TBAY that adds nothing new?

[a_reader2003]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kkearney at s...> 
wrote:
> How are we dealing with TBAYish posts that don't add any new
> information?  For example, posts greeting new members of a ship, 
which
> don't add to Harry Potter canon discussion but do develop the ship
> environment.
> 
> Personally, I'd prefer to keep it in the database, since these posts
> definitely add to a newcomer's understanding of TBAY.  But I wanted 
to
> check with everyone first.


Carolyn:
I've been making much the same decision. Posts I might otherwise have 
rejected as OT have sometimes been allowed in as part of that shippy 
TBay environment if I thought they added something about the various 
group identities. However, not all of them. One part of the thread 
diverged off into an argument about the alleged environment at (I 
think) Sugar Quill. I thought this went too far, even though much the 
same personalities and shipping topics were involved.

Also, I'm afraid I have given up coding to the characters on SHIP 
posts, and just tick a trio ship/gay ship or whatever heading. OK, 
shoot me down, I'll go back and add the codes if everyone thinks this 
is a crime.



> 
> Also, a comment I meant to make a while ago.  Why should we code a
> post as 5.4 TBAY only if it doesn't have the proper subject 
indicator?
>  I think it would be infinitely more helpful if _all_ TBAY posts, 
both
> labeled and not, were collected in one category.  Otherwise, it 
seems
> a user would have to browse this category, and then do a keyword
> search on subject lines, in order to find all posts of interest.
> 
> -Kelly

Carolyn:
I don't have a problem doing this, lets change the rule and tick TBAY 
for all TBAY for all of them. As I recall, the reason might have been 
that in the final search routine, Paul could have programmed it to 
pick up TBAY in the headers as well as our Admin codes, but this way 
is surer, and we won't miss any of them.