Re: STAGE TWO – the subject categories

[a_reader2003]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, silmariel <silmariel at t...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> 1. Textual Analysis
> 2. Characters: Beasts, Beings and Spirits
> 3. The Wizarding World
> 4. Interests: 
>    SHIPs
>    Sources and Influences
>    Filks, If not let out. (*)
> 5. Predictions
> 
> (*) This section can be added later if a Filk lover wants to do it. 
I personally delete all Filk posts (in case they have offspring), so 
I really don't mind what do we do with them. Later it can be 
retrieved a plain list with all Filk (at Least all filks that follow 
the FILK convention in the subject) posts if anyone wants to go and 
review them.

Carolyn:
None of us like FILKS it seems ! I think as long as these posts have 
FILK in the subject line, we don't bother to classify them any 
further. It lets people find them, but doesn't give us much work. Is 
this a decision ? 


> >Interests is there because I don't see clear S&Influences or ships 
as primary categories. I know we need somewhere to put them, but I 
wanted a more general category to include those themes that really 
don't add very much, as Ships or Alchemy. As fantastic as Alchemy 
discussion can be, well, I don't know what percentage of the 
population is interested in intense research about it.

Carolyn:
I'd probably prefer to use the word 'Themes' rather than 'Interests' 
for the subjects that seem to be ending up in this section. Alchemy 
comes up a fair amount, Christianity of course..

>> Questions to Rowling? We have a lot of posts about that, what do 
we do with them? 

Carolyn: I wouldn't include them, personally - I think it is a new 
reject category, unless there is something substantial there, and if 
there is, chances are it forms part of a theory post somewhere else.


>> You know, the first question that arised in my mind when I 
received the categories list was where to put Catlady's once a week 
posts. They need multiple categories.

Carolyn:
Yes, she's a big problem for us ! I think we have no option but to 
break the post up into separate bits, then code them individually. 
Tiresome, but fortunately, not too many people use this posting 
style. Would this mean we have to allocate her posts a special 
numbering system eg 12345.1, 12345.2 etc ?

>> If anyone can explain me the difference between ships, ships, and 
ships, I'll be glad to hear it. Currently I don't know whether you 
refer to relationSHIPs (the one I put in 'Interests') or SHIPs as 
boats. I'm very lost.

Carolyn:
This discussion here is all about relationSHIPs, not boats (although 
of course some of the relationSHIP posts have become aquatic TBay 
boats sometimes, but ignore that for now !).