I know this subject has been going on forever but I have a new question to ask. The team sent me an email saying my response of no was rude because it upset a Karen with an RC. Frankly I don't have to time to respond to a lengthy RC and itemize my response and have been answering no for years until now. If I have the time I will respond to the ones who have an allergy,  I have pets, had a wood stove etc. It's a used book site with established rules which I don't need reiterated in an RC. On the other hand if I had an RC I would appreciate a concise answer...no. Are you offended?

I have never understood why we even have to give a reason.  They give us the option if it meets their conditions to send or not.  I have very often just written no as my answer or I just write the word conditions. 

I usually respond to a RC with conditions I can't meet by stating one of the reason(s). Usually this only takes about 10 more letters. For example, I'll write "library book" if an RC states they don't want a previous library book.  Occasionally, I've written "conditions too vague" for some RCs, such as "can't have an odor," as if such a condition even exists. Recently. I denied a RC which pretty much required the book to be brand new.  I suspect the book was for resale. So I just replied "used" as the reason for not accepting the request. Hey, I read it, so it is used, right?

I also have an RC which is fairly common here----no tobacco smell---as I have a severe allergy to that. I do think just responding "no" is a bit rude.

The RCs I don't appreciate are the ones which just repeat the conditions required by PBS. But I do read those, as sometimes that member includes a condition of their own.

I don't think I'd be offended.  I would prefer "no" over somebody going on a tirade about why their book doesn't meet my conditions.

If my book does not meet their RC, I usually just respond with "Does not meet requestor conditions" and move on.

No

I can't understand why they would even get involved with something so petty.  I usually put that my book doesn't meet the RC and have never had a problem.

I do what Thomas does..

That being said, that's for the easy ones of no pets or library books or books w/o dj's..I have pets, it's a library book, etc

The oddball ones I've received like..book must be new, I am a collector. I declined with book is not new

All books must include d/j (if it doesn't have one and never did) I decline with book doesn't come with one

No printing errors, I declined with I don't know if it does or doesn't

While I think no is a little rude, I'm surprised anyone made an issue of it...

When a few years ago PBS added the requirement for a reason for not sending, it was after many complaints that some people just decline all RCs. By requiring  an answer, requestors at least know why they didnt get the book. When someone just responds 'NO', that is the same as just clicking ' cannot send' and doesnt provide a reason. So I agree just saying No seems rude. 

I wouldn't be offended, but I don't know why we have to give a reason for declining the RC in the first place.  People who have RCs arn't required to say why they have it. 

I just say "doesn't meet conditions."

I decline all RC's that have to do with smell.  I just write Smoker.  If it's pets, I write Pets.  So far I haven't been reported as being rude, that I know of.  I'm not about to go into long explanations when just 1 word will do.

I think your one word answers are fine , Cindy, for those situations.