Un subiect dezbatut pe lista de arhivistica: in ce masura registrul de prezenta la sala de studiu nu este o incalcare a vietii private?
Logica este ca orice cercetator are dreptul la confidentialitatea vizitei sale. Or, daca listez totul si fiecare semnatar va vedea cine si cand a cercetat, pot aparea probleme juridice, sustin unii arhivisti americani.
Eu as adauga o alta chestiune inca, si anume cea a foilor de folosire. Aici mi se pare cu adevarat semnificativa problema, pentru ca atunci pot afla si ce dosare a cercetat altcineva, nu doar daca a fost la Arhive.
Relevanta acestei foi mi se pare, de altfel, una nula. Ea a fost introdusa la noi in perioada stalinista (si ma amuza de mor cand stiu asta si ii vad pe cei de la CNSAS ca au copiat acelasi sistem si acolo!!! :P), si nu ii inteleg rostul astazi. In plus, azi a luat forme aberante, caci daca inainte era pentru cei din afara institutiei, la sala de studiu, azi a ajuns sa fie si pentru angajati (cei care prelucreaza arhiva, cei care rezolva cereri etc.). In cazul rezolvarilor de cereri cel putin, ajungi sa ai un dosar de 50 de file (originalul) si 20 foi de folosire, ceea ce e o monumentalitate a absurdului…
In plus, este hartie ordinara, acida, care afecteaza serios mai ales documentele medievale.
Bogdan's Archival Blog -- Blog de arhivist 
Bogdan>> in ce masura registrul de prezenta la sala de studiu nu este o incalcare a vietii private?
Really, much less than logging of your search queries by the search engines.
Or, daca listez totul si fiecare semnatar va vedea cine si cand a cercetat, pot aparea probleme juridice…
Change the practice so that only authorized persons have access to the full record.
Archivist is an authorized person, and he/she has legal business needs for these data. Of course, the archive should only disclose such data to the third parties in response to the properly authorized legal requests envisioned in the legislation.
Ea a fost introdusa la noi in perioada stalinista…
What about the US? American archives and libraries also keep such records, and the US secret services regularly use these data 🙂
There were two different things.
I agree with the first sentence you said, I was really flabbergasted when I saw how google logged my searches!! I mentioned the approach because it seemed interesting. Of course there are different options for logging the researcher’s presence in the reading room, but I do not know how many Romanian archivists even thought to this issue of privacy.
The second topic I was talking about is a list of all the persons who were reading a certain file during time. That was introduced in ‘1950s, and I did not find it anywhere else, where I went. And this information I found not relevant neither for archivists or researcher. Maybe for secret services, that we are not 😛
Bogdan>> And this information I found not relevant neither for archivists or researcher.
Seems you are living in the perfect world where users never damage files, and no need exists to take culprits to task. Lucky you!
That was introduced in ‘1950s
So what? Would you say that everything introduced at that time was bad? Are you 100% sure that the decision was political and not “technical” one?
I did not find it anywhere else
In the libraries the information on the readers is recorded in the item card which anyone can see. This practice is used worldwide for centuries.
I bet that archives of many countries follow similar practice. At least Russians archives do, and that’s already “somewhere else” 🙂
well, based on my knowledge of the Romanian archival histories, yes, I can bet it was not full technical, because the majority of ,,professional” isues have been imported in that time. Never previously somebody was interested to have a researcher file…
And was saying: ‘anywhere where I went’. I was not in Russia, so it is outside my statement 🙂
About libraries: no, the card is not seen by everybody – at least here. That card is attached to the bok and it is extracted when somebody borrow it. It is for control use, which is not the case with archival material. And more, if somebody damage a file, you can not accuse him based on the signature in that list: you must prove it was not one of your employee..
Bogdan>> That card is attached to the book and it is extracted when somebody borrow it.
You don’t have “open access” library shelves, where one can freely browse and select books (and can peek into the cards as well), do you? Strange.
Bodgan>> And more, if somebody damage a file, you can not accuse him based on the signature in that list: you must prove it was not one of your employee..
That’s true. But this information can be an important clue during an investigation. And if there is a pattern, if I get enough circumstantial evidence for suspecting someone, I can find a way to cut his access or to tighten the controls, – I don’t need a court decision to do that!
Mind you, I don’t say that such a record is a must. If an archive can live without it and the archive’s owner doesn’t mind, – well, away with it then! Less clerical work for archivists 🙂
I was studying in 3 European archives; nowhere they ask such a thing, to write down on a sheet of paper attached to every file that i was studying it. And I did not find this type of list in professional literature. Yes, I have write down an order form, yes, I fulfiled an replacement card (,,fantôme”), but nowhere one more list. It’s useless… Like reading room custodian, I can identify in any moment what file was to what usre based on control forms; why should the user write down once again, to the file, that he/she indeed have looked into that file… And, I emphasis, that happens also to the clerics who are processing the file!