<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Instant Messaging in Libraries: Ten Points from Aaron Schmidt</title>
	<atom:link href="http://maisonbisson.com/blog/post/10931/im-in-libraries/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://maisonbisson.com/blog/post/10931/im-in-libraries/</link>
	<description>A bunch of stuff I would have emailed you about.</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:14:12 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Instant Messenger Or Virtual Reference? &#171; MaisonBisson.com</title>
		<link>http://maisonbisson.com/blog/post/10931/im-in-libraries/#comment-31807</link>
		<dc:creator>Instant Messenger Or Virtual Reference? &#171; MaisonBisson.com</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Feb 2006 17:21:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://maisonbisson.com/blog/?p=10931#comment-31807</guid>
		<description>[...] I noted  Aaron Schmidt&#8217;s points on IM in libraries previously, but what I didn&#8217;t say then was how certain I was that popular instant messaging clients like AOL Instant Messenger or Yahoo!&#8217;s or Google&#8217;s are far superior to the so-called virtual reference products. Why? They&#8217;re free, our patrons are comfortable, and they work. Ah, heck, just take a look at what Michael Stephens was saying about them last week (as quoted by Teresa Koltzenburg at ALA TechSource): â€œBack in 2002, my library jumped into the virtual reference game, and we wrote a gigantic check to an unnamed VR company. We spent the summer doing intensive training. I was training at that time at my library, and I designed a four-session, four-hour-apiece training course to get people comfortable with this huge, scary thing that was virtual reference.â€ [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] I noted  Aaron Schmidt&#8217;s points on IM in libraries previously, but what I didn&#8217;t say then was how certain I was that popular instant messaging clients like AOL Instant Messenger or Yahoo!&#8217;s or Google&#8217;s are far superior to the so-called virtual reference products. Why? They&#8217;re free, our patrons are comfortable, and they work. Ah, heck, just take a look at what Michael Stephens was saying about them last week (as quoted by Teresa Koltzenburg at ALA TechSource): â€œBack in 2002, my library jumped into the virtual reference game, and we wrote a gigantic check to an unnamed VR company. We spent the summer doing intensive training. I was training at that time at my library, and I designed a four-session, four-hour-apiece training course to get people comfortable with this huge, scary thing that was virtual reference.â€ [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: aaron</title>
		<link>http://maisonbisson.com/blog/post/10931/im-in-libraries/#comment-16789</link>
		<dc:creator>aaron</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Nov 2005 05:56:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://maisonbisson.com/blog/?p=10931#comment-16789</guid>
		<description>Not your fault, but rather my lazy arse, but the link to the original post is broken.  This one is better:

http://walkingpaper.org/212

Love your pics of the gorey house, btw.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not your fault, but rather my lazy arse, but the link to the original post is broken.  This one is better:</p>
<p><a href="http://walkingpaper.org/212" rel="nofollow">http://walkingpaper.org/212</a></p>
<p>Love your pics of the gorey house, btw.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
