Use of reject codes

[a_reader2003]

In connection with the MEG paper, Kelley (Thompson) asked me some 
questions about our reject categories, and how we were using them. 
She was surprised at our reject rate of 70%. I thought this was worth 
discussing.

The breakdown as of last Sunday was:

5 -  REJECT
609 - ADMIN/list management related	
881 - Movie-related	
63 - Discussing spoiler issues/problems	
4585 - Off-topic Chatter  	
169 - Listings of personal favourite topics/characters etc  	
277 - Fan-fic-related  	
53 - Repeated /duplicated post  	
1123 - Adds nothing new  	
98 - Mere agreement  	
106 - FAQs & their answers  	
85 - Correction of trivial mistake in past post  	
93 - Mistakes/perpetrating mistakes  	
19 - Too illiterate, badly written  	

Most of these reject categories are fairly straightforward, but 
Kelley did want to know how we are using 'Adds nothing new'. The 
definition I wrote for the category was:

'Use this for first statement of questions, where the question is 
repeated in subsequent replies. Also use it selectively to ignore 
posts that repeat points that are frequently made.'

I'd be interested in your views on how easy you have found this to 
interpret in practice. It implies that the first person to make a 
particular point takes precedence over a later one, for instance.

Its important we are clear about this, as using this category 
effectively is likely to become more important as we go on, 
especially after the main reject categories (movie and OT) get their 
own separate lists, leaving the main list for pure canon discussion.

Carolyn

PS On another definition point - does anyone think post 5309 should 
be marked TBAY? Also, I coded it in because I found it amusing, but 
strictly, I suppose you could call it Fanfic - opinions?