Can I make an edit?

[Cindy C.]

Hey,

I think that asking that messages be sent to the other FAQ list is a 
better idea, for two reasons.

First, I don't think we want members reading the database.  They'll 
be looking for their own posts, and when their own posts don't turn 
up in an FP, they may feel insulted.  

Second, we can give instructions on the home page of the Other FAQ 
list, but I don't think we can do that with a database.

Cindy


--- In HP4GU-FAQ at yahoogroups.com, "elfundeb" <elfundeb at c...> wrote:
> Heidi wrote:
>   I think we should also create a template, because we all know 
that 
>   searching for a post from a particular day is difficult, whereas 
>   searching when you have the post's number is dead easy, and with 
the way 
>   the front page looks now, people might not give the url or post 
number, 
>   but the author and date instead.
> 
>   If nobody objects or has edits, tomorrow evening, I'll add this:
>   Url of Fantastic Post or Post's number:
>   Author of Fantastic Post:
>   Topic of Fantastic Post:
>   Date of Fantastic Post:
> If we have the post number and author, we probably don't need the 
date.  However, could we perhaps say "Description of Fantastic Post" 
instead of (or perhaps in addition to) "Topic" which might garner us 
a better explanation of what the post is about?  If we just 
say "topic" it might come back as "Umbridge" but "description" would 
be more likely to be "analysis of Umbridge's narrative function".
> 
> Also, I'd like to refocus on the suggestion Amanda made the other 
day:
> 
> 
> <<Why don't we make a database on the main list, so the members 
can 
> access it, and have them log likely candidates? The complexities 
of 
> how to access it will filter a few of them. What do you think?>>
> 
> This would give members two methods of nominating posts.  I think 
some members might be more willing to add posts to the database than 
to send suggestions off into the ether.  Also, we could start the 
database with a couple of examples of our own, so they could see 
exactly what kind of information we're looking for.
> 
> I actually think the main list database is a much better and 
simpler solution than sending messages to the archive list, which 
are going to have to be sifted through message by message and put 
into a usable format.  This way, the messages would be in a single 
easy-to-read database which can (I think) be imported into this 
group intact.  The separate archives list always struck me as a very 
cumbersome way of doing this.  
> 
> I'm sorry I didn't make this comment earlier.  Unfortunately, my 
office's internet connection was offline on Monday, and by the time 
I was back online, it seemed to already be too late to object.  This 
is why I think a 24 hour comment period is really necessary if the 
group's opinions are asked for.
> 
> Does anyone else have thoughts on any of this?  
> 
> Debbie
> 
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]