Libraries are just fining themselves

I've been on the 2 DVD at a time plan with Netflix for, what, seven years or more? And I have not once accrued a fine. Sometimes it takes a month for me to get around to watching one of these discs, but Netflix doesn't seem to care.

Now public and many school libraries do seem to care if I don't get around to consuming the media I have borrowed. I've pretty much stopped checking out print books from public libraries primarily because I hated having a timeline imposed on when I needed to have the book returned. And while the monetary fine was usually fairly modest, the sense of moral failure made my library experience negative.

I was happy to read that some public libraries are rethinking the whole idea of fines. In the Huffington Post, Claire Fallon writes:

The NYPL would be far from the first library system to dump fines for children. New York’s Rochester Public Library made the move earlier this year, as did Pikes Peak Library District in Colorado. Others, like Oak Park Public Library in Illinois and Worthington Libraries in Ohio, already have or plan to eliminate fines for all residents. The key to this experiment, as Todaro explained, is finding ways to maximize access and positive relationships between libraries and patrons.

"Maximizing access and positive relationships between libraries and patrons" is, of course, the goal in this long overdue (pun intended) move. Fines, I'm sure, were motivated by good intentions by our Calvinist forebearers who saw punishment as good for the soul. And a fine is, after all, a form of extrinsic (and ineffective) motivation since a fine is not a direct consequence of a poor choice.

Our recent initiative to get all our students public library cards has as a critical component a no-fine clause. You mean kids can check out books from the public library and not pay a fine if they are late? Yup - just like Netflix.

How then might we encourage responsible use of library materials - in both our public and our school libraries. Some ideas:

Teach the "why" not just the "what" of responsible use. Why is it a good thing to use and return borrowed physical materials? Empathy is required here, but knowing everyone benefits from shared materials, but only when those materials are available is a good understanding to teach. People don't bring their books back to please the librarian, but to benefit other library users.

Set limits to the number of items that can be borrowed. If there are a set number of items one may checkout, the direct consequence of not returning one's materials is not being able to check out more materials. This is how Netflix works, of course. I don't get a new DVD until I return one. My only caution here would be to not let a long time pass without a child being able to get something new because he/she has missing materials - active intervention may be needed. And I would set the max number of items per user pretty high.

Work with the family. A good partnership between parents and the library will go further than any fines. I would start the conversation with something of a positive nature, remind the parents of a no-fine policy, and then ask for their help.

Please remember....

BFTP: Buy experiences

Recent analyses of why many shopping malls and department stores are closing their doors conclude, of course, that more people are shopping online. But one story mentioned that younger people are not as materialistic as we boomers, spending more of their income on travel, nice meals, and other "experiences." Glad they took this advice I wrote five years ago.

_________________________________________________________________________

Johnson's Rule of Savings: The person in the nursing home with the best stories, not the most money, wins.

When asked in a recent workshop to place myself into a group that represented how I felt about money, I was a bit torn. My choices were Saver, Spender, Avoider, and Monk. The first two categories are self-explanatory and the Avoider perhaps should be called the Procrastinator. But the Monk, as I understood it, believes thinking about money is somewhat irrelevant. I was the only person in that group.

I don't much like thinking about money. It's boring. I can't tell you how much my networth is or my annual salary (very accurately anyway). Long ago I set it up so I automatically max out my 403B contributions and I don't see what goes into my state retirement fund. I make my mortgage and no-interest car loan payments every month. I pay the balance of my credit card. I like money for what it will buy, not as a means of keeping score or rating one' success in life. I just want enough money to buy everything I want - and pray my needs and wants remain fairly modest. When I croak, my plan is to neither be a burden nor a jackpot to my family.

Cartoon source

Research (and personal experience) shows that spending on experiences rather than things makes a person happier. I spend money on travel, on books, on technology toys - and on my grandchildren. Increasingly, I try to find ways to purchase experiences (or future experiences) for them as well: vacations, summer camps, swimming pool memberships, college costs, theater performances, etc. As precocious 11-year-old grandson Paul wrote recently: "Thanks for the toys, books, and food, but especially for the quality family time." He gets it.

A question that has been at the back of my mind is "When we buy computers are we buying things or are we buying experiences?" While they are virtual experiences to be sure, the ability to create, to inhabit a virtual world, and to communicate all are more about having an experience than having a device. Pretty good rationalization, huh?

But I'll make dang sure the virtual experiences don't ever replace the physcial ones.

Original post April 28, 2012

Why do people do stupid things?

Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. Robert J. Hanlson

Law 3. A stupid person is a person who causes losses to another person or to a group of persons while himself deriving no gain and even possibly incurring losses. from  The five universal rules of human stupidity by Corrine Purtill.

Cipolla Matrix

I'm not convinced one has to pose a hazard to others to commit an act that could be called stupid. Not wearing a seat belt, bungee jumping with a badly frayed cord, posting job-endangering photos to the Internet, or drinking from the toilet are all stupid acts as far as I am concerned, but none of them necessarily harm anyone other than the person himself.

But an element of harm seems to be at the heart of most stupid acts. So if a stupid acts are harmful, why do we still commit them? Why do all of us, even those who may behave intelligently and reasonably most of the time, do really stupid things now and again. And I very much include myself.

Is stupidity a quality that can only be discerned by others or not realized by oneself until after the stupid act has been committed, and is therefore unpreventable?

I've long worried that we confuse ignorance and stupidity. (See Seven stupid mistake teachers make with technology.) So any definition and explanation of stupidity is a welcome read. I personally define stupidity as having knowledge but not using it. Yes, I know the bungee cord is frayed and may break, but I'm going to do the jump anyway, sort of scenario.

Most of the stupid acts I commit are a result of over-confidence. My high opinion of myself when applies to fixing things like plumbing, electrical outlets, and furniture, despite knowing from past experiences that my repairing something costs more in time and money than if I had hired an expert in the first place, tops my list of stupid acts. (See The quick fix: a tale of woe) Not admitting to ignorance is reason stupid acts are made.

Anytime one defies the odds, they are acting stupidly. Any time one refuses to admit their ignorance or acts despite reliable information, they acting stupidly.

To be very clear, I would not label any person as stupid. But I am happy to call out actions, even beliefs, that seem stupid to me.

It's OK to be ignorant. Ignorance, happily, is a correctable condition. But let's all try to do stupid things as seldom as possible.

Why do you think people do stupid things?