Skip to content

ALA Survey on Electronic Participation — Please Participate!

If you are an ALA member, please take this survey (problems with that URL? try this direct link), brought to you with tender loving care by the ALA Task Force on Electronic Meeting Participation, of which I are one. You’ll see this survey in the wild over the next several days.

Your participation in the participation survey is much encouraged, and I believe will help us get to where we need to be.

The survey asks for your ALA membership number, which is one reason it’s pleasantly short. What, you don’t have that tattooed on your ankle, right above your “I love Mom” tat? Look at the mailing label on American Libraries; it’s on the top left corner of the mailing label (on mine, it’s two rows above my name).

This survey will be open from Monday June 2, 2008 through 5pm on Friday June 13, 2008 (CDT).

Repost widely!

How my cabin in the woods turned into a motel in Albuquerque…

One crucial bit of information I left out of my previous post is that I’m going to Santa Fe, New Mexico in mid-June to celebrate my mother’s 80th birthday (or to shop and drink with my baby sister, depending on who you’re asking. She’s better at shopping, I at drinking).

I know New Mexico very well; I’ve lived there twice (Clovis and Albuquerque) and my mother has lived there off and on since the 1970s. North of I-40, it’s a gorgeous state with a great mix of country and city. I can tell you what’s best on the menu at Duran’s Pharmacy (yes, they serve food there) and how to shop for earrings and where to go for brunch in Santa Fe (Tecolote).

Many of you responded on- and off-blog with great ideas based on what I asked for. But suddenly I said to myself, “Self,” I said, “why don’t I change my ticket and hang out somewhere in New Mexico? There are various motels in Albuquerque, retreat centers, the Blue Swallow in Tucumcari, Ghost Ranch, and other places I know and trust. I will enjoy a few days by myself and won’t have long drives to get somewhere nice.”

Self liked that — a lot. Self loves New Mexico and would live there again if she could (we came close four years ago).

I even mulled extending my reservation at the Santa Fe Sage Inn, where my sister and I are staying for my mother’s wingding, but would rather have a different venue for writing than for my family visit. (When we’re plush, Sandy and I stay at the Santa Fe Hotel, which is gorgeous and comfortable. But the Sage is a do-right kind of place.)

So I’ve changed my ticket, made a reservation at Albuquerque’s Monterey Nonsmoker’s Hotel — a funny name, but a genuine Route 66 motel, and not one of the scary rundown Route 66 places but a sweet place now managed by Europeans — put out feelers to retreat centers, and so forth. I have a place to stay that will be great (I may refer to it in future posts as the Monterey Nonsmoker’s Writing Retreat Center) and if I find something more interesting or apropos before the cancellation period (48-hours prior), well, go me. (It might be wise to stay there at least the first night anyway, since my flight gets in late.)

Oddly, everyone who gave me tips is responsible for my success here. I know you were helping me find places in the area, and those are all wonderful “file for future reference” places, and yet your suggestions pushed the gears so I thought around and beyond “Plan A.”

Recommendations for a Cabin of One’s Own?

I’m going to take a personal writing retreat starting, oh, say, in a week (after June 6, my last day of work), for about five or six days, and I have no idea where to go.

(I keep wanting to say “writing vacation,” but that’s backwards. Once my new job starts on June 23 I’m going to be very busy for a good long while, and I want to really dig in and enjoy some writing before I get going.)

I want to go somewhere that I can be happily anonymous (just that crazy old lady in boxer shorts, working away on her laptop all day when she could be Having Fun).

What I would really, really like: a cabin somewhere woodsy and quiet, in a setting where I can heat food, make my morning coffee, keep my laptop plugged in, and bathe once a day. I don’t even mind if “heating food” means I bring a small grill and cook a meal outside. I don’t mind driving a few hours to get there.

What would be very helpful: wifi (since I find half my writing depends on tapping in to research or files related to such). I have instructions for using my Blackberry as a modem, which is something I’m considering. Nearby access to Internet services would be a consideration — some place I could sit for an hour or two if I needed to do some digging and researching.

What isn’t that important: air conditioning (if I’m hot, I’m hot; I tolerate heat pretty well and have written quite a bit in my skivvies), lots of amenities, fabulous hiking and boating, dramatic views and scenery, great dining opportunities, elegant furnishings, etc.

What I hope to avoid: units conjoined with other units (by cabin, I mean a cabin, not a room in a lodge), loud people chattering outside my door, cross-country flights (too late for anything reasonable), and people I know. It’s ok if there are people wandering around, as long as I don’t have to interact with them and they aren’t bothering me. (Am I starting to sound like a cat?)

I’ve had this as a goal for a good year and a half,  and each time there have been very good reasons I’ve abandoned this plan. (I also have been rejected by one writing retreat and haven’t tried reapplying.) It was the right call each time (well, obviously, that retreat center was wrong, and boy oh boy, someday are they gonna know that, right?).

But this time I do not want to abandon this plan. If I have to, I’ll go sit in a motel room somewhere, which wouldn’t be terrible, but I do have fond thoughts of a little house in the big woods, where I can be terribly self-indulgent and focus on my writing.

Ideas?

Upselling yourself

The delightful Cliff Landis (who I have even met in Real Life) has a post with advice for job applicants. Many of his points are excellent. Some can even be amplified. Don’t just proofread your c.v.: have a friend proofread it. You can’t see your own errors, particularly on a document you’ve been poring over for days.

Buhhhhht… I take issue with a couple of Cliff’s points.

Cliff wrote, “Don’t apply for a job you won’t accept – Some folks suggest applying for everything because it gives you ‘practice’ and you ‘never know.’ The reality is that it’s more paperwork and hassle for the folks on the search committee. Ask yourself if you would accept an offer for the position before you apply.”

My take (and, I just noticed, T. Scott’s take): if it’s just for practice, then don’t do it. But if you’re unsure if you want the job, then don’t die wondering. After all, the reverse may be true: you may be utterly convinced you want the job until you sit down with the search committee and a lightbulb goes off in your head, “No, I do not want to work with these people.”

You also don’t know what the agency might be able to offer that’s not on the table — whether it’s telework, or hours based around childcare, etc. You can always ask.

Cliff wrote, “Don’t apply for a job you’re not qualified for — Again, you’ll be adding more paper to stack that’s already too big. If you don’t have strong qualifications or missed out on getting a relevant internship, apply for an entry-level position (and yes, they are out there!).”

My take: women are particularly adept at ruling themselves out of jobs they are more than qualified for. I see this all the time. You need to have some faith that you are capable — and that you can grow into a job. If you aren’t sure, ask a trusted friend (the kind of friend who will tell you, yes, your butt DOES look big in that dress). If you must, take a risk and upsell yourself.

Obviously, if the job requires conversational German and you can’t get past “Guten Tag,” well, then, rule yourself out. But I once walked into a job interview looking for a reference position and walked out as the director, and that ball started rolling the instant the interviewer picked up my c.v. (In this case, I didn’t know of the other position — but I also wasn’t looking at administrative jobs, having limited my idea of what I was qualified for, despite years of work that clearly made me capable for this position.)

You also really don’t want to be in an entry-level job if your skills are better than that (assuming, of course, that you have options). You’ll be frustrated and will spend your days mumbling to yourself how you’d do things better. Well, of course you would, but that’s not the job you applied for, was it?

Finally, I see job descriptions that are laundry-lists of every possible skill set they think they want in an applicant. If you think you can do the job as it will play out day to day, then be bold and apply.

Five travel habits




IMG00025.jpg

Originally uploaded by freerangelibrarian

Oh, did I forget to mention that I’m in Tampa to teach a workshop Thursday? I think I’ve been a little distracted…

So, the five habits:

* I use a packing list. The list isn’t just so I don’t forget things; it really speeds up packing.

* I take a picture of my parking area at the airport and just in case I lose my phone, I also upload the picture to Flickr. (If I’m in West, I’m flying; East, I’m renting a car.)

* I travel with my own coffee fixin’s. My cuppa Peet’s is better than anything I can get on the road, Starbucks included, and I can have it while I’m getting dressed, just like I do at home.

* I try to stick to an exercise schedule. I coaxed myself through a half-hour on the treadmill tonight. I wanted to sit in the lobby during happy hour and drink free wine and eat free potato chips, but once I got on the treadmill, I was fine. (I do have a beer and some almonds for later tonight, purchased at a local grocery store.)

* I keep *all* important charge cords with me when I fly–laptop, cell phone, etc.–so if I’m delayed, I can still keep working.

Ebony and Ivory: Tagging and Taxonomies

I still have 21 single-spaced notes from IA Summit 2008. Two weeks ago I dreamed I was flying a small airplane low and slow across a gorgeous and ever-changing landscape new to me; beneath me spread cities, farms, rippling wheat fields, and rivers twisting and wrinkling in the distance. I think I’m in that airplane now, and the casualty may be some of my pre-flight blog posts don’t get written.

However, I wanted to return to tagging just long enough to talk about smarter tagging and also the very rich value of systems that combine taxonomies (such as LCSH) with folksonomies (tagging systems).

A number of us giggled helplessly through Gene Smith’s terrific presentation on tagging at IA Summit. The speaker kindly ignored us, though he may have wondered what the joke was. Here were some of the suggestions for improving tagging:

  • More structure and control
  • The ability to subdivide tags
  • Providing tag definitions
  • Offering tag suggestions (such as the way delicious prompts you with tags)
  • Allowing true phrases (such as the ability to write creative nonfiction as a phrase, which I can do in LibraryThing, rather than cram it together as creativenonfiction, as I must in delicious)

If you’re a librarian and you’re reading this, you’re grinning. Isn’t it amazing how if you give people enough tools and time, they eventually reinvent cataloging?

However, it’s also telling when people reinvent something that already exists. While traditional cataloging (let’s call this taxonomy work) has all of these characteristics and then some, it’s also slow, in part because it puts the emphasis on “structure and control.” Taxonomies are “expert” systems limited in application to a handful of skilled practitioners. Taxonomies are the long, slow, deliberative output of people thinking at high levels about ontologies (or they should be, but that’s another post).

Slow isn’t bad, as long as it’s not the only descriptive method available. However, if you’ve ever attempted to search a library catalog for an emerging topic, you know slow has its limits. Imagine waiting around for catalogers to decide what tags we would be “allowed” to use in delicious, LibraryThing, or Flickr.

This brings us to pace layering, discussions in the wild for which I can easily trace back to IA Summit 2003. The concept also gets an excellent workout in Peter Morville’s Ambient Findability.

The information-architect folk are very familiar with “pace layering”; it’s newer or unknown to many librarians. In a nutshell, as Morville describes it (a theory adapted from Stewart Brand’s books), “buildings, and society as a whole, are constructs of several layers.. each with a unique and suitable rate of change. … The slow layers provide stability. The fast layers drive innovation.” Together, tagging and taxonomies form a healthy complement, building a “hybrid metadata ecology.”

It really is all good. However, we as librarians should carefully avoid remaking tagging in cataloging’s image — slowing it down to the pace of taxonomies by making tagging too rigid, vetted, and structured. I’m in favor of all those capabilities described at IA Summit, but only insofar as we do not (ab)use them in a manner that trips up the fast front end of folksonomy-building.

I also disagree with (or simply want to broaden) some of the conclusions about motivations for tagging presented in the comments on my earlier post about tagging.

Librarians (and other taxonomists) tagging content for others to use occupy a fascinating and important middle ground — striding quickly, perhaps, between the jog of the folksonomists and the wedding-march of the taxonomists. (Think of three people-movers; librarians tagging for others are on the middle stretch.) We can be proud of the work we do in this space, and it really deserves closer attention.

I repeatedly use the Assumption College delicious set in my presentations because it is a superb example of skilled taxonomists leveraging the tagging wilderness. Sometimes they re-use taxonomy terms and sometimes they do not; you can also see taxonomists thinking around some of the limitations of delicious, such as the inability to recognize strings of words, or exploiting its strengths, such as the ability to group terms into sets. It’s this kind of innovative thinking — applying a taxonomist’s knowledge to a tagging framework — and this kind of behavior — tagging for your users — that tells me librarianship has a real future.

I could write more — perhaps I will — but it’s time to get back into my airplane and resume cruising speed!

New job, Community Librarian, Equinox, Woohoo!

A quick lunchtime post (written in the wee hours, embargoed until now) since I’ve received email that tells me the press release is filtering out across the Internet’s series of tubes…

First, I’m going to miss My (Current) Place Of Work. They are great folks and when I said I was leaving they expressed great sorrow and sent some VERY funny pictures.

100_3090 But I had an offer I couldn’t refuse — well, I could have refused, but then I’d be kicking myself for the rest of my life, and what fun would THAT be? (Like this cupcake I ate in New York City last December. Sure, diets, whatever… but I’m still glad I ate the cupcake.)

As of June 23 (just in time for ALA!), I’m the Community Librarian at Equinox, the support and development company for Evergreen, the premier, industrial-strength open-source integrated library system software.

What, you ask, is a Community Librarian? It’s a chief blogger, presenter, evangelist, community liaison, birds-of-a-feather organizer, strategist, branding specialist, user-experience person, project management advisor, and whatever else happens to need doing. (I wrote the job description, and I think that hits the high notes.)

After sixteen years in LibraryLand (more, if you count college and high-school jobs), I want to be working on the future of libraries. It’s time. For nearly two decades I’ve watched libraries struggle with closed legacy software, and the advantages of open source — particularly in a highly-scalable system — are obvious to me.

Making the advantages of open source obvious to YOU will be part of my job.

Where will I work?

I don’t like to say “from home” — that sounds too parked-in-a-chair — I think a better term is “telework,” because first, our home will probably change sometime in the next year, and second, the point is that I’ll be wherever Evergreen and Equinox need my voice and presence. I will make trips throughout Georgia and to the Norcross offices of Equinox (I’m starting to like Atlanta — it’s an interesting city) and far, far beyond.

I’m sad to leave MPOW… learned a lot, great people; definitely recommend MPOW to anyone interested — but I’m excited about the future. (I hope that was a nice-enough farewell to my buddies at MPOW. I’m hoping they give me a green Prius as a going-away present… though that means I better finish that Shibboleth report Greg is waiting for..!)

Riding at the Front of the Bus

Just over four years ago, in front of family and friends and a few surprised tourists, Sandy and I were married at San Francisco City Hall.The ceremony

Our marriage was eventually declared invalid, and the recent ruling in California won’t change that. We can get married again in California (or Massachusetts, or Canada), and probably will, though Florida doesn’t recognize same-sex marriages and is trying to stop them from ever being recognized, and California’s voters are headed to the ballot box to try to change the state constitution.

You might wonder why we would even bother doing this again, since so few states recognize same-sex marriages, and it could get undone, etcetera, and it boils down to this:

It’s different at the front of the bus.

No matter what, when you commit to riding at the front of the bus, and then you actually do it, you will be changed for life. Maybe next time, you won’t get to ride at the front of the bus, and maybe even as you’re riding up front people will be trying to push you to the back, but you’re still on that bus, at least for that one ride, and from that point on you see yourself differently.

As I wrote in “The Outlaw Bride” (an essay about our experience which will appear in the next issue of Ninth Letter, published by the University of Illinois), “Our marriage could be invalidated, but the mischief had been done: I no longer saw us as people who could not or should not marry.”

The state can take away our right to marry (or in the case of most states, never offer it), and it can declare our wedding licenses invalid, and it can even accuse us of ruining it for everyone else (which is the gist of Florida’s anti-marriage initiative), but it can’t take away our experiences. Once you see yourself as equal, that clock won’t turn backwards.

If you are reading this and wondering what you can do to put everyone at the front of the bus, I recommend donating to Equality California, Equality Florida, or another human-rights organization. Give as much as you’d give if your same-sex friends were getting married and you were buying them a particularly nice wedding gift. Because I can’t think of a better present.

Getting a (goals-based) life

“Where there is no vision, the people perish.” — Proverbs 29:18

About a year ago I stated quite firmly that I don’t do professional goals.

But before I launch into that, I’m aware I’ve been relatively quiet here. My bloggy silence is due to a combination of bad stress and good stress that has eaten into my personal writing time. I’ve been working hard to be more of a presence in my family life and get some other stuff done, and for me, writing happens when my mind is clear and I can devote several quiet, sustained hours of concentration on nothing but the words on the page.

Instead my brain constantly natters, “Hey, think about THIS, no think about THAT, but what about THIS, and then about THAT…” In my one recent writing session, after three hours of listening to that bloviating gush  of random thoughts I gave up and wrote email to old writing buddies.  Not a bad thing to do, actually.

The bad stress is that Sandy is no longer the pastor at her church; she will be consulting while she looks for a settled or permanent position.

I won’t go into details here now or any time in the future, but stuff happens. Sandy has had great church jobs before and she’ll have them again. She’s back “in search,” as they say in her denomination, where her profile is distributed to the regions she has identified (with my involvement and approval).

Yes, that does mean we’ll eventually pack up our troubles in an old kit bag. We have our health and one another, not to mention our ever-amusing cats, and even, in an amazing sign of God’s goodness, naturally curly hair.

I can’t discuss the good stress just yet, but it’s good many times over.

So. Goals.

I still believe that there are few people more annoying or patently false than the strivers living in the future tense, “always thinking about how they are going to get to the job that puts the right title on their door.”

But I think my anti-goals-ism of a year back was an artifact of one ghastly experience. Since then, I’ve been blessed to work with a group of people who aren’t climbing over one another to put Shiny Job Titles on their doors. Nonetheless do think quite naturally about the direction of their careers, the skills they acquire, and the positions they seek to hold, even when that direction is heavily influenced by the desire to stay where they are and do the very best they can do, and become the best they can be, for Their Place Of Work.

(If there can be an MPOW and a YPOW and even an FPOW [where F = Former], then TPOW is valid, as well.)

I also still strongly believe in balance. I tune out the people who want to tell me how many hours they put into their job. They don’t have to tell me; I’m sure their family members have kept careful track for them.

I recall an administrator at a FPOW who misted up when she remembered the good old days under a former director, where they’d stay up until 1 a.m. on a project. I also remember the snide response from someone who had to participate in those sessions and whose spouse was none too amused. They were never on some truly significant project; they were simply performing in an all-emergency all-the-time mode.

But I have also noticed that in the past few months I have looked at certain projects and been so bold as to muse, “I could do that.” Or even, “I SHOULD be doing that.” I’ve allowed myself to remember with pleasure some of the best professional challenges of my career, some of the Manhattan Projects that involved a certain amount of insanity and messianic belief to bring to fruition.  Partly through my mentee, I’ve gotten in touch again with my Inner Administrator.

Once life settles down a little bit, I’ll resume writing at five miles per hour. (The writing workshop is crucial during this fallow period. It might seem like a distraction to read “other people’s work,” but to dig down deep into a manuscript is its own little mini-class, and yes, it also counts as reading. Since I’m obliged to participate — I started the damn workshop, after all — my brain calms down and cooperates long enough to let me do my share of effort.)

But I’ve let myself dream myself into the future, and that’s not a bad thing at all.

Tagging in workflow context

The personal detour

I’m back from giving the closing talk at SOLINET’s annual membership meeting, where I was well-pampered by all involved. I also rented a Prius for the trip, and it was quite difficult to return this lovely car to Avis. I had wondered how I would like driving a Prius, and the answer is “OMG ponies!” Smooth ride, the joy of watching myself save fuel, and pride of (temporary) ownership of a green vehicle… ‘sall good.

I didn’t sleep well for two nights running (no fault to anyone except my over-active brain working on issues completely unrelated to SOLINET, speeches, or cars), so during my talk I felt under my game. I can always feel the difference between “they liked my talk” and “I shot them over the moon with numinous insights.” I’ll make a point of sleeping better before I teach “Writing for the Web” at TBLC next month.

The when-ness of tagging

Now I make a sharp right turn to discuss tagging in workflow context. Over on Thingology, Tim Spalding discusses user tagging of Godless, Ann Coulter’s latest screed book, pointing out that on Amazon the shouting match is unrelated to book ownership:

But while, on LibraryThing, where you have to have a book to tag it, Godless has a fairly unremarkable tag cloud, touching on its subject matter and point of view, on Amazon, the tagging has devolved into a shouting match.

For some time I’ve been pondering tagging in the context of a user’s workflow. Tagging in library catalogs hasn’t worked yet for a number of reasons, such as these rather obvious points:

  • John Blyberg has noted that without critical mass, tagging is useless. I’d go farther and say without critical mass, tagging could backfire, because only the most determined cranks and pranksters might actually use it. A local library catalog is not beefy enough to build critical mass on its own; I don’t know how big or how heavily-used a catalog needs to be, but “a lot” is my guess. (Then there is the issue with the silo-like design of most library software, which keeps social data imprisoned behind proprietary walls.) That is yet another reason I like “LibraryThing for Libraries“: it’s an enrichment service to salt a catalog with an initial mass of high-quality tags built by passionate readers (and also provides that spookily-marvelous if-you-liked-this functionality).
  • Some systems that claim to offer tagging make it so high-pain to tag that it works against adoption. I am thinking of the system where to merely SEE the tags a user must log in, and where tags are only searchable in “Advanced Search.” (Carl Grant, if you’re reading this, I owe you a citation on people-don’t-use-advanced-search… you have been very patient.)
  • Also, on several occasions I have observed conversations about tagging between vendors and customers where the first words out of a customer’s mouth are “How can I control tagging?” and the vendor then responds in kind. If your primary objective is to “control” tagging, rather than make it work (that is, at minimum, to encourage users to provide quality tags), then the system design, to borrow youthful jargon, will be a FAIL.

But I have also pondered tagging in workflow context and feel this has not received adequate discussion. I’m guessing (based on Tim’s comments) that Librarything users are predominantly tagging when they add books or when they return to their collection for maintenance/grooming activities, such as cleaning up entries, fiddling with their default display, or examining the community discussion around books. Tim is also suggesting that on Amazon tagging appears to be less related to activities related to the workflow of book acquisition and ownership.

So I again mull over the library catalog and tagging workflow. Most catalogs are designed to help users find books or book-like items — known items, or items found through discovery. (Well, that is the claim, anyway.) You don’t return books through a library catalog (at least not yet). So when would tagging happen?

My guess is the best tagging would happen when the users returns the catalog to find more items. I say this because in some respects, a library catalog appears to be remarkably similar to Netflix in workflow, where I (again, out on this limb!) presume user reviewing (similar to tagging?) happens when a user logs in to refresh his or her queue with yummy new titles or simply get a reminder of what’s in the queue (in my family’s case, this happens after we receive some bizarre movie that sorta-looked-good that stealthily crept up to be #1 in one of our queues).

If I’m not going to tag when I find a book (why would I, if I haven’t read it, Amazon notwithstanding), and I’m not going to tag when I check out a book (an unrelated physical activity), and I’m not going to tag after I read a book (because that would mean the sole reason I’m returning to the catalog is to tag an item, which feels low-gain), and I’m not going to tag when I return a book (can you see me at the circ desk, reciting tags I want added to an item — or perhaps shouting tags into a book drop? Or I guess I could write them on a p-slip)…

Seems to me that tagging workflow in a catalog should be “gamed” so that the next time I visit the catalog to find something, the catalog entices me to tag. That would also be when I’m motivated to tag the book in a way that describes it well for my own bibliographic reuse, and also for others. (It could lead to opinion-tagging, though maybe that is always inevitable.)

Then again, what if at the beginning of a new discovery session the catalog recommended books? Prompted me to add reviews? Suggested I queue items? But I get ahead of myself…

All I’m really saying is that the very primitive tagging workflows I’ve seen so far in library catalogs aren’t designed to encourage tagging. (I am not referring at all to LibraryThing for Libraries, which at this point is a one-way enrichment service.) In fact, I don’t see much attention to tagging workflow, period. It feels very random and first-gen — a tacked-on service to allow a vendor to say “Yes, we offer tagging.” If you care at all about engaging users in catalogs and building user-contributed data, or for that matter leveraging social data period, that is simply not good enough.

Thoughts on tagging? Do I have this all wrong, or is there a nubbin of sensicalness here? Have I missed or misinterpreted/misrepresented some tagging behavior?