This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
To those people who are suggesting that library science isn't a real thing, I have a simple exercise for you: Suppose you are managing a very basic, but busy archive that adds dozens if not hundreds of new documents per day. Each document is assigned a sequential number, and has several names associated with it. When each document is entered, an index entry for that document must be created. Without a computer, how would you organize such an index to make it quick and easy for someone to find documents associated with a particular name?
You could use linked lists. The front desk of the archive would have a ledger that maps all names in the archive to the numerical ID of the first and most recent documents with that name, and all documents would be added to the shelves sequentially. When looking for all documents by John Doe, you would look up John Doe in the ledger and go to the first document. That document would have a cover page affixed to it that lists the ID of the second document associated with John Doe. The second document would tell you where the third one is, and so on until you get to the final one. Adding a new document would likewise be straightforward: put it in the first open space on the shelves, look up in the ledger where the last John Doe document is, affix a cover page to it that points to the new document, and then update the ledger. If a document has multiple names, simply repeat this process for each name.
More options
Context Copy link
I'd make a physical version of a relational database, actually pretty easy to accomplish with filing cabinets and folders.
I'm not a CS guy so I don't know what that is. If I walk into the office and tell the clerk I want to search the archive for records indexed to Michael Price, how do I find them?
literally just do that ^ ?
And what do they tell me? Do they just have the record locations memorized?
how to find them or they find them for you?
probably not but they should know to find them since that is literally (a part of) their job?
More options
Context Copy link
This was already answered, and it was at one time taught in elementary school. You don't need a degree in library science to use an indexing system.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There's a bunch of cards/sheets/whatever containing lists of authors, each with a unique id (just a number that I increment with each new author added, though there are other ways). I find Michael Price and make a note of his id. Then there's another bunch of cards that has book/record/document titles ordered by author id. I find the sheet(s) for Michael Price's id and use that to find all books by him
There's other concerns like handling books with multiple authors, adding new sheets in the middle of others, etc. that would make it more complicated but it's nothing that can't be done by hand, especially for a smaller local/school library.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
How many school libraries could this possibly describe? I think you and many others are conflating school libraries with public libraries. The latter are relatively large and provide all manner of community services and I could imagine a 2 year degree program could be necessary for managing such a thing. The former are small and often staffed by community volunteers or teaching assistants. I am not convinced that grad school or even a bachelor's is necessary for this function.
How many libraries of either variety do you think there are in US that don't any kind of computer or digital inventory management? Regardless, you could probably learn such an organization system in your bog standard 30 hour technical training class.
I'm not describing any library. I'm describing something much simpler than any library to illustrate a point that archival science is a lot more complicated than laymen think, largely in part because the professionals working behind the scenes have done such a good job that we don't notice them. And just because computers can handle a lot of our work now doesn't mean that the professionals in charge of these systems don't need to understand the underlying theory. Most people don't use 99% of the underlying theory they learned in school. I mean, why do we give a fuck if the kids can add when we live in a world with calculators?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
But we do have computers. It's 2023, not 1973.
The Cutter catalog system did it pretty much the same way a computer database would: Secondary indexes. You shelve the book based on one criterion, and you have multiple card catalogs with index cards sorted by the other criteria. You don't need a master's degree (or even any degree at all) to use this system, either. When you get a new book you make up all the appropriate cards and put them in the appropriate catalogs.
More options
Context Copy link
I would take a collection of loud noises and leave them on the front lawn overnight until they had been lightly coated in condensation. Then I would systematically organize the documents using these dewey decibels.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link