) on each vendor's web site.
Thanks,
Chris
- Original Message -
From: Chris Sharp csh...@georgialibraries.org
To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 8:13:08 AM
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2014 8:13:08 AM
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor Listing Policy
Kathy,
I was surprised to see that we were already requiring an Evergreen
offering page, which
Rogan,
We drew a lot on the Koha policy when we made it and while I think
looking at other communities is useful at this point we've had the
policy in place for a year and I think it's more important to look
internal to our own community and our experiences. Maybe it would be
useful to
Apologies in advance for this being long but like a board meeting that
wavers out in and out of discussion points I'd like to assess where we are
in this conversation.
Replying to Chris: There wasn't a situation that prompted this. That has
been part of what has confused me about responses I've
Postscript, I really don't want to redo the vendor policy but following the
logic either we voted on what is written or we didn't. Is the verbiage on
the wiki different than what was voted on? I had assumed it wasn't and was
going by the wiki.
P.P.S. I'm really not in favor of re-doing the
P.P.S.
Checking the board vote on the IRC log on the WIKI the reference of the
document for the vote was the one on the WIKI and checking it's revisions
that language was in place when it was voted on.
On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 1:24 PM, Rogan Hamby rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net
wrote:
Postscript,
Sent from my peronal email because I'm answering in my role as a vendor
and independent community member and not in my role at MVLC.
On 09/11/2014 04:27 PM, Rogan Hamby wrote:
What I'm curious to know from Brad and other vendors is if this is
something they would want to do. There have been a
So, I admit I'm perplexed by this, you see it as policing vendors rather
than helping them to provide it even as an option?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2014 at 9:17 AM, Jason Stephenson ja...@sigio.com wrote:
Sent from my peronal email because I'm answering in my role as a vendor
and independent community
Here's part of my confusion, we already say that vendors listed are
supposed to have an Evergreen offering page. This is copy and pasted from
the Getting Listed on the Evergreen Paid Support Services Page on the
WIKI:
Show support for the Evergreen community by adding a visible link on their
Perhaps by moving the link-back paragraph out of the “must” section and some
minor wording changes the issue of appearing to mandate specific content on
third-party websites could be avoided, for example:
--
Getting Listed on the Evergreen Paid Support Services Page
Companies and
Hi everyone!
I've been watching this discussion for the last few days now. As it's
been going on for quite some time, I've finally decided to share my
thoughts.
There have been several comments about the work required to maintain
this page. Some folks seem to feel it's quite a bit of
For the record,
+1
Chris
- Original Message -
From: Jason Etheridge ja...@esilibrary.com
To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Friday, September 12, 2014 2:08:38 PM
Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor Listing Policy
Thanks for the feedback Brad and thanks to Chris for his comments!
I have to say Chris' comments gave me a moment of pause to rethink the
proposal.
In thinking back to the time before we implemented the new vendor
listing procedures, the community had a vendor page that included 1)
several
What I'm curious to know from Brad and other vendors is if this is
something they would want to do. There have been a lot of comments about
this being a burden and almost in a tone as if it was a harassment to
vendors. I envisioned it as a positive way of pointing community members
to services
Rogan (and all),
We're always looking for ways to make the ESI site easier to use, or
provide more appropriate information about the services we provide. So the
short answer is that, yes, we would absolutely want to put together a
specific Evergreen Services page if that was what the general
...@list.georgialibraries.org] On Behalf Of Rogan Hamby
[rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net]
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2014 9:24 PM
To: Evergreen Discussion Group
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor Listing Policy
We (the Evergreen community) have had the vendor listing policy on the
Evergreen
of?
Thanks for listening!
Chris
- Original Message -
From: Rogan Hamby rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net
To: Evergreen Discussion Group open-ils-general@list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:24:36 PM
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor Listing Policy
@list.georgialibraries.org
Sent: Sunday, September 7, 2014 9:24:36 PM
Subject: [OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposed change in Vendor Listing Policy
We (the Evergreen community) have had the vendor listing policy on
the Evergreen community web site for a little over a year now. In
discussing possible changes one
Rogan,
Thanks for your feedback to my questions. I'll respond in-line:
- Original Message -
From: Rogan Hamby rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net
I'm only speaking for myself here but I don't think it's necessary
but nor is the listing itself. It's a nice thing to do as a
community to help
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:04 PM, Sharp, Chris csh...@georgialibraries.org
wrote:
Rogan,
Thanks for your feedback to my questions. I'll respond in-line:
- Original Message -
From: Rogan Hamby rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net
I'm only speaking for myself here but I don't think it's
Thanks again, Rogan, for the continued discussion on this. I'm glad we're able
to air our respective opinions.
There was some discussion during the meeting about it being suggested
versus required. To me those elements that make it more user
friendly should be required or we start diluting
No, I thank you for bringing up those points and I think you're right we do
seem to have a slightly differently view of the intent and so these
discussions are good to have. I hope we will hear from more folks!
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:18 PM, Sharp, Chris csh...@georgialibraries.org
wrote:
Hi all,
This has been a great discussion so far!
In addition to hearing from the general user community, I'm also
interested in hearing from the vendors who are part of our community.
Please let us know what you think because I think we ultimately want to
strike a balance between providing
Speaking as one of the vendors, I don't see a link back requirement as a
burden, but rather it seems a simple reciprocal gesture. It seems totally
reasonable to me. It's not like you're asking us to cut down the largest
tree in the forest with a herring. [1]
I couldn't remember, so I just took a
I haven't looked at the Equinox website but if you have a page lusting your
Evergreen services that we could link to that's all the web team would need,
not a link back from there.
Excuse my brevity, sent from my iPhone
--
Rogan Hamby, MLS, CCNP, MIA
Managers Headquarters Library and
P.S. Autocorrect apparently doesn't like the word 'listing.'
Blame Steve Jobs :)
Excuse my brevity, sent from my iPhone
--
Rogan Hamby, MLS, CCNP, MIA
Managers Headquarters Library and Reference Services,
York County Library System
“You can never get a cup of tea large enough or a book
We (the Evergreen community) have had the vendor listing policy on the
Evergreen community web site for a little over a year now. In discussing
possible changes one proposed change that we (the Evergreen Board) was
favorable to was one that I have proposed. I have proposed that on the
vendor
+1 excellent idea
Stuart Forrest PhD
Beaufort County Library
Sent from my iPad
On Sep 7, 2014, at 9:24 PM, Rogan Hamby
rogan.ha...@yclibrary.netmailto:rogan.ha...@yclibrary.net wrote:
We (the Evergreen community) have had the vendor listing policy on the
Evergreen community web site for a
28 matches
Mail list logo
