Talk:Online Reference - Revision history

Cindiann: /* Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference? */

2007-01-06T00:54:19Z

‎Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference?

Cindiann: Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference?

2007-01-06T00:52:31Z

Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference?

Crios at 15:08, 20 October 2006

2006-10-20T15:08:18Z

Crios: /* How about organizing the IM list by state? */

2006-10-20T15:08:05Z

‎How about organizing the IM list by state?

Crios at 15:03, 20 October 2006

2006-10-20T15:03:06Z

Rmetzger: /* IM at the refdesk or from office? */

2006-05-12T01:47:50Z

‎IM at the refdesk or from office?

Rmetzger: /* more detail in the "we like" sections maybe? */

2006-05-12T01:47:23Z

‎more detail in the "we like" sections maybe?

Rmetzger: IM at the refdesk or from office?

2006-05-12T01:47:01Z

IM at the refdesk or from office?

Rmetzger at 01:45, 12 May 2006

2006-05-12T01:45:18Z

Rikhei at 20:33, 14 July 2005

2005-07-14T20:33:25Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:54, 6 January 2007
Line 30:		Line 30:
	== Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference? ==		== Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference? ==

−	In their FAQ, Google advises that once one finds a business listing via SMS, it's not possible to contact that business via SMS. Given this, I don't think that Google SMS should be listed under "Software for SMS." Unless, of course, I'm missing something. Am I?	+	In their FAQ, Google advises that once one finds a business listing via SMS, it's not possible to contact that business via SMS. Given this, I don't think that Google SMS should be listed under "Software for SMS." Unless, of course, I'm missing something. Am I? -[[User:cindiann\| Cindi]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 00:52, 6 January 2007
Line 27:		Line 27:
	The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?		The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?
	[[User:Crios\|Crios]]		[[User:Crios\|Crios]]
		+
		+	== Is Google SMS really for SMS Reference? ==
		+
		+	In their FAQ, Google advises that once one finds a business listing via SMS, it's not possible to contact that business via SMS. Given this, I don't think that Google SMS should be listed under "Software for SMS." Unless, of course, I'm missing something. Am I?

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 20 October 2006
Line 26:		Line 26:

	The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?		The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?
−	[[User:Crios Crios]]	+	[[User:Crios\|Crios]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 20 October 2006
Line 26:		Line 26:

	The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?		The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?
−	[[User:Crios]]	+	[[User:Crios Crios]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:03, 20 October 2006
Line 22:		Line 22:

	We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[User:RMetzger]]		We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[User:RMetzger]]
		+
		+	== How about organizing the IM list by state? ==
		+
		+	The list is pretty long, and I imagine it'll only get longer. Do you think we could organize the list by state?
		+	[[User:Crios]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 12 May 2006
Line 21:		Line 21:
	== IM at the refdesk or from office? ==		== IM at the refdesk or from office? ==

−	We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[RMetzger]]	+	We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[User:RMetzger]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 12 May 2006
Line 9:		Line 9:

	The thing about a wiki is that people need to add the stuff they know about. The people who posted thus far (me included) have been mostly proponents of IM Reference. I figure all of the sections will get fattened up once people start adding more things (it's just started developing). Feel free to add whatever sections you want. I expect things to grow and change into every section and for each section to have separate pages and subsections as things develop. [[User:Meredith\|Meredith]] 20:10 CT, 8 July 2005		The thing about a wiki is that people need to add the stuff they know about. The people who posted thus far (me included) have been mostly proponents of IM Reference. I figure all of the sections will get fattened up once people start adding more things (it's just started developing). Feel free to add whatever sections you want. I expect things to grow and change into every section and for each section to have separate pages and subsections as things develop. [[User:Meredith\|Meredith]] 20:10 CT, 8 July 2005
−
−	We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[User:RMetzger]

	== Is it IM Reference? ==		== Is it IM Reference? ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:47, 12 May 2006
Line 20:		Line 20:
	== What is Jybe, really? ==		== What is Jybe, really? ==
	I was just wondering...doesn't Jybe count as web-based chat? When we say "web-based", does that mean that we have to use a browser in order to chat, or does it mean that we have to access a certain web page in order to chat? Might I recommend "browser-based chat" as a description for Jybe? Just a thought... [[User:Rikhei\|Rikhei]] 16:33, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)		I was just wondering...doesn't Jybe count as web-based chat? When we say "web-based", does that mean that we have to use a browser in order to chat, or does it mean that we have to access a certain web page in order to chat? Might I recommend "browser-based chat" as a description for Jybe? Just a thought... [[User:Rikhei\|Rikhei]] 16:33, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)
		+
		+	== IM at the refdesk or from office? ==
		+
		+	We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[RMetzger]]

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 The thing about a wiki is that people need to add the stuff they know about. The people who posted thus far (me included) have been mostly proponents of IM Reference. I figure all of the sections will get fattened up once people start adding more things (it's just started developing). Feel free to add whatever sections you want. I expect things to grow and change into every section and for each section to have separate pages and subsections as things develop. [[User:Meredith|Meredith]] 20:10 CT, 8 July 2005
+We already use IM for reference on the small liberal arts college where I'm a librarian. However, we've been using individual handles for each librarian and only offering the service during regular business hours from 8:45am-5pm (each librarian manages his/her handle from his/her own desk). My sense is that we're not getting much traffic and I'm proposing moving to one library handle and having the service staffed from the reference desk instead, which means until 10pm at night! (then marketing the new service to see if we can increase traffic). My team is concerned that we can't handle IM service in addition to refdesk duties--specific concerns are 1. that it might appear to in-person users that we're being rude/distracted and 2. that we'll have to stop IM chats midstream and we'll lose those patrons. The literature that I read on this wiki went both ways on this matter: with some libraries enthusiastically taking on IM at the desk and others saying that they couldn't swing it. Any thoughts on what I can do to convince my team? Our pace at the refdesk isn't that quick to begin with and I'm convinced that streamlining, adding hours, and marketing will increase traffic...but I need to back it up. Thanks. -- [[User:RMetzger]
 == Is it IM Reference? ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:33, 14 July 2005
Line 17:		Line 17:

	Meredith, looks like UT uses Docutek, and UWO uses LivePerson, which are both WBC. [[User:Rikhei\|Rikhei]] 12:55, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)		Meredith, looks like UT uses Docutek, and UWO uses LivePerson, which are both WBC. [[User:Rikhei\|Rikhei]] 12:55, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)
		+
		+	== What is Jybe, really? ==
		+	I was just wondering...doesn't Jybe count as web-based chat? When we say "web-based", does that mean that we have to use a browser in order to chat, or does it mean that we have to access a certain web page in order to chat? Might I recommend "browser-based chat" as a description for Jybe? Just a thought... [[User:Rikhei\|Rikhei]] 16:33, 14 Jul 2005 (EDT)