I can't quite resist adding a note to this thread (although I probably
should), but I have to say that it drives me nuts when people say things
like, "NLM demonstrates..." or "NLM obviously doesn't..." or anything
else that suggests that "NLM" is some monolithic entity that has a
single point of view on any issue.

"NLM" is comprised of hundreds of individuals, many of whom are
librarians themselves, working very hard to try to meet the diverse
missions that they have been charged with.  They are independent minded,
frequently brilliant, sometimes slightly crazed, and generally always
focused on trying to do the best job that they can.  They argue with
each other on matters of policy and approach and programming before
official decisions are finally made.  

I certainly do not agree with every decision made at every level within
the organization and I'll grant that some of the decisions that have
been made over the years may appear to act against the particular
interests of a particular library.  But to say that NLM "lacks respect"
for librarians is ludicrous on the face of it and, if you'll forgive me,
deeply insulting to the many hardworking men and women who give us
PubMed, MEDLINE, MEDLINE Plus, PubMed Central, and all of the other
products and services without which modern medical librarianship would
be unrecognizable.

Pointing out that the survey that Valerie mentioned should have included
the librarian choice was certainly appropriate (and, as she reported,
quickly fixed).  But to use it as evidence of official disrespect on the
part of NLM is a case of letting one's frustration run away with one's

T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
University of Alabama at Birmingham
[log in to unmask]