Discussion Forums - Questions about PaperBackSwap Questions about PaperBackSwap

Topic: frustrated with wish lists

Club rule - Please, if you cannot be courteous and respectful, do not post in this forum.
  Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership.
Subject: frustrated with wish lists
Date Posted: 5/27/2009 1:35 PM ET
Member Since: 2/23/2009
Posts: 53
Back To Top

i have 6 books on hold waiting for people because they are on members wish lists  they are all very wish for book there is 67 people waiting for one and 68 people waiting for the other I hate waiting. Three 48 hour windows have past on two of the books does any one else find this frustrating???? I mean I posted the books because i knew people wanted them and I need credits and then I have to wait and wait and wait grrrrrrrr.

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 1:49 PM ET
Member Since: 1/24/2008
Posts: 6,990
Back To Top

I sometimes do too!! I guess I just get so excited and want to mail them out and see that credit pop up. :-) 

 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 2:21 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

This is why so many people post directly to other members instead of to FIFO. 

But at least you are helping to flag some accounts as possible inactives and maybe getting their accounts closed.

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 3:59 PM ET
Member Since: 4/13/2009
Posts: 285
Back To Top

No kidding!  The last book I posted had 66 people on the WL, and it was offered to 3 people (none of whom responded before the 48 hours expired) before the 4th confirmed - eight days after I posted it.    And they were at an address which couldn't accept electronic postage (huh?) so I'm still waiting for my credit.

I figure it's the universe's way of telling me to cultivate patience. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 4:06 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

And on the other side of the coin -

In the last week I've had 3 WL books offered to me, which I accepted. One already went past 5 days and was canceled by PBS. Another will hit the 5 day mark later this afternoon. Both of these books were accepted by the sender but not shipped :(.

I am frustrated. I have waited several months for these books.

Christina

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 4:29 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

I had one go through 7 people one time.  2 were autorequest but they cancelled very quickly.  That's when I started looking for regular posters to post them to more often. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 4:33 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

How do you post directly to members?

Thanks,

Christina

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 4:47 PM ET
Member Since: 12/9/2007
Posts: 9,601
Back To Top

If you have Buddies or you find people in the forums - particularly your genre forums - you can go to their WL and look to see if they've got your book with your ISBN on their WL.  If they do you can use the "Post this Book" button ON THEIR WL to post it directly to them.  There are some members who really disapprove of doing this, though.

Ruth

ETA - spelling - new keyboard is tiny



Last Edited on: 5/27/09 4:48 PM ET - Total times edited: 1
Date Posted: 5/27/2009 4:58 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

Thanks Ruth. I didn't know that existed. It does bypass the FIFO though, which seems a little unfair to those who have been waiting. Too bad PBS can't remove member's WL when they have been inactive for a certain length of time.

Christina

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 5:14 PM ET
Member Since: 12/9/2007
Posts: 9,601
Back To Top

That's a rule others would like to see here.  If you don't log in for a month or 3 weeks or howevr long your account goes on hold,  That would help us a lot.  But it would also mean that inactive and /or abandoned accounts wouldn't be found soon.  Write a note to the Contact Us link at the bottom of the page suggesting your solution to them.

Ruth



Last Edited on: 5/27/09 5:15 PM ET - Total times edited: 1
Date Posted: 5/27/2009 5:36 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

Ruth, thanks for the suggestion of contacting PBS. I just did. Hopefully, others here will also. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.

Christina

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 5:49 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Actually it would get an abandoned account found sooner because by not logging in within the time frame it would be automatically flagged as abandoned.  Obviously they'd have to work it so that accounts put on hold by the account holder were taken into account.  Then if you went away for an extended time you would still have your account. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 6:38 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

PBS could have 2 types of hold.

1) One that the member initiates (vacation)

2) One that PBS initiates (inactive hold).

PBS could put an account on hold when inactive for 3-4 weeks (this would free up the WL). They could send a warning email that the account has been put on "inactive hold". The member could then sign on to reactivate if needed. If an account has been on hold for say 6 months it could be considered abandoned and removed.

Christina



Last Edited on: 5/27/09 6:40 PM ET - Total times edited: 2
Date Posted: 5/27/2009 6:44 PM ET
Member Since: 12/29/2008
Posts: 182
Back To Top

You are all welcome to check my wishlist and post directly to me anytijme. I check my account at least twice a day most days and I get email notification on my blackberry, so I always accept immediately. I do check my buddy list wishes sometimes, but I have different tastes than most, so I rarely find one on theirs.

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 7:32 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Christina that was the suggestion I made at one time.  Just requiring a once a month log in would probably greatly reduce the WL lines and the lines for a lot of posted books.  It would only take 2 minutes for those people who only log on when they get a book request or WL offer-they wouldn't have to actually come to the boards or do anything but log in to signal to PBS that they still want their account. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 8:00 PM ET
Member Since: 12/9/2007
Posts: 9,601
Back To Top

I'm sorry, Mary, that I didn't give you credit for that idea.  I know you have proposed it before.  Maybe we can get some momentum behind thie idea if members will write to the team (using the Contact Us link) about your great idea.

The reason I saId it wouldn't find inactive or abandoned accounts as soon is that if the account goes on hold then it stays that way until PBS has a time limit on "automatic" holds.  It would definitely make things easier for active members.

Ruth

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 8:32 PM ET
Member Since: 2/19/2009
Posts: 692
Back To Top

Mary, glad to hear you have already suggested this. I hope others will write into PBS and support the idea.

I did hear back already on my suggestion. They basically said they already "do this" as in putting accounts on inactive hold. But, they missed my point in that I think it should be done on a proactive basis not reactive. They only put the account on hold after they miss a WL request. That is reactive and creates a bottleneck in the WL queue. If the account was put on inactive hold based on not signing in for 3-4 weeks, then the account would already be on hold when the WL book was posted. This would be proactive and help to alleviate the bottleneck.

So, if anyone writes in about this suggestion, make sure to point out the proactive versus reactive option to the process.

Blessings,

Christina

 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 9:41 PM ET
Member Since: 6/19/2008
Posts: 1,976
Back To Top

I sent a note to TPTB about the 5 days a sender has to accept an order.  I was trying to order a book that had numerous copies in the system.  It went thru 4 or 5 members before someone finally accepted and mailed. At 5 days per member it was about 6 weeks before I got the book.   I suggested that it be reduced to 3 days tops.  I don't mind if a person takes a week to actually mail the book;  I just want to know someone knows the order exists.

I guess I need patience.  It's not like I don't have anything else to read. lol

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 9:49 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

Oh I wasn't looking for credit I just wanted to say that I was thinking the same thing.  The same ideas for logging in once a month and then the hold being a vacation for say 6months and then if still no response then closed completely.  The system could be set up to send automated emails to warn people.

At least now they shortened the number of requests it takes to make a shelf inactive. Although I don't know if it's really working not.  I've seen people post on here upset because their account was put on hold after they missed a request or two because they couldn't get on for various reasons.  It actually helps active members who just had life get in the way of PBS.  Because instead of missing several requests and having to start at the end of several WL and books posted lines-the account goes on vacation preventing any more from being missed. Then they can contact PBS and be reactivated. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 9:51 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

I happen to like the 5 day response time. Although if they extended the mail by time then I'd be ok with a shorter response time. I like to go to the post office once a week. I send a lot of books out so I don't want to rely on printed postage because of the fees.  Also when I have a WL book I posted on hold, I like to see if I have a book from my TBR that I can post to them. So that 5 days gives me a couple of extra reading days if they want the other book as well. 

Date Posted: 5/27/2009 11:21 PM ET
Member Since: 12/9/2007
Posts: 9,601
Back To Top

I agree, Mary, I like the current time limit as well.  It gives most members enough time to cover most real life situations so that they can reasonably get back to PBS before timing out.  I've had to worry before just like you when the electricity has gone out for the area and even the library didn't have internet service.  That went on for 4 days.  I was never so glad to get internet service back!!  ;D

Ruth

Date Posted: 5/29/2009 5:04 AM ET
Member Since: 12/28/2006
Posts: 14,171
Back To Top

That's a frustrating and increasingly frequent situation Dinajean :-(    For those times you want /need quick credits, there is the option to post to a buddy as already mentioned.  Although there is no quick or easy method to hunt through wishlists to discover which buddy may want your books, occassionally I've seen members send out pm's offering books to buddys before listing FIFO.

Several genre discussion forums also have threads along the lines of "is this on your wishlist?" where members post wishlisted books before offering FIFO, and it's common to ask the requestor place the book on 'auto request'.  This method usually speeds up the mailing time considerably.  One would assume PBS has no objection to these transactions, because they have provided the necessary button and I've yet to discover a different use for it.

In addition, there is usually a companion thread "Is this on your bookshelf?" where members post non-wishlisted books they want to order.  Again (in addition to rewarding members active in the PBS community) this can speed up the pre-mailing period. 



Last Edited on: 5/29/09 5:09 AM ET - Total times edited: 2
Date Posted: 5/29/2009 6:51 AM ET
Member Since: 8/10/2005
Posts: 4,599
Back To Top

To live is to be frustrated! This is what I have learned in my old age. Grasshoppa, the best thing you can do is chill and go with the flow. Once you post a book, what others do with it is out of your control. All you can do is control your own actions. Worrying over book transactions is not worth getting high blood pressure, ulcers, gray hair or incarcertaion from hunting down PBS members who don't follow the rules and "dealing with them." :-D

Perhaps this newfound serenity comes from having a TBR pile fast approaching 600 books--I have plenty of books to read so don't obsess over getting any particular book NOW, and I've squirreled my credits enough such that posting books simply to get fast credits is also a thing of the past. So I read my books, I post my books and let the chips fall where they may. If the first person on the wishlist wants it and accepts it--vunderbar! If it cycles through 2, 3, 4.....I laugh and say, "it's their loss! This book was read once by a little old lady on Sunday and hasn't even got a single spine crease! Hah!" and wait some more. Someone WILL want it eventually. It's really of no consequence to me who that is. And hey...pat yourself on the back for helping those who were #45 in line. They are now #39 and beaming at their good fortune that the wishlist is moving so fast. :)

Seriously, I have been sending the PBS powers that be suggestions about inactive accounts since not too long after I joined. (I was not always as serene about things as I am now, you see. LOL) It seems that they have finally done something about it--at least making accounts inactive if they don't respond to book/wish list requests. Still waiting for the day when a once-a-month login is required.

Cheryl

Date Posted: 5/29/2009 8:01 AM ET
Member Since: 1/8/2009
Posts: 2,016
Back To Top

The new WL, if ever implemented, would help "weed out" these inactive accounts in a relatively efficient manner.

The default setting is "Auto Request." The system would automatically skip over people at the front of the WL queue if they don't have any credits. I'm assuming that most inactive accounts would have zero credits. And if those inactive people ever want to get back into PBS activity again, they just need to repopulate their credits and won't have to start all the way at the end of the line again.

I know it's not popular because of the need to rank and people don't like the possibility of being bypassed, but it's one thing that helps with the transaction wait time. Doesn't help with books in the system though.