I've been pondering for a few hours on a requester's condition that I received for a WL book. The RC mentions the book has to meet some standards but there are no real standards listed ... just a general statement that kind of makes no sense to me. Should I forward a copy of the RC to a tour guide to help me figure this one out? I'm reluctant to post it here because I don't want to upset anyone but this one really has me scratching my head on what they mean.

What exactly does the RC say?  Maybe they mean it must meet PBS standards?

You can always decline due to RCs and say they are too vague.  Maybe then the person with the conditions will clarify what they mean.

I appreciate your help, Sarah. = ) Here the is the RC. I didn't want to post in case the requester reads this board, I don't want to hurt anyone's feeling. But, I'd hate for them to lose this WL book as I don't think it gets posted often (a reference type book).  Here is the request as it came to me. Right now, I am leaning toward denying it and then mentioing that the RC is too vague. 

I do most of my reading in bed, so a book needs to meet some  standards: I prefer not to know where it's been (e.g., living with cigarettes or animals). I make every effort to do the same- altho I live with neither cigarettes nor animals!

Yeah, that is pretty strange.  They don't say what their standards are, if they prefer books that don't smoke and haven't been around animals?  I'd reject the conditions for being too confusing.  This person'll stay #1 on the WL then and your book will go to the next person.

I think she means that she doesn't want it to smell like smoke or have traces of animals (Like cat hair, or smelling of animals). But that's would just be a guess. It is kinda... oddly worded.

I rarely turn down RCs I can meet, but as someone else said, this one leaves it to wide open on what "standards" they want met. I'd be hard pressed to send them anything I hadn't bought new.

If you do turn it down, I'd politely let them know that the way their RC is worded, it is unclear on all the standards they want met and they should more clearly define exactly what it is they want or don't want.

That's way too vague. I'd have to turn it down too.

Jonnie, unless the person has put their PBS nickname on their RC, there is no way to contact them without first accepting the request.  When this person sees that the book's been marked it doesn't meet their conditions because the conditions are too confusing and vague, hopefully they change their wording to be clear in what they mean.

Thanks for everyone's help! I declined it and stated that I did so because the RC was confusing and vague. I didn't go into too much detail because I have a tendency to overexplain and at times that creates more of an issue.

If you turn down the request because it is vague the requestor can hardly complain, or if you send the book the requestor can hardly complain that the book does not meet his conditions.

It sounds like she did originally refuse books in a household with smoke and cats, but lost quite a few books she wanted because of her restrictions. I think she wants everyone to make sure it doesn't smell like smoke or have cat hair in or on the book, that way she can pretend it never did.

I would have turned that town as well.  I'll accept RCS that I can meet that are clearly worded with no room for confusion.

To me it sounded like she lost her train of thought and forgot to put some info in there.  Maybe she'll get a clue and change the RCS. 

I would have declined too.

That is really weird! My guess is they don't want to smell smoke, see pet hair or perhaps if you read it at the beach - have sand in the book? LOL I have no clue! Yeah, this person totally needs to reword their RC!

I would have declined this request also.  I am speculating by the wording of the request that this member may not always have used English as a first language and that is why the condition seems confusing.