[HP4GU-FAQ] Keyword Questions, Protocol Guidelines, and SHIPping
eloiseherisson at aol.com
eloiseherisson at aol.com
Sun Oct 6 10:40:54 UTC 2002
In a message dated 06/10/2002 03:26:25 GMT Standard Time, skelkins at attbi.com
writes:
> Now, if (for some sick and twisted reason) I was specifically looking
> for posts discussing the possibility that Snape and Dumbledore
> are ::shudder:: *lovers,* then I would narrow my search down still
> further, by asking Excel to sort not only by "Snape"
> and "Dumbledore," but also by keyword "SHIP."
Actually...........I very nearly made that blunder on my delurk. Fortunately
I read through the posting guidelines a second time and realised at the last
minute that putting 'SHIP: Snape/Dumbledore' didn't mean an innocent
exploration of their relationship, but something else entirely.
Not only would I have embarassed myself at the time, but Cindy would just
have paraded the unfortunate error in front of you all again!
<shudder> indeed!
> <>
> SHIPPING POSTS
>
>
> I know that this contradicts what we decided earlier, and if you've
> already entered a bunch of H/H keywords, please don't worry about
> it. We can fix them later. But from here on in, please don't use
> slashed keywords. We already have a SHIP keyword to help people to
> find the shipping posts, and slashed-or-hyphenated keywords really do
> cause a lot more problems than they solve.
Thank you. I agree entirely.
<>>
> Eileen complained:
>
> > I am going to go nuts having to write Keyword 1: SHIP Keyword 2:
> > Ron Keyword 3: Harry Keyword 4: Hermione, Keyword 5: Ginny, Keyword
> > 6: OBHWF, Keyword 7etc: whatever the post addresses in relation to
> > OBHWF for simple posts about OBHWF.
Sorry, I've got to ask. What's OBHWF? It's clearly something really obvious,
but I don't know what.
And *where*s Inish Alley? I don't know how to link to it easily without
searching for an old TBAY post and typing in that huge long URL.
>PARRICIDE
>That's how I see it, anyway. But I see now that Pip, Eileen *and*
>Cindy are all throwing their weight behind this "kin-slaying" notion.
<sigh>
>Demented. You are all demented. But I suppose that if you all
>*insist,* then I can swallow "kin-slaying," even though I think it
>fairly baroque and unnecessary.
There is a third way. Rather than argue over it, we can always have,
"Parricide (cf Kin-slayer)"; "Kin-slayer (cf Parricide)".
I'll use "Kin-slayer" if I have to, (though it sounds like Buffy on a bad
day, to me) but my vote would definitely be for "Parricide".
.....................
Another question on how Excel sorting works.
I have quite a lot of entries that take up more than one row and one keyword
(such as SHIP) which applies to keywords in all/both rows. In a sort, will
'SHIP' only appear with those names on the same row of the chart, despite
their all having the same message number?
For instance, I have a post that spills over three rows, containing the
keywords, SHIP, LOLLIPOPS, FLIRTIAC, Snape, Lily, Filch, Mrs Norris (and I
think, also Malfoy, not that he has anything to do with the SHIP part).
Should I make sure that SHIP occurs in each of the lines that also has a
SHIPped character?
(I've used this theory when it comes to comments, starting a new line of
comments with each new row of keywords.)
Eloise
Who isn't anywhere near halfway through, managed not to save the few posts
she did last time and has just catalogued the first appearance of Fourth Man
(modestly introduced as, "A stunning and revolutionary new Avery theory")
whilst we're on the subject of Avery.
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
More information about the HP4GU-FAQ
archive