Two Responses to Tom and other stuff

[abigailnus]

I wrote, in response to Tom:
> There is absolutely no requirement to present a theory in TBAY
> format.  
> TBAY is a stylistic designation, nothing more and nothing less, and a 
> theory is no more or less valid because it has been created within the 
> TBAY environment.  I want to be especially clear on this because, like
> it 
> or not, TBAY is a clique within HPfGU - a very open, inclusive clique,
> but 
> a clique nonetheless.  To insist that HA theories can only come from 
> TBAY posts is essentially to limit HA to a specific sub-group of HPfGU 
> posters.

To which Cindy responded:
 
> The entire purpose of HA is to make TBAY more accessible.  That's it.
> It isn't to memorialize the best theories or the most popular.  It is to
> make sure people can get a base of information so they can understand
> what is said and jump in.
>  
> This is why TBAY contains things like Yellow Flag violation and Flying
> Hedgehogs.  The minute a theory is being referred to primarily as an
> acronym or as metaphor, that is when it belongs in HA.  

Alright, I stand corrected.  But I do think that it's important that we stress 
that a theory doesn't have to be created or used in TBAY in order to belong 
in HA.  George, for example, was created outside of TBAY, and referenced 
quite frequently outside of TBAY before TBAY became what it is today and 
sort of kidnapped him.  It's entirely possibly (although, let's face it, rather 
unlikely these days) for an acronym or weird name theory to evolve and 
come into common usage outside of TBAY, in which case it still would 
belong in HA because new members wouldn't be able to intuitively 
understand what that theory refers to.  The only difference is that it's a lot 
easier to briefly explain any weird name theory in a non-TBAY post then it 
is in a TBAY post.

> BTW, I don't see TBAY as a clique (i.e., a small and exclusive group),
> primarily for two reasons.  HA, and the fact that TBAYers are welcoming
> to newcomers.  I think our goal should be to keep it that way, to the
> extent we have influence over that.

I agree, but the fact remains that TBAY is imposing to a lot of members, 
and not just newbies.  I've seen more then once the mention that people are 
afraid to respond to a TBAY post or even that they don't read them.  In 
general, I think HPfGU has its luminaries.  This is entirely justified as those 
people got where they are based solely on their talent, but when it comes to 
TBAY those people can often seem like "the rulers" even though we know that 
anyone is welcome.  That's why I wanted it to be clear that we don't consider 
non-TBAY theories to be less important or worthy or mention, in HA or 
anywhere else.

By the way, I think it's time we declared the request for contributions 
program an unqualified failure.  I haven't seen one entry on the database or 
one post on the archive group.  I think we should continue to post the 
request on a regular basis.  Tom suggested weekly, at least to begin with - 
that may be a bit much.  Any thoughts?  Also, we should seriously talk about 
going through the post-OOP posts.

Abigail