Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership. |
|
|||
If I turn down a request due to RCs doesn't it go into my transaction archive? I turned down one yesterday because of smoking RCs since my husband smokes. Today I got another request for the same book with no RCs. I know I stayed at the top of the FIFO but this book has been on my shelf since 8/06 and there are almost 300 copies in the system so it seemed odd that two different people all of a sudden wanted it. I looked at my TA to see who the first requestor was but there's nothing there. |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
It should be in your TA. According to the PBS help center. It is most likely the same person. The requester could want the book so badly that they are willing drop their RC to get the book. I would accept the request and then PM the person explaining what conditions it did not meet and give them the opportunity to cancel the request if they then want to. Here is what the Help Center says to do.
Last Edited on: 2/12/09 7:55 PM ET - Total times edited: 1 |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
maybe they forgot they had the RC turned on and this book is for someone else so the smoking rc does not matter..I would just accept and let it go on its merry little way :) |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
A request declined for RCS will not show up in your TA and that person cannot request the book from you again even if they turn off their RCS. Most likely it's a steadily moving book. Those books with lots of copies in the system do get ordered. Sometimes if there's been a reissue, a new book in a series or a movie made of a book there'll be resurge in orders. This past month I had 4 heavily posted books ordered from me. So they do move-just a little more slowly then others. |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
Mary, read Margaret's post above. Now you can request the same book, if it's available, by either changing your RC's or turning them off and requesting it again. |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
THat must be new because it used to prevent you from re-requesting a book declined for RCS |
|||
![]() |
|
|||
It is new, they announced it in last month's NewsWire. Lots of members had requested this change. |
|||
![]() |