ACQNET v2n063 (June 14, 1992) URL = http://hegel.lib.ncsu.edu/serials/stacks/acqnet/acq-v2n063 ISSN: 1057-5308 *************** ACQNET, Vol. 2, No. 63, June 14, 1992 ===================================== (1) FROM: Christian SUBJECT: Who's new on ACQNET today (63 lines) (2) FROM: Dennis Gibbons SUBJECT: Gift books (17 lines) (3) FROM: Donna Signori SUBJECT: Gift books (9 lines) (4) FROM: Rosina Tammany SUBJECT: Downloading MARC records (17 lines) (5) FROM: Helen Mack SUBJECT: Bar coding new receipts (24 lines) (6) FROM: Maggie Rioux SUBJECT: Aquizeema (15 lines) (7) FROM: Helen Mack SUBJECT: Telemarketing (31 lines) (1) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: June 14, 1992 From: Christian Subject: Who's new on ACQNET today Hille Novak Dora Biblarz Head, Acquisitions Department Associate Dean, Collection Development University of San Francisco Libr. Arizona State University Libraries E-mail: NOVAK@ALM.ADMIN.USFCA.EDU E-mail: IACDWB@ASUACAD.BITNET Barbara Ellen Klintworth Rae Ellen Dubois Director of Technical Services Head, Gifts and Exchange Section Sangamon State University Library National Agricultural Library E-mail:KLINTWOR@EAGLE.SANGAMON.EDU E-mail: RDUBOIS@ASRR.ARSUSDA.GOV Elizabeth F. Miller Microcomputer Systems Analyst Library of Congress E-mail: EMIL@SEQ1.LOC.GOV (2) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 09:02 CST From: Dennis Gibbons Subject: Gift books In response to Phyllis Brown's request for other libraries' guidelines concerning the acceptance of review copies of textbooks, etc., here is our library's (Texas Christian University) position: POSITION STATEMENT: Complimentary Textbooks and Review Copies Because of the non-profit status of the University, the library accepts donations of complimentary textbooks and review copies of trade books for its collections and for disposal as suitable. The Library will not knowingly permit purchase of such books by vendors for resale in the trade. Furthermore, it should be understood that the library has not and will not ever realize parity from books received as gifts. (3) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 09:19:16 PDT From: Donna Signori Subject: Gift books At the University of Victoria we accept the review/complimentary publishers' copies from faculty because they usually come mixed in with considerable other donations. However, we don't necessarily add them to the collection and we certainly don't give them tax evaluations. This appears to occur mostly in the social sciences. (4) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 12:11:39 -0400 From: Rosina Tammany (Eastern Michigan Univ.) Subject: Response to S. Reuter re: ordering, using full MARC records Our Acquisitions staff have been downloading records from OCLC into NOTIS for the past three years. The Cataloging staff are responsible for authority control and rely on the NOTIS New & Dropped Headings List to inform them of any changes to the database. Authority work is now done within a week or so after Acquisitions downloads the records instead of at the time of cataloging. Although authority work is being performed on records that may be deleted (if the order is canceled, the item cannot be obtained, etc.), we still felt it was important to have uniformity of access points in the database. The holdings symbol is added to the record at the time of cataloging. Catalog- ing staff make sure the correct OCLC record was transferred into NOTIS, perform any editing on OCLC, and overlay the NOTIS record with the edited version, if necessary. (5) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 14:10:23 EDT From: Helen Mack (Lehigh Univ.) Subject: Bar coding new receipts Until 2 years ago, the Acquisitions Dept. performed the functions of barcoding new materials, as well as obtaining OCLC prints for use in the Cataloging Dept. Then we lost a position and Cataloging gained one, at which time these func- tions were transferred to the Cataloging Dept. (since that staff is better equ- ipped to determine duplicates when the author/title information is complex -- as in conference proceedings -- or when we were unable to verify the item before ordering). The reading of barcodes into the automated records is done in the Cataloging Dept. Call numbers and holding symbols are entered on OCLC, along with the barcodes. In some cases, however, it is more efficient to enter the barcodes directly into our local (GEAC) system: large multi-volume sets can be linked much faster in GEAC than on OCLC, and our records do not overflow nearly as soon. Also, our Serials Dept. enters barcodes locally for annuals and other continuations. Overall, this scheme has made all parties happy. Having materials barcoded further along in the process enables us to return those occasional duplicates or unwanted items. And the Cataloging Dept. gets to select their own records from which to catalog. (6) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 08:19:10 -0400 From: Maggie Rioux (Woods Hole Oceanographic Instit.) Subject: Aquizeema revisited I enjoyed the account of the appearance of our goddess Aquizeema at Feather River. I like to think of myself as one of the "more smart than powerful." Imagine my surprise, however, when I found her picture on a catalog in my mail the same day I read of her appearance in California. Take a look at the cover of the new ALA Books catalog for 1992-1993. Isn't the young lady at the top of the picture (the one holding the gold plants) our very own Aquizeema? Notice how the powerful person down below is paying no atten- tion to her? That's a great clue right there. Thanks to ALA for honoring acquisitions librarians everywhere! (7) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 11:18:07 EDT From: Helen Mack (Lehigh University) Subject: Telemarketing reps I'm sure that I'm not the only one annoyed by telemarketing reps (and regular marketing reps as well). They try to provide examination copies, then follow up with endless phone calls. They want to receive our orders, even our checks, personally. I understand that they work on commission. The real problem is that their employers, the publishers, refuse to accept the fact that we don't want to be bothered, that we'd rather deal with vendors. I hate to go direct. I hate to add another exception to the list, another branch to the flow chart. What to do? 1. Allow operations to grind to a halt because we're doing not only directs but also dealing with a specific rep who may not be around forever? 2. Go direct (even if not necessary) but avoid the extra step of dealing with the individual? 3. Maintain our standard operating procedure by using a vendor whenever possible? Add notes to our action forms requesting that the rep be given credit for the sale (when we know that these won't be seen by the right people)? 4. Engage the rep in a discussion of their job and our reluctance to conduct business in this manner? 5. Be nice, but blow them off? How do others handle this problem? ******* END OF FILE ****** ACQNET, Vol. 2, No. 63 ****** END OF FILE *******