Am I the only one that misses the chance to get a book because I didn't respond within the 48 hr window?  To the administrators of Paperback.swap, I would like to request you remove this condition. I have missed opportunities to get books on my Wish List because I was on vacation, travelling or without access to my computer for a couple of days.

What is the reasoning for this requirement? Seems like we should all be mature enough to keep our Wish List updated such that, without this restriciton,  we don't inadvertenely receive a book we don't want.

Hi Buz, if you set your books to Auto Request, I think this will help you out.  They will automatically be requested & sent to you even if you are out of town as long as you have available credit.

Isn't that what auto request is for?

Oops, Robin answered before me :-)

I agree with Cindy - It is REALLY frustrating when you are low on credits to post a book that you know someone has wishlisted, only to have the book sit there, and sit there, and sit there.  48 hours seems perfect to me - most people check their email once every couple of days minimum.  And if you don't, as others have said, putting your WL on auto request will solve the problem.

I'd like to point out that putting your WL on auto request does NOT solve the problem---

I recently went on vacation, and a book I had on auto-request came up, and was declined (or timed out?) by the sender.  It automatically went back on my wishlist, but not as an auto-request.  So, when it came up again, I became one of those annoying people who don't respond when their wish list book is posted! 

In the couple of months I've been a member, it hasn't been uncommon at all for a book I've requested to time out or be canceled by the sender--(and I don't have any conditions listed.) 

AR rocks. I never confirm WL books I get "surprises" on my account page all the time :)

Julie, as an FYI, if you put your account on hold when you'll be away from home for a few days (or simply cannot complete transactions), you won't have that problem. If the AR-WL book is returned as a standard request, if you account is on hold, you will be skipped until your shelf come off hold.

.

We have traveled a lot this summer and each time I put my account on hold.  I went over my WL before Ieft and ARed every book where I was close to fcoming up to the top of the list.  I had no problems at all and over the two trips [with account on hold] I received about a dozen WL books.  It was a great surprise to find books when I got home with some were still coming.

I find nothing wrong with the system and will be doing it again the end of the month when we are gone again.

Use the Ar more often. It works.

Leyba

I am going to add my two cents worth here, and considering how unpopular my thoughts on the matter are likely to be, I think two cents is a good value for them...lol!

I feel that if a person can't be bothered to find a way to check their account at least once every 48 hours, then it's only their fault if they miss out on a book. It's really not fair to hold that title up from moving on to the next person wishing for it who can reply within that time frame. And it's also very unfair to the person who posted that book, you are holding them up from getting a credit for a book that they honestly want to share with others.

Yes, I know that folks go on vacations and that sometimes they have power or computer problems beyond their control, but that what auto request is for. And really...this (and many other) rules are for the benefit of all who participate in this wonderful website. I feel the 48 hour rule is very fair and evens the playing field for all here.

Allie, I'm confused by what you mean when you say that "My wishlist is huge now that there is no limit..."

Aren't we all limited to only 200 wished for books? Did you m mean to say your Reminder List has no limit?

*confused*

Julie, as an FYI, if you put your account on hold when you'll be away from home for a few days (or simply cannot complete transactions), you won't have that problem. If the AR-WL book is returned as a standard request, if you account is on hold, you will be skipped until your shelf come off hold.

Jane, my account *was* on hold while I was gone.  It didn't affect my wish list, only my bookshelf.  Maybe it was just a glitch, then?  Or what did I do wrong?

"Am I the only one that misses the chance to get a book because I didn't respond within the 48 hr window?  To the administrators of Paperback.swap, I would like to request you remove this condition. I have missed opportunities to get books on my Wish List because I was on vacation, travelling or without access to my computer for a couple of days.|

You are certainly not but still you have to consider that there are many other people waiting for a book and that tere is still the person waiting for the book to be requested and earning a point. If you want a book that bad you've still got the choice to put it on auto request.That's what it is meant for.

"Seems like we should all be mature enough to keep our Wish List updated such that, without this restriciton,  we don't inadvertenely receive a book we don't want."

Ok, I am posting a book and it is on your wishlist. Just because you are on vacation and the next two persons in line are busy as well and I would sit and sit and wait for a member to accept a trade ? No way. If that would happen I would stick to the other trading sites I use.

Julie, as I understand it, standard requests should be skipped when the bookshelf  account is on hold. But perhaps because the book was "added" after the WL book was on hold, it was treated as an in-progress transaction? Perhaps you should report that to R&R as a potential bug. Be sure to include when it happened and which book it was.

Yes, I know that folks go on vacations and that sometimes they have power or computer problems beyond their control, but that what auto request is for. And really...this (and many other) rules are for the benefit of all who participate in this wonderful website. I feel the 48 hour rule is very fair and evens the playing field for all here.

Nearly every public library in the US has computers to access the internet, regardless if you are a resident of that area you can use their system to at least check your WL account to accept or deny.  But like others I too went through my list, actually bought credits to ensure all my AR would be covered and selected AR for any book I was under 10 th in line for.  Especially if you know you will not have time or access to a computer.

I am against removing a time limit for accepting, what happens if god forbid someone has a tragedy or life altering circumstances that keeps them from logging back in for months or even longer, leaving others waiting while that book is the last thing on their minds.  I think 48 hrs is fair, and if it was a case of a AR being timed out and sent back to the WL on regular request and timed out again, then obviously it is a fairly fast moving book if you were offered it twice in the space of time you were gone so your turn will come arounc again.

I am one of the NON-auto-requestors for alot of my books.  Though I am online more often then not.  The 2 days is a good balance. 

I do think the system does need to be changed though.  Julie should not be skipped over simply because the sender cancelled or timed out on her wishlisted book for some reason.  It should be returned to the wishlist to its prior state.  She did the right thing and auto-requested it because she wanted it.  Her desire for the book did not change after she went on vacation.  I run into this problem because of conditions and vacation hold.

Julie should not be skipped over simply because the sender cancelled or timed out on her wishlisted book for some reason.  It should be returned to the wishlist to its prior state.  She did the right thing and auto-requested it because she wanted it.

Anthony, I agree with you here. But what ended up happening is that Julie lost her place in the WL line, because she was still offered the book while her account was on hold. If that's the case, she shouldn't have lost her place in the WL line because she shouldn't have been offered the book if her account was on hold and it was listed as a standard offer. At least, that's how I understand the posting guidelines.

That's why I suggested that she report it. While the book returning as a standard request is not ideal, it shouldn't result in an accidental loss of the place in the WL line if the account is on hold.

As it stands now, if a WL request is cancelled, the book returns to the WL as a standard request. If we want that changed, we'll have to request it.

The CD swap site already does this.  They have a default setting that lets you choose how you want your wish list items set up. 

Julie & Jane -- R&R are very nice about returning you to the top of the wish list if you've lost your place because of something that was really not your fault (wrong book sent, damaged book sent, etc.)

I can't believe they'd penalize somebody who is using both auto-request and the vacation hold feature properly! Ask them to put you back at #1 for your book.

Looking through the Help Center on this issue may give some clarification:

If you are putting your lists on vacation hold the only things that are not hidden are books that are in the process of an active transaction, or if you place books on your Wish List on autorequest.  If your WL books becomes available and you have an available credit, the system will automatically ship the book to you.  This recently happened to me when I was off for a few days.

I'm sure there may be glitches in the system, such as you didn't have credits available, the sender of the book decided at the last minute for some reason that they didn't want to send the book after all, and then perhaps there were no other books available in the system for a backup WL book to be sent to you.

As Chris says AR autorequest is a really cool way to go.  I think she must have all her WL books on autorequest.  I do pick and choose what I want on autorequest but you can do it anyway you want.

Chris - is shark week over tonight?

With all due respect, if there's a wishlist of 200 people (or 400 or even 900 people) wanting a book, why should one person who is on vacation or can't check in for whatever reason, or doesn't have credits to cover the transaction hold up the whole line for longer than 48 hours? I think 48 hours is a very reasonable timeframe for response, especially with the availability of auto-request. If it's a book you really want, you'll have it auto-requested and make sure you have enough credits to cover those WL books you put on auto-request....and if you don't want it badly enough to put it on auto-request and buy a credit for it, then let someone else who DOES have it!

As to people being adults and keeping their WL up to date...yeah, right! LOL Almost every time I post a book that's wishlisted, it's either turned down or not responded to at all by 2 or 3 people before it finally finds someone who actually DOES want it...often takes a week or more to get an acceptance which can be frustrating for the sender.

Cheryl

I agree Cheryl.  I've had a few heavily Wishlisted books that I've posted hang there for a week or more while several people just let thier 48 hours lapse. 

I've put my WL on autorequest.