara Auchter
           Circulation Systems Librarian
           Albin O. Kuhn Library & Gallery
           University of Maryland Baltimore County
           Baltimore, MD  21228

           Barbara_Auchter@UMBCADMN.Bitnet
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-Envelope-to: CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET
X-VMS-To: IN%"CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET"
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 07:46:00 EST
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         "W.C. (RUSTY) DIVENS" <ERCOUPE@PITTVMS.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: NON-TRADITIONAL CIRCULATION NOTICES

>and did not solve the problem.  Privacy was not an issue.  We only listed the
>requested title, call number info - not the name or any information about the
>patron who requsted the item.

Well, forgive me if I'm missing something...but this scenario would
indeed reveal who has what charged out.  The addressee is
the person who has the stuff listed on the back charged out..right?
It doesn't reveal the REQUESTOR, but does reveal the borrower.

As a solution, those who send postcards for overdues and recalls could
simply use a 'disconnected' identifier for the item(s).  Identify the
items needed/overdue by barcode number or a portion of the call number.

Include a note that explains why the item can't be identified completely.

Then you have the scenario where folks start calling in asking what it
is they are looking at and what item you are talking about.  This has the
staff handling an inordinate amount of phone calls, and pretty soon you
realize that the money saved by using postcards is more than eaten up
in the cost of staff handling inquiries.

As for privacy, I would think that in this lawsuit-happy era it will just
be a matter of time before some attorney decides to make a big deal
about the postcards.  But then again, at least the issue will
be resolved one way or another.

"Hi, I'm attorney Dee Pockets and if you or anyone you love has had
        their privacy compromised by a library mailing a notice on
        a postcard, call our law firm of Screwem, Clipem and Howe.
        You don't pay a cent until WE get money for YOU!"

<just ain't no easy answers>

Rustbelt Bill
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:00:42 EST
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         Tom Clark <sils@MAIL.LIB.DUKE.EDU>
Subject:      NON-TRADITIONAL CIRCULATION NOTICES

          Re: Post cards for circulations messages.

               We have used post cards to send recall and hold
          notifications for years and have never had a complaint.  As
          much as I've lectured patrons on privacy and why we as
          librarians must take the issue so seriously, this potential
          violation of patrons privacy never occurred to me.  I'm not
          inclined to change my ways, but its a good question.
                                             Tom Clark
                                             Head of Circulation
                                             Duke Divinity School
                                             Library
                                             Durham, N.C.
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Mon, 4 Jan 1993 10:49:43 EST
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         TOM SCHNEITER <SCHNEITE@UCS.INDIANA.EDU>
Subject:      RE: Colorado amendment 2

This is being cross-posted to the lists on which I have seen comments
regarding Colorado amendment 2.  Apologies for duplication.

**************************************************************************

Like many of our colleagues, I have reservations about attending ALA Midwinter
in Denver, due to the passing of Amendment 2 in Colorado.  We all, I
believe, have become aware that this amendment outlaws any state or local
statutes that prohibit discrimination against gay/lesbian/bisexual
individuals.  I feel, however, that I have obligations that necessitate my
attending Midwinter, despite any hesitation I may have personally with
contributing to the Colorado economy.

I have come up with a way to assuage my conscience, in part, while meeting my
professional obligations at Midwinter.  Every dollar I spend in Denver and
every charge slip that carries my credit card imprint will carry the
following legend:

"Repeal amendment 2!"

I urge my colleagues of like opinion to do the same.  Please feel free to
pass this idea around.


**************************************************************************
Tom Schneiter                                                            *
Access Services                                                          *
Indiana University Libraries                                             *
Bloomington, IN  47405                                                   *
(812)855-2304/FAX:(812)855-8229                                          *
schneite@ucs.indiana.edu                                                 *
**************************************************************************
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
X-VMS-To: IN%"CIRCPLUS%IDBSU.BITNET@VM1.MCGILL.CA"
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:49:08 -0400
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         BILL SLAUENWHITE <BSLAUEN@AC.DAL.CA>
Subject:      Re: NON-TRADITIONAL CIRCULATION NOTICES

Just a short note to say that Novanet consortium here in Nova Scotia
vetoed the idea based on that "individuals "right to privacy"".
See ya

Bill Slauenwhite
Asst. Head Circulation
Killam Library
Dalhousie University
Halifax, Nova Scotia
Canada
BSLAUEN.AC.DAL.CA
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1822
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.circplus
Date:         Fri, 8 Jan 1993 09:16:45 +1000
              <CIRCPLUS@IDBSU.BITNET>
From:         madeleine mcpherson <mcpherso@ZEUS.USQ.EDU.AU>
Subject:      Re: Photocopier Policies

Daniel Philbrick asks about policies for handling photocopied articles and
the re-copying of same by students, with the resultant workload for circ
staff.

The best solution to this problem I have seen is at the Queensland
University of Technology, my employer till recently.  They have
established a separate copying services unit that concentrates
photocopiers, microcopiers, laser printers and associated gear in a
separate room in each library building and staffs it with
specialised staff who also service the machines etc.  They use their own
smart cards, they give very good service to the students and they make a
heap of money for the library.  You could seek more information from the
manager of the section, James Milne (possible Internet address
j.milne@qut.edu.au).

The system means that circ staff are not bothered with photocopy
enquiries.  They do still have to handle the 'originals' from the reserve
collection.  Seems to me the way out of this will come when we use
scanning technology to store images of these articles electronically and
put them up on our campus networks.  I would like to hear of anyone who
has done this.  We plan to do it by end 1994.  We think copyright aspects
will be covered by the licensing agreement available to educational
institutions under Australian law, but the US situation is probably
different.  At the moment libraries here meet their legal obligations by
posting copies of the relevant sections of the Copyright Act by each
photocopier.

========================================================================
Madeleine McPherson                     email: mcpherso@zeus.usq.edu.au
University Librarian                    tel:   076 312979
University of Southern Queensland       fax:   076 312920
Toowoomba
Queensland  4350
========================================================================
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 10:02:43 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      astronomy, demos, Arm

[Avery Andrews 930105.10.00]
 (Gary Cziko 930104.1730)

> So I can only guess that today must be the latest sunset down under.

Not sure - we just got rid of all of our newspapers for recycling, & my 3D
visualization is to crummy to figure it out easily.  Plus, of course,
the infinite confusing effect of the dateline ...

Not sure - we just got rid of all of our papers for recycling, & my 3d
visualization is to crummy to figure it out easily.  Plus, of course,
the infinite confusing effect of the dateline ...

Switching topics, another problem with Gary's demo is that it doesn't
defuse the `standard brushoff' of PCT -- `we've known about this
feedback stuff for more than thirty years, and that it doesn't really
do very much for you'.  I don't believe that any collection of `mere' demos
of the phenomenon of control can overcome this objection, & I'm not too
optimistic about the prospects for heaps of quantitative data either,
no matter how precise.  People will just say `that's fine as far as it
goes, but it's just one step up from psychophysics, and doesn't address
the hard problems that people are concerned with now.'  And I don't think
it's a good idea to dismiss these people as writeoffs, since it would
really much better if more of them were at least minimally sympathetic to PCT,
if not outright converts.

And I'm not too keen on `going to the public' a la Freud - after all,
there is a growing body of opinion that the public got gulled that
time, as well as by the astrologers, channellers, crystal dealers,
spoon-benders, ...

So I still think that the people to get onside with are those like the
MIT AI-Labbers, who certainly have their own agenda, but do know the
difference between stuff that works and stuff that doesn't, and whose
brains do not seem to be encased in concrete, from what I've see.  Which
means more development of `big demos' like Arm.

So more on Arm:  one possible difference between direct control of
velocity and proportional integration of position is that since the
former involves two levels of control systems, you get two distinct
error signals to play around with, positional error and velocity error.
Hence reorganization/self-tuning circuits would have more information
to play with, in particular, they can distinguish between average
positional error (caused perhaps by the target moving around a lot),
and average velocity error (caused by children tugging on your arm,
perhaps).

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU,@vmd.cso.uiuc.edu:andaling@durras.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 12 Jan 1993 21:18:43 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      slow feedback reference bungled

[Avery Andrews 9201112.2108]

The reference to the excesive slowness of feedback is actually:

Jordan and Rosenbaum (1989) `Action', in Posner, ed. _Foundations
of Cognitive Science_, pps. 731, 746.  This paper also cites some
very suspect-looking work by Kelso and others that is supposed to
support a concept of `coordinative structures' (what seems to be going
on is low level configuration/relationship control between
articulators).

I guess the obvious question to ask about any movements that do look
too fast for feedback is how they go under novel or unpredictable
dynamic conditions.  E.g. how does the concert pianist make out with
lead weights attached to her fingers.


  Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU,@pucc.Princeton.EDU:BAKANICV@ASHLEY.COFC.EDU>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1993 07:37:06 -0600
From:         BAKANICV@ASHLEY.COFC.EDU
Subject:      The science of groups

        I obviously have vastly different reference signals regarding what
is and is not the science of groups.  The following passage sent immediate
error signals in my own understanding of the science of groups:

< ... Psychology is really the science of groups; unfortunately it thinks
<its about individuals and this is mainly self-deception.  Now that I think
<of it, the only places PCT has been able to have ANY impact on conventional
<psychology is where psychology is REALLY about individuals....

        Before I explain my problem with this passage, let me introduce
myself.  My name is Von Bakanic.  I am a sociologist at the College of
Charleston.  I was a student of Clark McPhail and Chuck Tucker.  I have
been reading your dialogue for several months, but did not comment because
I did not feel knowledgable enough to make a contribution.  However, this
issue concerns me enough to overcome my reserve.

        If psychology is really the science of groups, what pray tell is
sociology?  Self-aware conventional psychology?  Does this imply that
sociologists are a lost cause as PCT converts?  And what is implied in the
use of "REALLY".  Is this a truth claim?  I thought you folks were
interested in perception, not "reality".  Can anyone clear up my confusion?

                                              Regards, Von


_____________________________________________________________________
Von Bakanic                                  (803) 792-7105
Dept. of Sociology                           internet address:
College of Charleston                        bakanicv@ashley.cofc.edu
Charleston, S.C. 29424
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:mmt@ben.dciem.dnd.ca>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 22:50:51 EST
From:         Martin Taylor <mmt@BEN.DCIEM.DND.CA>
Subject: Re: Why adopt a different theory?

[Martin Taylor 930105 22:40]
(Rick Marken 920105.1800)

>Just today I was asked to help with a task at work that
>involved trying to find a "reliable and valid test instrument" that could
>be used to ascess some behavioral variables. Well, there is a problem;
>how can PCT help solve it? First I could point out that the
>tests are useless unless the reliabilities are on the order of .99. There
>are no such tests and right off hand I don't know how to design them.

It seems to me that you (and Gary Cziko some weeks ago) are confounding two
issues: (1) what is going on in the tested person, and (2) what is the
tester controlling for.  Both of you in different ways argue that the
statistical approach in the test of reliabilities less than 0.99 is
pointless.  Maybe it is, when you are dealing with the tested person
(though I hold my options open to disagree later).  But when you are
dealing with the tester, the controlled variable may be something like
"how many people exceed a criterion of success" in education or handling
a complex instrument, or whatever.  Generally speaking, the reference
level for this variable might be 100%, so anything that increases the
proportion is an action that forms part of the tester's functioning
control system.  They usually don't want to reduce the proportion of
success if it is, say 90% and they were hoping for 80%, so it is only
a one-sided control most of the time.

The tester may have a conflicted control system (and often does).  To get
100% passes {ay be possible, but only a great cost, and the tester also
has a reference level that the cost be zero.  So the two tester control
systems conflict, resulting in less than 100% pass rate of the testees
and greater than zero cost for whatever they do to the testees to improve
the pass rate.

All of what goes on in the tester relates to the ACTIONS of the testees,
not the control systems of the testees, and it seems to me that the
testers are justified in being happy that (more people survive the cancer
longer| more students can read the instructions in a manual| more people
are happy using the isntrument), even if the differences are measurable
only statistically.  It's a question of whose control systems are you
worrying about, the tester's or the testees'.

Martin
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Tue, 5 Jan 1993 11:45:39 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      revolutions

[Avery Andrews 930105.1144]
 (Dag Forssell (930104))

 >Does anyone think it is
 >worthwhile to develop a context of scientific revolutions as a way to go
 >up a level for the introduction of PCT?

I thinks it's better to not talk too much about revolutions until
they've actually taken hold.   Revolution-talk sets off too many
alarm-bells in the minds of people who might actually be useful.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU
Return-Path: <@VMD.CSO.UIUC.EDU:andaling@durras.anu.edu.au>
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.csg-l
Date:         Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:10:11 EST
From:         Avery Andrews <andaling@FAC.ANU.EDU.AU>
Subject:      micro/macro-phenomena; statistics

[Avery Andrews 930106.1856]
 Bill Powers (930105.2130)

Putting what Bill says in my terms:

  a) conventional psychologists aren't interested explaining
     macro-phenomena

  b) their quantitative standards for micro-phenomena are too
     low to prevent them from getting buried in trash.

I have a suspicion that this is true of the institutional structure
of psychology, though I suspect that (a) is false for many
individual psychologists, and even more for people on the margins
of psychology, such as AI-ers, broad minded linguists, etc.


Switching subjects, here's a little experiment I did where statistical
evaluation of the results seems essential.  Put a piece of paper on
your lap, on a clipboard or something similar, and draw a circle with
a dot in the center.  Put your pen on the dot, then close your eyes,
lift the pen from the paper, move it around for a while, and try to put
it back on the dot, all without looking.  I find that I can get it
within 2.5cm of the original position, possibly improving to 1.5cm
with practice, but certainly can't get it back to exactly where it is
(without looking), and also not to exactly the same place, so the
only useful description of the results is a statistical one.

My conjecture is that there is some component of the assortment of
control systems involved here that is being pushed to its limits of
resolution, kinesthetic memory being one obvious possibility, but
there are others.  I would assume that there are many who would
do better than  I at this (blind people, surgeons, Tai Chi adepts,
dancers ...),  & that the degree of precision attainable by
the kinesthetic systems is a significant thing to investigate.

I lack the mathematical and conceptual tools to say anything more useful
than this, though it does make me think of some of the things that Martin
Taylor has been saying.

Avery.Andrews@anu.edu.au
Comments: Gated by NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU