Discussion Forums - Questions about PaperBackSwap Questions about PaperBackSwap

Topic: WL book 5 deep and counting - just a rant

Club rule - Please, if you cannot be courteous and respectful, do not post in this forum.
Page:   Unlock Forum posting with Annual Membership.
Subject: WL book 5 deep and counting - just a rant
Date Posted: 8/13/2011 12:37 PM ET
Member Since: 6/23/2010
Posts: 148
Back To Top

OK, this is a first.  I am into the first 12 hours of number 5 person for a    f     o      u    r     t     y           e      i      g     h      t              h       o       u      r    hold for someone to accept a wishlist book.  ~sigh~  Please TPTB make the time to wait shorter!  If a book is on a wishlist then people should care to check up on their accounts or check that they don't want the book anymore.  I know, I know, I am doing my part in weeding out inactive accounts - in this case more than my part, I think!  And, yes, I have already submitted my thoughts and rec'd a reply that 24 hours is not enough time.  .  .  . Well, there are still 8 people wishing before the book is released into the general population of FIFO instead of the WL prison. On to wait.  .  .  . 

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 12:53 PM ET
Member Since: 10/28/2008
Posts: 3,529
Back To Top

I would like to see the hold time shortened.  I also think 24 hours is plenty of time.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 1:05 PM ET
Member Since: 10/13/2010
Posts: 4,315
Back To Top

I try to request my WL books within the first 24 hours, but lately I've been running low on credits, hoping that the books I've sent will get to their destinations & I will end up with a few more credits.  And thus, I've waited until the last couple of hours before the hold runs out to request them (and once or twice, to deny them).

I do understand the frustration though.  A couple of days doesn't seem like much time until you've had to wait on a handful of people to let the WL books roll through.

Although I also think 24 hours is probably long enough, just be glad it's not 72 hours. wink

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 1:07 PM ET
Member Since: 2/26/2009
Posts: 36,025
Back To Top

I check everyday so 24 hrs would be plenty for me, However-  many people don't have internet access at home and have to go to the library- and they may not have access to transportation everyday, or may have mobility issues,- so I think the 48 hr time frame is fair.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 1:41 PM ET
Member Since: 2/13/2007
Posts: 2,272
Back To Top

I hate "the wishlist prison"! It seems so many people use their wishlist more as a reminder list and either turn down the request or don't respond at all.

There are a lot of inactives out there and I would love to see PBS initiate a "census" once a year with a PM that you must respond to within XX days or your account is suspended. Or you must log into your account every 30 or 45 or 60 days or your account is suspended.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 1:57 PM ET
Member Since: 12/1/2009
Posts: 105
Back To Top

I think the 48 hour time frame is fair enough. With  a little thing called real life going on, 24 hours isn't always enough time to respond. Some days I am so busy, I don't even check my regular email, let along log onto PBS, though I do try to do both daily. I would be very, very ticked off if I was offered a book I'd been waiting MONTHS for and it rolled over because I didn't respond in a DAY.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 2:24 PM ET
Member Since: 2/26/2009
Posts: 36,025
Back To Top

There are a lot of inactives out there and I would love to see PBS initiate a "census" once a year with a PM that you must respond to within XX days or your account is suspended. Or you must log into your account every 30 or 45 or 60 days or your account is suspended.   
+1

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 2:28 PM ET
Member Since: 10/6/2005
Posts: 10,717
Back To Top

I don't think 24 hours would be fair b/c what if you only have internet access at work and you don't work weekends?

I'm guessing the large number of WL roll-overs people have been experiencing lately have more to do with summer vacations than anything right now though - people going away and forgetting to use vacation hold.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 3:27 PM ET
Member Since: 10/6/2007
Posts: 460
Back To Top

I like the 48 hours.  I don't get on the computer every single day and would hate to miss out on a wished-for book.

MaryF

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 4:42 PM ET
Member Since: 6/23/2010
Posts: 148
Back To Top

Sally's yearly census idea is a good one!  Also, Amber, I am glad the wait is not 72 hours!  Now I am just curious to see if I am going to go through all 8 wishers remaining =)

Subject: Wishlist
Date Posted: 8/13/2011 4:47 PM ET
Member Since: 11/18/2005
Posts: 5,426
Back To Top

I like the 48 hours for a wishlisted book-not too short and not too long. I am on PBS every day, but there are lots out there that have to go to the library or work.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 5:36 PM ET
Member Since: 9/8/2009
Posts: 619
Back To Top

A yearly census would be BRILLIANT!

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 5:38 PM ET
Member Since: 5/29/2011
Posts: 634
Back To Top

5 is not so bad; i have book posted that is now on #7 of  wishlists...hopefully the next few people will want it--since there is only a total of 9.  The issue; the book does not have a dust jacket :) 

 

 

Subject: I have previously posted about my WL offering that went thru ...8 people
Date Posted: 8/13/2011 6:46 PM ET
Member Since: 4/4/2009
Posts: 74
Back To Top

but, finally, I was able to send it off  more than  2 weeks after posting it. The real pain was that the 48 hour hold acceptance came just after I had made my final PO run for the week, so the requester had to wait until the next Monday for me to mail it.

 

Nothing to do but have paitience, apparently.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 6:47 PM ET
Member Since: 1/21/2006
Posts: 125
Back To Top

This summer, I wasn't able to get online every day, or even every other day - so I definitely couldn't have made the 48 hours.  But I've always had my wishlist books set to auto-request, so even if I can't get online I'll still get the wishlist book.  I am really surprised that more people don't take advantage of this feature - any thoughts as to why?

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 6:57 PM ET
Member Since: 8/30/2008
Posts: 2,207
Back To Top

Personally, the 48 hours is ideal, too. Not too short, not too long. The time span isn't the problem - it's the members who don't bother to accept or reject the offer. I always have plenty of credits but once in a while I'm offered a WL book but decide at that moment that I'll pass on it and I respond to the offer as quickly as I can.

It's rare I don't get online at least once a day, but if a WL book was available to me at 6:30 a.m. - I'm already on my way to work, PBS is blocked at work so I can't check. If I go out after work and get home late, too tired to checked e-mail or PBS I could conceivably miss the book if I don't get to check my computer the following morning. The extra 24 hours would practically ensure I'd be able to be able to act on the transaction.

Patience - it's the PBS mantra. We've all gone through this kind of delay. I vote for keeping the system as it is.

Gail

 

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 7:05 PM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

I've been suggesting that once a year "census" type thing since I joined as well.  I think they would weed a lot of inactives out if they just required a log in every 90 days (or whatever). Whenever someone hasn't logged on in x # of days-send an automated email asking them to log on and confirm that they still want to do PBS.  Then vacation anyone who doesn't respond.

Date Posted: 8/13/2011 9:00 PM ET
Member Since: 10/13/2010
Posts: 4,315
Back To Top

I also think that disabling accounts for those who don't log in after X amount of days is a good idea.

Suzi, I would assume that a lot of people don't do auto request due to a number of reasons. I personally only have about 10% of my WL on auto because I am low on credits.  Maybe some people aren't sure about the books on their WL, like maybe they add the books & figure they'll decide later if they really want the book.  Sometimes I have more than one edition on my list that are the same or similar & if I get at least one of them, I don't want the others so I just put the ones on auto that I think would get listed but keep the others on my WL just in case.  For instance, if I would rather have a paperback copy instead of hardcover, I may ONLY put the paperback on auto, but have the hardcover one on my WL in case it gets posted first.

I definitely like the auto request option though!  It's also a help so that I know which of my books to read next since I know someone is willing to snatch it up when I'm done!

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 10:41 AM ET
Member Since: 10/30/2009
Posts: 962
Back To Top

Not everyone has access to internet 24 hours a day.  By shortening the hold period, you run the risk of losing people who ARE active but can't get online within 24 hours.  I don't think that's fair.  Weed them out with the 48 hour hold.  You'll be able to mail it sooner or later.  Why is it so important to do it right this minute?  Did I miss a new date for the world to end? lol  Just chill for a bit.  The book's time will come.  Good luck.

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 10:55 AM ET
Member Since: 8/23/2007
Posts: 26,510
Back To Top

I think the issue is that this is the 5th person that the 48hr hold is ticking away on for the OP.  It's not so frustrating when it just happens with the 1st wisher. But when you post a bunch of books and want to mail them all out together-and one just keeps going through wisher after wisher while you hold off mailing (or even accepting other ones)-it gets annoying.  Especially if you are out of credits, read and post a WL book to earn one and more than a week later that book is still on hold waiting for someone to request the book. 

But I still think 48hrs is a good timeframe.  It gives someone time to buy a credit if they need one.  It gives people who can't come on everyday and use the email notifications to know when to go to the library (or friend's or wherever) to log on and deal with their account.

The required log on every 60-90 days or even once a year would clear a lot of inactives out.  Some might say it's an inconvenience to someone who is busy and doesn't have a very active account. But if you can't log on for 2 min every few months than how will you have time to mail a book when it's requested? 

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 10:56 AM ET
Member Since: 11/28/2010
Posts: 754
Back To Top

24 hours would not be long enough hold for the WL to accept.  Let's say you log on every single day and you work day shift.  It could be that you logged in before work on Monday, had then the next time Tuesday after work.   It's still every day, but you just missed that WL book that was posted at 11 AM on Monday.  

  I am on here every day, but I can see how the current 48 hour hold might be a stretch for some people.  24 hours would not long enough for a lot of people.

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 2:45 PM ET
Member Since: 4/7/2008
Posts: 15,690
Back To Top

I also like the idea of the 'census'. And I totally agree with you, Mary that if a person doesn't have time to log in every few months, then maybe they won't have the time to mail a book or even mark a book received when the time comes.

Maybe we should just all contact the Team and let them know about this? TPTB don't read the forums and the only way they will take this idea into consideration it's if we hear from enough of us.

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 5:20 PM ET
Member Since: 10/6/2007
Posts: 460
Back To Top

I like the census idea too!

MaryF

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 5:40 PM ET
Member Since: 4/24/2008
Posts: 310
Back To Top

I had that same problem a couple of months ago.  I had a book that had five wishers on it.  By the time it got requested it got down to the fifth person.

 

Date Posted: 8/14/2011 8:03 PM ET
Member Since: 8/10/2005
Posts: 4,600
Back To Top

I like the census idea as well, but I think quarterly would be better than yearly if it's just programming that can be automated. Anyone who hasn't logged in in the previous quarter should be put on hold and have to respond to a link in an e-mail to reactivate their account. This weeds out all the people who have joined in the previous quarter who posted their 10 books, ordered their two freebies and went away. Or those who get discouraged because they posted all Nora Roberts and John Grisham books and can't figure out why no one wants their books, so they drift away after a month.

Considering that there is supposed to be some sort of hold put on accounts with owners who don't respond to either requests from their shelves or to wishlist books offered them (although I've never actually seen where it's been explained by TPTB just how many missed requests within what time frame triggers this action), it seems like there's still lots of people that fall through the cracks.

I think the time frame is fine as it is--it gives people who have busy lives or limited internet access time to respond. My own wishlist is autorequested so it doesn't affect me on the requesting end at all. On the sending end of things, I've gotten a lot more relaxed about posting and mailing my books. I don't check whether a book is wishlisted or not before I select it to read...I just read what I want, post it when I'm done and if someone wants it, great! If not, it either cycles through a few people or it sits on my shelf. No biggie.

Cheryl

Page: