Last night, for the first time, I took down a post in its entirety after publishing it. I received some private feedback, which I perceived as negative, and I worried that I had said too much. Later, I received reassurance that this was not the case, and I re-posted.

I’m not proud of that. I firmly believe that a person should own what they say or not say it. I almost always have second thoughts after posting, and I worry how what I write will be received. I do not take lightly the fact that words have an impact. Not that my words matter any more than anyone else’s, but if I choose to put them out there, then I had better be darn sure that I’ve said what I want to say with enough conviction to withstand criticism.

In thinking about why I caved, I decided that the post did not present a balanced view. Ironically, my post about negativity in the workplace was fairly negative. In the spirit of balance and fairness, I would like to present the other side–those positive qualities that I have come to recognize far and wide in the library world in almost every library venue that comes to mind-











If these qualities, which are not insignificant, could be combined with a bit more vulnerability, then that well would be not only fit to drink from, but it would probably provide enough clean water to sustain a completely healthy environment in which to work and thrive. And it would attract others, who want to draw from this well. The positive attributes of librarians are powerful. It’s a shame to let negativity rule.

There will always be negativity in the workplace. But as my blog crisis makes abundantly clear, negativity should not dominate the conversation. Dissent is good; balance is better.