[HP4GU-FAQ] New and Improved Guidelines for Cataloguing Posts

[eloiseherisson at aol.com]

I'm shuffling my deckchairs again, fearful of the ship sinking at any moment.

> 6.    For SHIP, TBAY and FF, please use the prefix and other 
> keywords depending on canon point.  Please do not include separate 
> keywords for acronyms; we have over 200 different acronyms in use on 
> the list.  Instead, use appropriate keywords to describe the canon 
> point of the post, using the comments field for the acronym.  
> Remember, garden variety acronym posts are not TBAY and so do not 
> require the prefix.

I take the general point and obviously in the case of things like LOLLIPOPS 
and FLIRTIAC, they are quite superflous in that they are *defined* by the 
keywords, 

SHIP  Lily  Snape

or whatever.

But I'm stuck. How do I find a keyword for SYCOPHANTS (a discussion of the 
diversity and characteristics thereof) without using the word, um, 
sychophants? Which in the context, is always capitalised?

And what about posts inventing acronyms for non-canonical, TBAYish things?
For instance, I have Tabouli's post where Hedwig, Errol and Pigwidgeon 
sacrifice themselves to create the FEATHERBOAS which certain people round 
here sport.
Is this heroic and memorable act OT?

And is this what you want?

I'm changing, 

Black  Snape  CUPIDSBLUDGER
(The post considers the relative merits of whether Snape or Sirius is the one 
caught with the other one's girl)

for,

SHIP  Black  Florence
SHIP  Snape Florence
Black  Snape

Although Florence doesn't really figure much, except as a pile of ashes in an 
urn next to Snape's bed. (Isn't it funny how it's always the same people's 
posts that give you headaches?)

I'd been working along the priciple that some of these acronyms are not so 
much acronyms as the names of full blown theories, discussed at length on 
list, and quite likely to be searched for in themselves. 
Isn't this what 'Fourth Man' is? Is George acceptable? GEORGE'S SISTER DIANA, 
 presumably wouldn't be.

> 
> 7.    You might encounter SHIP posts and TBAY posts in which the 
> prefix was used improperly, either because the poster neglected to 
> use the appropriate prefix or because s/he used it when it was not 
> necessary.  Go ahead and rectify these errors when you catalogue.  A 
> post which makes reference to an established theory by means of 
> shorthand (ie, Fourth Man, Big Bang, MAGIC DISHWASHER) and does not 
> elucidate the meaning of that theory in the post should still carry 
> a TBAY designation, even if the poster did not write in a "TBAY 
> style."


I am cataloguing part of the phase which led up to the creation of the TBAY 
prefix. I should presumably go back and give the prefix retrospectively?
Should the above example and the rest of that thread be TBAYed? I regard 
CUPIDSBLUDGER as a TBAY theory and we do have some slight refs to ships and 
tugboats, etc. here and there.

There is a practical problem cataloguing as something as both TBAY and SHIP 
as really it needs a minimum of four key word on a line.

Or should I go for,

TBAY  SHIP  Black
TBAY  SHIP  Snape
TBAY  SHIP  Florence ?

Going back to the guidelines, I guess I'm not quite sure of the reason *why* 
we're using the TBAY prefix as a keyword, at all.
If it is so that someone can pull out all the TBAY threads, then surely *all* 
the posts pertaining to such theories should be given TBAY as a keyword, 
whether the meaning of the theory's name is elucidated or not. Otherwise, 
incomplete threads will emerge from the search.

The reasons for using the prefix on the main board don't really pertain here, 
do they?
(Unfortunately! I love reading TBAY posts, but they are pigs to catalogue and 
avoiding them would speed me up considerably!)

(Later)
A constructive suggestion:
Since, skimming through other people's catalogues, TBAY doesn't seem to have 
figured much, if at all, as a keyword yet (unless Amy's done some), how 
about, instead of actually putting it in as a *keyword*, we put it in as the 
first word in the 'comments' column?
That way, we don't clog up the 'Topics' columns, but if anyone performed an 
'Accio TBAY!' on the Comments column, all the TBAYs should immediately fly 
into their hands.... Shouldn't they? And whatever posts you summoned up via 
any other column in a sort, the comments column would tell you immediately if 
it was a TBAY, should you need warning.
At the moment, as I understand it, the comments column isn't meaningfully 
sortable and this would give it a dual purpose.

On the subject of what *not* to include, I suspect that I may be leaving in 
posts that could be cut, but I've erred on the side of caution. I've 
commented occasionally that the post adds little (I even employed Pip's 
friend ANN, yesterday). I'd rather leave it to the discretion of the FAQ 
editor to make the final decision. (It takes me longer to come to a decision 
about whether it's worth keeping than it does to catalogue it.) Occasionally 
when there's been a bit of a ding-dong disagreement over something (Snape 
didn't take the Wolfsbane Potion to the Shack - Oh yes he did - Oh no he 
didn't) I've felt it quite helpful to catalogue more or less the whole thread 
to represent the feeling of the list, rather than of one or two individuals.

Eloise
Who doesn't try to be difficult, but just has a natural talent for it.
> 
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]