Settings and activity
186 results found
-
14 votes
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
shared this idea
·
-
49 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment -
13 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This seems like it really needs to be fixed. Why not have one system-level table for this and allow entries in it to be suppressed or not at different libraries/branches? That is what is done for a lot of similar items and seems to be much 'safer' in terms of potential for error.
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
30 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
45 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
shared this idea
·
-
51 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
92 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This is especially important with the addition of pickup areas in 7.5. We've gotten a lot of feedback from front-line staff that the pickup area information is not clearly visible on the hold slips and stuff gets mis-shelved.
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
16 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This is especially important since email notifications account for 90+% of most libraries' notifications, and with the way Polaris is set up, they are practically the only channel for almost due/autorenew messages, so even patrons who are signed up for a different notification method may still be receiving email messages with the incorrect name on them.
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
53 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
The inconsistency of this drives me crazy. Why can you search for 'digital but not physical books' but not for 'physical but not digital books'? It doesn't make sense, and more importantly, most of our ebook users are searching our ebook platforms (Libby, hoopla, etc.), not the PAC. The patrons using the PAC are specifically there because they want physical items.
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
12 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
18 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
14 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
31 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
159 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
Well, that's a horrible situation I wasn't aware of. Thanks so much for posting this! We really need a fix for this. Nothing is more frustrating to patrons than this kind of situation ("you've given us the correct information, possibly more than once, but we can't use it").
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
24 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
20 votes
Updating this to under review. We have plans to add an "alert note" on patron records but need to evaluate on items. I accidently updated the wrong idea (between the two).
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This would be SO helpful! There are a ton of things this would be useful for. I know blocking notes are supposed to fulfill this function, but I don't want my patron to not be able to borrow ebooks or renew their checked out items because we have an item of theirs in the lost and found, we need them to sign a form, etc. We end up putting that info in non-blocking notes instead and staff just don't look at it and the issue stays unresolved for months.
-
27 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This would be very helpful! We have patrons who use the card mainly for accessing computers/devices. The access management software isn't sophisticated enough to pass anything back to Polaris, so someone could renew their card, hop on a computer that day, and then visit every day for the next month for a computer session and it wouldn't be reflected in Polaris at all.
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
14 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
commented
This would be very valuable for addressing patrons correctly. I'm sure the customers that use titles would like the ability to include them. We use a UDF in our library for parent/guardian name on children's accounts, and it would be nice to address the notice to the parent/guardian when something was present in that field and the notice is going to the parent's email address, not the child's.
We'd also like the ability to include preferred name in notices instead of legal name (we use a clunky swapped setup in our instance of Polaris to keep the legal name fields mandatory, so the "name" fields that are merge tags are legal names for us, not preferred names).
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
20 votes
We will consider this idea for possible future development. Thank you!
Emma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
-
35 votesEmma Olmstead-Rumsey
supported this idea
·
There is a system admin setting that might or might not do this already, I don't 100% understand how it behaves. Admin Explorer-->Profiles-->Cataloging-->Automatic display in PAC processing.
If you have the bottom checkbox checked, I think you could accomplish this with current tools?