Settings and activity
42 results found
-
40 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
40 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
23 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
48 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
62 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment -
103 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
15 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
42 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
45 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
56 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
21 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
88 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
118 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
62 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
58 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
46 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
56 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
11 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
77 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
-
61 votes
Joyce Peter
supported this idea
·
One of our former circ staff members used bulk change to erase the collection code on around 1,500 item records and that was not an easy thing to clean up as it involved dozens of collections. One of the reference staff has changed the ownership field when using bulk change-- and done it more than once even after receiving an admonition from me. I have more examples of unfortunate batch changes, but the bottom line is that if the catalogers or sys admin doesn't want staff to have the ability the modify a single item record-- they certainly shouldn't be allowed to modify thousands through a backdoor.