From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Mar  1 17:02:44 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 17:02:44 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & ACTION REQUIRED, SUNDAY 29 FEB !!
In-Reply-To: <c1tgmt+qv7f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c1vqbk+ohu3@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have just finished reviewing the topic lists in the files that 
> Kelley put on the site, and making changes to our subject list as a 
> result. In the files section on this site there are now two new Word 
> documents called:
> 
> CategoriesV3 (I have taken down V2 and V1 to avoid confusion)
> De-duped HPfGU topic lists
> 
> Please could you have a look at both ?
> 
>  
> Its important that you feel able to use the Category list - so let me 
> know what you think. Should there be more topics ? Do you agree with 
> the ones I have put in? Etc. The category list is now only four 
> sections, and I have added numbering to every topic, so these codes 
> can be used directly on our spreadsheets, no writing required.
> 
> On the technical front, I have agreed with Carolina that I will do an 
> intro email to Paul Kippes, and I will let everyone know the result 
> of those discussions as I can.
> 
> Look forward to your responses AND to your thoughts on the reject 
> code list.


Hells teeth! I realised that it would depend on detail to successfully
catalogue the posts, but this is more than I expected. Difficult to
reduce without loss of accuracy though. Ah, well. This is what happens
when you break the habits of a lifetime and volunteer.

With this many categories and sub-groups it's going to take some to
become familiar and comfortable with the listed topics etc. Progress
is likely to be slow to start with and there are sure to be anomalies.
If a post turns out to be particularly troublesome, can it be put in
abeyance and downloaded later while thought and perhaps the opinions
of the rest of the group are brought to bear? (This shows my ignorance
of Excel - any news on the possibility of working direct to the database
yet?)

There's a few small points I'd like to raise, one of which may actually 
save us some work!

You suggest that posts referring to the teenaged Tom Riddle be
keyed to Voldemort. Personally, I'd be happier doing so for that
time after he became Voldy. There's five school years before he
enters the Chamber and presumably changes. These years I  see
as more or less a continuation of his pre-Hogwarts persona and
before the defining change.

There's a database in existence for all those "My one true prediction"
posts made before the publication of OoP. Why not leave that lot
as a separate database? Or failing that, can they be folded into
the new database directly as one lump?

I'm wondering if it's worth incorporating those fun threads, also
just before OoP "What you will/won't read in OoP". They're a
succession of one liners - some witty, some not. It'd be really
difficult to sort that lot out - most of each post consists of
duplicating previous efforts. It might be feasible to make a file
of the the compiled lists and stuff it into the files section. Yep,
I know you said that one line posts are to be ignored, but most
are multiple unrelated one line jokes in each post. I suppose 
someone sometime might do research into pre-publication 
hysteria among HP fans. 

Something close to my heart - the section on relationships - could
you include my AGGIE theory in there? Sunken SHIPS are much more
fun than the hearts and flowers stuff and Snape spurning Lily is a
relationship of sorts, isn't it?

You mention not including gibberish - does this mean we can give
Ivan Vablatsky a miss? None  of  his posts seem to have much to
do with canon - just his own strange obsessions. Sad, really.

Barry




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  1 22:51:50 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 01 Mar 2004 22:51:50 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & ACTION REQUIRED, SUNDAY 29 FEB !!
In-Reply-To: <c1vqbk+ohu3@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c20eq6+rtp4@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
>> Hells teeth! I realised that it would depend on detail to 
successfully catalogue the posts, but this is more than I expected. 
Difficult to reduce without loss of accuracy though. Ah, well. This 
is what happens when you break the habits of a lifetime and volunteer.


Tell me about it. It has taken me four days hard work to compile this 
list, and I nearly lost the will to live putting the numbers in. 
Wrestling 7-800 stream-of-consciousness topics into usable categories 
was definitely one of the harder tasks I have attempted lately.
 
>> With this many categories and sub-groups it's going to take some to
become familiar and comfortable with the listed topics etc. Progress
is likely to be slow to start with and there are sure to be 
anomalies. If a post turns out to be particularly troublesome, can it 
be put in abeyance and downloaded later while thought and perhaps the 
opinions of the rest of the group are brought to bear? (This shows my 
ignorance of Excel - any news on the possibility of working direct to 
the database yet?)


Yes, this is going to be the only way we can work - discussion and 
referral on difficult cases. Pins in wax effigies of awkward listies 
etc. I should think we could put a word like 'Hold' into the database 
for such cases, and come back to them. On the technical front, an 
email has gone to Paul, and hopefully we will get some puffs of smoke 
in the not too distant future. 
> 
> There's a few small points I'd like to raise, one of which may 
actually save us some work!
> 
> You suggest that posts referring to the teenaged Tom Riddle be
> keyed to Voldemort. Personally, I'd be happier doing so for that
> time after he became Voldy. There's five school years before he
> enters the Chamber and presumably changes. These years I  see
> as more or less a continuation of his pre-Hogwarts persona and
> before the defining change.


I don't have a problem with that. One of the advantages of my 
horrible numbering system is that we can easily add extra categories. 
Lord V can still be 2.7.7, but young Tom, aged 0-16/17, could be 
numbered 2.7.7.15. I don't know if any of the theory acronyms relate 
to this younger period, but if they do, we could shift them about to 
reflect this.

> 
>> There's a database in existence for all those "My one true 
prediction" posts made before the publication of OoP. Why not leave 
that lot as a separate database? Or failing that, can they be folded 
into the new database directly as one lump?
 
I'm wondering if it's worth incorporating those fun threads, also
just before OoP "What you will/won't read in OoP". They're a
succession of one liners - some witty, some not. It'd be really 
difficult to sort that lot out - most of each post consists of
duplicating previous efforts. It might be feasible to make a file
of the the compiled lists and stuff it into the files section. Yep,
I know you said that one line posts are to be ignored, but most
are multiple unrelated one line jokes in each post. I suppose 
someone sometime might do research into pre-publication 
hysteria among HP fans. 



I think this is an area where we can amuse ourselves exercising more 
than usual editorial judgement - lets put in the really funny ones, 
the really wrong ones and only the well-argued, insightful ones from 
the rest. This goes for all the prediction posts dating back to the 
start of the list in 1999 (ie pre-GOF). Its not a seriously important 
part of the catalogue, IMO, just nice for the egos of those that got 
it right.

> 
> Something close to my heart - the section on relationships - could
> you include my AGGIE theory in there? Sunken SHIPS are much more
> fun than the hearts and flowers stuff and Snape spurning Lily is a
> relationship of sorts, isn't it?

Carolyn:
Consider it done. In the next revise, AGGIE can go in after RAPIST 
and RASPBERRY.. ! (But probably also ought to get a mention under 
Snape & Lily as well ?)

> 
> You mention not including gibberish - does this mean we can give
> Ivan Vablatsky a miss? None  of  his posts seem to have much to
> do with canon - just his own strange obsessions. Sad, really.
> 
> Barry


LOL! Alas, I think some (a very few) people think he has something to 
say (although the deafening silence after his posts is very 
noticeable, particularly after the last 'open letter' to JKR). To 
cater for this, I have created a special box just for him (1.7.8.2), 
and I think we just hastily put his stuff in there, and gaze at it 
respectfully as an extreme example of the lunatic fringe. Was it 
Voltaire who said 'I disagree with everything you say, but will fight 
to the death for your right to say it' ? There's definitely going to 
be a bit of that we have to deal with in this project !

Thanks for your responses..any more points, anyone else out there ????

Carolyn






From annemehr at yahoo.com  Tue Mar  2 01:27:37 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 01:27:37 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & ACTION REQUIRED, SUNDAY 29 FEB !!
In-Reply-To: <c20eq6+rtp4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c20nu9+26q2@eGroups.com>

Barry:
> >> Hells teeth! I realised that it would depend on detail to 
> successfully catalogue the posts, but this is more than I expected. 
> Difficult to reduce without loss of accuracy though. Ah, well. This 
> is what happens when you break the habits of a lifetime and volunteer.

Anne:
What I can see is that I'll have to be working with printouts of the
topic list and the acronyms and their meanings.  I bet it'll get
easier with a little experience, though, except for those
hard-to-place ones.


Barry:
> >> There's a database in existence for all those "My one true 
> prediction" posts made before the publication of OoP. Why not leave 
> that lot as a separate database? Or failing that, can they be folded 
> into the new database directly as one lump?

Carolyn:
> I'm wondering if it's worth incorporating those fun threads, also
> just before OoP "What you will/won't read in OoP". They're a
> succession of one liners - some witty, some not.

Anne:
IIRC, somebody combined each of those will/won't read threads into two
single posts.  Those would be easy enough to include in Predictions,
while rejecting all those that led up to them.  I thought they were fun.


Barry:
> > You mention not including gibberish - does this mean we can give
> > Ivan Vablatsky a miss? None  of  his posts seem to have much to
> > do with canon - just his own strange obsessions. Sad, really.
> > 
> > Barry
> 
Carolyn:
> LOL! Alas, I think some (a very few) people think he has something to 
> say (although the deafening silence after his posts is very 
> noticeable, particularly after the last 'open letter' to JKR). To 
> cater for this, I have created a special box just for him (1.7.8.2), 
> and I think we just hastily put his stuff in there, and gaze at it 
> respectfully as an extreme example of the lunatic fringe.

Anne:
All right, I'll admit to having read all of them!  Well, I thought
they were interesting, as I knew nothing about Alchemy before.  I'd
have just stuck them under Religious Influences myself.


To Carolyn: I downloaded the .doc files okay, and it seems the excel
file too, but our excel '97 can't read it.  My DH was going to try to
download a converter from the company, otherwise he said you'd have to
save the excel stuff at the '97 level (apparently you can do that). 
Sorry if my technical inexpertise is a nuisance -- I'm just hoping we
can get everything squared away and make it work, so I can actually be
useful!

Anne





From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Mar  2 15:35:41 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 2004 15:35:41 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & ACTION REQUIRED, SUNDAY 29 FEB !!
In-Reply-To: <c20nu9+26q2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c229kd+jioh@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> wrote:

> IIRC, somebody combined each of those will/won't read threads into two
> single posts.  Those would be easy enough to include in Predictions,
> while rejecting all those that led up to them.  I thought they were fun.
> 
>
 
Not quite. They split at a few points so there are a bunch of threads where
the first fifty or so one liners are the same but differing later, even though
they ostensibly have the same number of jokes in total. So there is more
than one joke numbered '85' for example.
Yeah, I quite liked them too - I ought to, I wrote a bunch of 'em. Nothing
is a bigger ego boost than having your wit preserved for posterity, but I'll
go with the group on whether to save them or not, and if so, how.

> Barry:
> > > You mention not including gibberish - does this mean we can give
> > > Ivan Vablatsky a miss? None  of  his posts seem to have much to
> > > do with canon - just his own strange obsessions. Sad, really.
> > > 
> > 
> Carolyn:
> > LOL! Alas, I think some (a very few) people think he has something to 
> > say (although the deafening silence after his posts is very 
> > noticeable, particularly after the last 'open letter' to JKR). To 
> > cater for this, I have created a special box just for him (1.7.8.2), 
> > and I think we just hastily put his stuff in there, and gaze at it 
> > respectfully as an extreme example of the lunatic fringe.
> 
> Anne:
> All right, I'll admit to having read all of them!  Well, I thought
> they were interesting, as I knew nothing about Alchemy before.  I'd
> have just stuck them under Religious Influences myself.
> 
>

There's probably a good reason for the lack of respondents to Ivan. I once
did myself and started receiving enormous screeds by email. Any reply -
even "I don't want to continue this" resulted in even more. I suspect
that the same thing happened to others and there was a general
realisation that the only way to avoid having the HPfGU equivalent of
the Moonies flooding your mailbox was not to respond under any 
circumstances. He wasn't malicious, just massively over-enthusiastic, 
almost  to the level of proselytising.
For a long time afterwards I thought very carefully about posting on 
certain subjects in case it set him off again. The post 'Prophets without 
honour' where I cast doubt on Nostradamus was ended with the statement
that "I would not, under any circumstances enter into communication on 
this subject" and was put there because of Ivan. It's no fun when you
have to do that.

Can we move the site without telling him?

> To Carolyn: I downloaded the .doc files okay, and it seems the excel
> file too, but our excel '97 can't read it.  My DH was going to try to
> download a converter from the company, otherwise he said you'd have to
> save the excel stuff at the '97 level (apparently you can do that). 
> Sorry if my technical inexpertise is a nuisance -- I'm just hoping we
> can get everything squared away and make it work, so I can actually be
> useful!
> 

I've managed to download the files OK; what I worry about is uploading
from an Apple translation of an Excel clone. It might be worthwhile if I 
have a test run in the near future to find out if it'll actually work, if that
can be  arranged.

Barry




From silmariel at telefonica.net  Wed Mar  3 16:53:59 2004
From: silmariel at telefonica.net (silmariel)
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2004 17:53:59 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Ivan's posts  (was Re: UPDATE & ACTION REQUIRED, SUNDAY 29 FEB !!)
In-Reply-To: <c229kd+jioh@eGroups.com>
References: <c229kd+jioh@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <200403031753.59357.silmariel@telefonica.net>



Carolyn:
> > > LOL! Alas, I think some (a very few) people think he has something to
> > > say (although the deafening silence after his posts is very
> > > noticeable, particularly after the last 'open letter' to JKR). To
> > > cater for this, I have created a special box just for him (1.7.8.2),
> > > and I think we just hastily put his stuff in there, and gaze at it
> > > respectfully as an extreme example of the lunatic fringe.


Anne:
> > All right, I'll admit to having read all of them!  Well, I thought
> > they were interesting, as I knew nothing about Alchemy before.  I'd
> > have just stuck them under Religious Influences myself.

Barry:
<snip> He wasn't malicious, just massively over-enthusiastic,
> almost  to the level of proselytising.
> For a long time afterwards I thought very carefully about posting on
> certain subjects in case it set him off again. The post 'Prophets without
> honour' where I cast doubt on Nostradamus was ended with the statement
> that "I would not, under any circumstances enter into communication on
> this subject" and was put there because of Ivan. It's no fun when you
> have to do that.
>
> Can we move the site without telling him?

I think there's a problem if we give him a category. He may feel rewarded, not 
understanding that if we put there is because we don't know exactly what to 
do with his theories, or whatever they are. I don't want to encourage him 
given what Barry has told. 

So I recommend not to do a specific category for him and just insert him in 
Alchemy or Religion or both.

For myself, it is not that I'm not interested in Alchemy, is that the view he 
has includes also a specific soul doctrina I'm not about to buy. I like 
Alchemy, Masonery, Templars, anything that smells magic, but I found Ivan's 
posts not to be about that but about fitting HP books into his view of the 
world, so I've never replied to him, I had nothing constructive to add, and I 
chosed to ignore him. 

I haven't read yet the V3 categories list, but I wanted all of you to know I'm 
still alive.

Carolina




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Mar  3 17:34:40 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2004 17:34:40 -0000
Subject: Ivan the Terrible
In-Reply-To: <200403031753.59357.silmariel@telefonica.net>
Message-ID: <c254vg+d814@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, silmariel <silmariel at t...> 
wrote:

> 
> I think there's a problem if we give him a category. He may feel 
rewarded, not understanding that if we put there is because we don't 
know exactly what to do with his theories, or whatever they are. I 
don't want to encourage him given what Barry has told. 
> 
> So I recommend not to do a specific category for him and just 
insert him in Alchemy or Religion or both.
> 
Carolyn:
I don't have a problem with doing this. By giving him a category I 
was trying to isolate him from mildly more sensible stuff in this 
area, but I can see the argument for not giving him this prominence. 

Like Anne, when I first encountered his posts I was curious, not 
knowing much about alchemy, but as I read more, the more bonkers his 
argument seemed. Of course, he might be right in the end - she really 
did base the whole series on this book, and sleeps with it under her 
pillow every night, but I really hope not. On the other hand, she is 
a well-read woman, and she might have come across the book at some 
point in her alchemy research, and some of the ideas may have seeped 
into her subconscious, who knows. Pity he is too obsessed to discuss 
the subject in a normal way.

> I haven't read yet the V3 categories list, but I wanted all of you 
to know I'm still alive.
> 
> Carolina

Carolyn:
Alive but hopping around on one leg, I think ! The big thing we need 
you to do is reply to Paul Kippes ..um, look forward to trying to 
understand what you say to each other !






From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Thu Mar  4 05:55:40 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 05:55:40 -0000
Subject: I'd just say 'hello' but seems that subject is now banned as spam
Message-ID: <c26gcs+9n3i@eGroups.com>

anyway...hello,

Carolina and I are working on agreement with technical issues.

But I was wondering about the Yahoo Club posts.  It had nearly 1000 
before changing to HPFGU.




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Thu Mar  4 09:05:49 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 09:05:49 -0000
Subject: I'd just say 'hello' but seems that subject is now banned as spam
In-Reply-To: <c26gcs+9n3i@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c26rhd+kcqc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...> 
wrote:
> anyway...hello,
> 
> Carolina and I are working on agreement with technical issues.
> 
> But I was wondering about the Yahoo Club posts.  It had nearly 1000 
> before changing to HPFGU.

Carolyn:

Actually, I think there are nearly 7500 posts in the previous club 
before it moved to Yahoo - or is this yet another club ?? Anyway, all 
should be included - one of the interesting things is to capture what 
the earliest analyses were about !




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Thu Mar  4 11:22:12 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Thu, 04 Mar 2004 11:22:12 -0000
Subject: Cataloguing screen layout suggestion for Paul & Carolina
Message-ID: <c273h4+nq2s@eGroups.com>

Hi

I have put a Word file into the Files section on this site 
called 'Screen Layout Suggestion', which would be an ideal way of 
speed-coding the posts, if it could be generated by the database 
structures you are discussing. 

Basically, it enables people to read the full text of the posts 
whilst having a coding screen open at the same time. This gets around 
all my former clunky suggestions of having an Excel printout which 
you write on by hand.

Also, by designating the first code a primary code, this could 
automatically generate a new title for the post rather than its old, 
inaccurate one. 

Don't know if its workable, but it would be great if you could do it. 

Carolyn

PS Barry, Anne, do have a look - see if it looks like something you 
could use with confidence..




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Fri Mar  5 04:03:48 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 05 Mar 2004 04:03:48 -0000
Subject: Cataloguing screen layout suggestion for Paul & Carolina
In-Reply-To: <c273h4+nq2s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c28u74+iqas@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have put a Word file into the Files section on this site 
> called 'Screen Layout Suggestion', which would be an ideal way of 
> speed-coding the posts, if it could be generated by the database 
> structures you are discussing. 
<snip>
> PS Barry, Anne, do have a look - see if it looks like something you 
> could use with confidence..

Yes, it looks good to me.  It's slightly wider than the screen, but I
don't know if it would be that way in it's final form.  If it is, it
still looks way better than having to work from printouts!

I'm very glad you are trying to make this easy for us non-tech people.
 The more intuitive it is for someone to use, the more we can
concentrate on the actual cataloguing, which is going to be difficult
enough.

Finally, I do like the very large and detailed category list. The
finer we can sort the posts, the more organized things will be and
easier for someone to find.  I can't remember if I said that before or
not.

Anne  :-)






From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Mar  5 11:27:02 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (Barry Arrowsmith)
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2004 11:27:02 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Cataloguing screen layout suggestion for Paul & Carolina
In-Reply-To: <c273h4+nq2s@eGroups.com>
References: <c273h4+nq2s@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <0666CFC2-6E98-11D8-A577-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>


> Hi
>
>  I have put a Word file into the Files section on this site
>  called 'Screen Layout Suggestion', which would be an ideal way of
>  speed-coding the posts, if it could be generated by the database
>  structures you are discussing.
>
>  Don't know if its workable, but it would be great if you could do it.
>
>  Carolyn
>
>  PS Barry, Anne, do have a look - see if it looks like something you
>  could use with confidence..


I think I get the idea.
Should be very useful and could make things a lot easier.

Let's see how the software wizards translate your plan into a working 
format
and if they can give us a nice clean worksheet .

Optimism. There's nothing quite like it.

Barry


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/enriched
Size: 849 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20040305/4947fcd7/attachment.bin>

From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Sun Mar  7 00:27:46 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 00:27:46 -0000
Subject: Cataloguing screen layout suggestion for Paul & Carolina
In-Reply-To: <0666CFC2-6E98-11D8-A577-000A9577CB94@btconnect.com>
Message-ID: <c2dqa2+n09c@eGroups.com>

I don't think I can have that exact layout mainly because it will 
complicate the programming and add delay.  We can use it though to 
come up with something easy to implement and efficient to use at the 
same time.  If we don't get it right the first time, we can always 
press on.

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> 
> > Hi
> >
> >  I have put a Word file into the Files section on this site
> >  called 'Screen Layout Suggestion', which would be an ideal way 
of
> >  speed-coding the posts, if it could be generated by the database
> >  structures you are discussing.
> >
> >  Don't know if its workable, but it would be great if you could 
do it.
> >
> >  Carolyn
> >
> >  PS Barry, Anne, do have a look - see if it looks like something 
you
> >  could use with confidence..
> 
> 
> I think I get the idea.
> Should be very useful and could make things a lot easier.
> 
> Let's see how the software wizards translate your plan into a 
working 
> format
> and if they can give us a nice clean worksheet .
> 
> Optimism. There's nothing quite like it.
> 
> Barry




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Mar  7 12:16:46 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:16:46 -0000
Subject: Search screen layout suggestions
Message-ID: <c2f3re+jkjq@eGroups.com>

Hi

I have put up in a Word file some further suggestions on what the 
search screens and search processes might be, once we make the system 
live for HPfGU members.

Comments please - it is how the results of all our hard work will 
appear - is it usable ??

Carolyn




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Mar  7 12:31:51 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 12:31:51 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & SUMMARY, Sunday 7th March
Message-ID: <c2f4nn+n79p@eGroups.com>

Your project co-ordinator here, yet again. 

1. Subject list
We have taken an initial look, broadly accepted the structure, made 
some minor tweaks. Essentially, we can't tell until we begin to use 
it whether the topics work or not.

2. Reject categories
Still the same 9 categories, surprisingly (despite an attempt to bin 
Ivan). Maybe more will emerge when we try to use it.

3. Technical front

Currently waiting to hear from our techno-wizards as to what might be 
possible. CW has put up some sample designs for (a) cataloguing 
screens; (b) search screens.

Separately, there is an issue to raise with HPfGU admin about how the 
catalogue will be hosted in the longer term, although we can use Paul 
Kippes server temporarily to develop the project.

Whilst we are waiting for the tech stuff, I am going to put up a 
recent thread for us to have a go at coding. The one I propose is one 
we have all contributed to recently, which started off being 
called 'Cedric & Pettigrew' (I think), but has wandered off into many 
other directions in true HPfGU style.

Carolyn




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Mar  7 15:04:26 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2004 15:04:26 -0000
Subject: Search screen layout suggestions
In-Reply-To: <c2f3re+jkjq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2fdlq+6dfq@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003"
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I have put up in a Word file some further suggestions on what the 
> search screens and search processes might be, once we make the system 
> live for HPfGU members.
> 
> Comments please - it is how the results of all our hard work will 
> appear - is it usable ??
> 
> Carolyn

It looks good.  How I think it would look in its final form is that
the table on screen 3 (the mock-up you had for Fudge) will be *very*
long in many cases (think of the Snape one!).  To narrow their
searches, users would scan the last several columns, I assume.  Since
the posts are listed in chronological order, threads will probably
become apparent by looking here. Sometimes you do get parallel threads
which would end up being coded the same -- some of the James vs. Snape
battles post-OoP come to mind -- which I think on the table might be
indistinguishable.  Still, who in their right mind would want to
*follow* an entire one of those threads (mind boggles)?

Rejecting duplicated ideas, of course, will leave us with much fewer
posts in a table.  The problem, of course, is deciding what's similar
enough to be a duplicate, and what's different enough to warrant
inclusion.  But we were always going to have that problem.

Unfortunately, I'll bet a surprising number of people don't bother to
use this, but the ones who do will no doubt be amazed at how much has
been written about anything you can think of.  I do still think it's
worth doing for the people who are going to make use of it.

I, as someone with no technical clue, have a technical question.  How
much harder or easier would it be if we sorted posts into all the
subcategories of screen 2 (i.e. down to the level of individual names
of MoM members in your example) and then have that group of posts be
searchable by any keyword the searcher would chose?  For example, if
you want to find posts discussing when Fudge and Harry interact, you
get to screen 2 and click on "Fudge, Cornelius Oswald" and a search
function comes up.  You enter "Harry" and click on a "go" button, and
every post we've sorted into the "Fudge" category is searched for the
word "Harry" and the message numbers (and names?) come up
automatically.  I think this would be more end-user friendly and
*maybe* less work for us as we wouldn't have to actually *sort* the
posts any finer than to the level of Screen 2.  Meaning that *we*
wouldn't have to separate the Fudge-and-Harry posts from, say, the
Fudge-and-Dumbledore or Fudge-and-LMalfoy posts.  I just don't know if
that's technically possible (I'd think it must be, though), or how
easy or feasible that would be to set up.  I don't even know if I'm
making myself clear!  ;-)

One last consideration: if we could do what I just suggested, we're
going to have to standardise the names somehow.  If an end-user is
going to search a category for "Voldemort," either they would also
have to search for "Voldie" and "LV" and "VMort" and all the other
variations, or *we* will have to insert a line somewhere that lists
all the proper names for people, spells and things.  Like "Avada
Kedavra" for "AK," etc.  Not to mention correcting misspellings, to be
thorough.  I notice Barry has taken to refering to Salazar Slytherin
as "Sally" these days <looks askance>. 

Anne
who hope we can get through this before the book 6 avalanche comes
out, but still thinks it's worth it






From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Mon Mar  8 08:56:00 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 08:56:00 -0000
Subject: threading?
Message-ID: <c2hcf0+if8f@eGroups.com>

I'm not certain if we're speaking the same language.  If we're 
wanting to follow a thread for cataloging, do you want posts to be 
grouped into a threaded view?

I've uploaded an example screen shot of what popular Unix email 
program does with the posts I've downloaded.  It is very large, but 
it captures what I see as the various possibilities.  I'm not 
certain how complex something like this will be, but I find it 
handy.  I think it uses information in the email header--I can't see 
how else it can determine a reply is a reply to an initial post.

If only Yahoo would do this by default.....




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Mon Mar  8 09:25:52 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 09:25:52 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & SUMMARY, Sunday 7th March
In-Reply-To: <c2f4nn+n79p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2he70+4he8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Your project co-ordinator here, yet again. 
> 
>> 
> Currently waiting to hear from our techno-wizards as to what might be 
> possible. CW has put up some sample designs for (a) cataloguing 
> screens; (b) search screens.
> 
> Whilst we are waiting for the tech stuff, I am going to put up a 
> recent thread for us to have a go at coding. The one I propose is one 
> we have all contributed to recently, which started off being 
> called 'Cedric & Pettigrew' (I think), but has wandered off into many 
> other directions in true HPfGU style.
> 

Me being difficult again.

I downloaded the Suggested Search Screen file; OK for 6 pages but the
last page showing the Fudge search was a mess. The same thing happened
with your cataloguing screen example, which was why I may have seemed a
bit tentative. Judging by the lack of message traffic I'm probably the only
one afflicted.

I know (or think I do) exactly what has happened - during the translation
to an Apple -readable file, the settings have been stripped out. Instead
of a  nice neat table I end up with 6 lines of text. Obviously I can shuffle
these around by copying to text edit and judicial use of the space bar
and entry key, but this will be one hell of a chore for a file when the table
is a multi-page document. And what happens when I post stuff back?
Will my settings be stripped out too, leaving you with a  text file that
you will  then have to reformat? Is there an easy way round this glitch?

Another point: Posters names that are to  be entered into the table - are
these the site nom-de-plume, e.g. Kneasy, or the email identifier?
The latter can change  over time and circumstances; I  know that quite
a few posters have switched service providers  away from Yahoo! (wise
folk). Additionally, my  email identifier varies depending on how I submit 
a post. It can be arrowsmithbt, BTArrowsmith or Barry Arrowsmith. This
probably happens with others too. I suggest (if you haven't already decided)
that the site ndp be used as poster ID. It seems to be more consistent over 
time.
Late breaking news: I see that Paul is suggesting the opposite; ah, well.

Sorry about being a member of the awkward squad - on a Monday morning
too.

Barry




From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Mon Mar  8 15:13:29 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 15:13:29 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & SUMMARY, Sunday 7th March
In-Reply-To: <c2he70+4he8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2i2ip+7c64@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt"

Actually, we'll be tracking both.  The irritating thing is all the 
Club posts use only a yahoo ID.  The email address is totally bogus 
and was necessary since each post must have an email.  So for the 
Club, username is more appropriate.  However with the Group, some 
users do not specify their Yahoo name.  I can't think of an example, 
but you'll know one because Yahoo lists the email rather than a name 
such as "john williams."  So for the Group (messages 1 and up), the 
email is the only reliable user tracker across all messages.

I remember that both at the same time are necessary to follow a 
truer path of a user over time.

I'll take another look at this part.  It may be good to have the 
ability to link usernames/emails together.  But this is an extra 
complication that may be best held off for now.  I don't think a 
decision is needed right now since I doubt it matters for no more 
than 1-2% of the users (5% of total users probably make most posts 
and 80% of those would have remained the same).


> Another point: Posters names that are to  be entered into the 
table - are
> these the site nom-de-plume, e.g. Kneasy, or the email identifier?
> The latter can change  over time and circumstances; I  know that 
quite
> a few posters have switched service providers  away from Yahoo! 
(wise
> folk). Additionally, my  email identifier varies depending on how 
I submit 
> a post. It can be arrowsmithbt, BTArrowsmith or Barry Arrowsmith. 
This
> probably happens with others too. I suggest (if you haven't 
already decided)
> that the site ndp be used as poster ID. It seems to be more 
consistent over 
> time.
> Late breaking news: I see that Paul is suggesting the opposite; 
ah, well.





From erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com  Mon Mar  8 15:56:19 2004
From: erisedstraeh2002 at yahoo.com (Phyllis)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 15:56:19 -0000
Subject: Introduction
Message-ID: <c2i533+p3g2@eGroups.com>

Hi, everyone,

I just wanted to say "hello" and, for those of you who don't know me, 
introduce myself.  I'm Phyllis Morris, and I'm currently a member of 
HPfGU list administration (which means I help with pending messages, 
read the list for problem messages and send elfly welcoming messages 
to new members).  I'm also on the Convention Alley Planning Committee 
and am the co-chair for Programming.

I'm also a member of the FAQ list, and when Kelley asked whether 
anyone in HPfGU list administration was interested in joining the 
Catalogue list, I took her up on her offer because I thought it would 
be good to keep up to date on what you are doing over here as it 
relates to what we're doing on FAQ (unfortunately, we're not doing 
much on FAQ at the moment, but we're hoping to change that soon and 
I'm hopeful that this project will help to re-energize FAQ).

In RL, I work for the New York Governor's budget office, have 2 kids 
(boy, 7 and girl, 5) and a husband.

I'm glad to be here!

~Phyllis




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  8 20:41:06 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 20:41:06 -0000
Subject: Search screen layout suggestions
In-Reply-To: <c2fdlq+6dfq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2ilp2+9afi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> It looks good.  How I think it would look in its final form is that
> the table on screen 3 (the mock-up you had for Fudge) will be *very*
> long in many cases 

Carolyn:
Just a quick interim reply here, but I have asked Paul and apparently 
we may be able to narrow initial searches, so you get less results. 
Eg, search on Fudge AND OOP, Ch8 for example, or Snape AND Sirius.

Possibly may even be able to search on 3 criteria at once: X AND Y 
AND Z. However, mechanism for doing this is still being thought about.

> 
> Rejecting duplicated ideas, of course, will leave us with much fewer
> posts in a table.  The problem, of course, is deciding what's 
similar enough to be a duplicate, and what's different enough to 
warrant inclusion.  But we were always going to have that problem.
> 
Carolyn:
Now this is why I thought you'd all jump enthusiastically into 
discussing the reject categories ! It does seem to me that we will 
have to develop some rules for rejecting posts that put up precisely 
similar points to things that have gone before. This gives all the 
glory to older listees, of course, but that's too bad. The trick, 
however, will be spotting when an old thread suddenly starts to have 
a new spin.. and deciding what to include of the thread to make sense 
of this.


> Unfortunately, I'll bet a surprising number of people don't bother 
to use this, but the ones who do will no doubt be amazed at how much 
has been written about anything you can think of.  I do still think 
it's worth doing for the people who are going to make use of it.
> 
Carolyn:
Well, its another string to the bow for the elves. I'm hoping that 
they will invent a new rule for rejecting posts from newbies who self-
evidently have not tried to look anything up.

> I, as someone with no technical clue, have a technical question.  
How much harder or easier would it be if we sorted posts into all the
> subcategories of screen 2 (i.e. down to the level of individual 
names of MoM members in your example) and then have that group of 
posts be searchable by any keyword the searcher would chose?  For 
example, if you want to find posts discussing when Fudge and Harry 
interact, you get to screen 2 and click on "Fudge, Cornelius Oswald" 
and a search function comes up.  You enter "Harry" and click on 
a "go" button, and every post we've sorted into the "Fudge" category 
is searched for the word "Harry" and the message numbers (and names?) 
come up automatically.  

Carolyn:
Hopefully the dual-search idea explained above will achieve this. In 
your example here, someone would search on Fudge AND Harry and get 
only the posts which we had coded up with both those characters. This 
refinement will need to be designed into the suggested screen layout 
I put up.

I think this would be more end-user friendly and
> *maybe* less work for us as we wouldn't have to actually *sort* the
> posts any finer than to the level of Screen 2.  Meaning that *we*
> wouldn't have to separate the Fudge-and-Harry posts from, say, the
> Fudge-and-Dumbledore or Fudge-and-LMalfoy posts.  I just don't know 
if
> that's technically possible (I'd think it must be, though), or how
> easy or feasible that would be to set up.  I don't even know if I'm
> making myself clear!  ;-)

Carolyn:
Alas, I think it won't find the right posts unless we had coded them 
all up properly. Thus, we had given various posts the primary 
code 'Fudge', but then added various secondary codes such 
as 'Harry', 'Dumbledore', 'OOP Ch8' for instance. This sort of fine 
coding will narrow down searching to speculation on what was going on 
between those characters in the Hearing scene in OOP in this case.

Of course, we wouldn't always have to have all these subsidiary 
codes, but the option is there to use for complicated posts. And I'm 
thinking Magic Dishwasher here: it looms, smiling grimly at me on the 
horizon.
> 
> One last consideration: if we could do what I just suggested, we're
> going to have to standardise the names somehow.  If an end-user is
> going to search a category for "Voldemort," either they would also
> have to search for "Voldie" and "LV" and "VMort" and all the other
> variations, or *we* will have to insert a line somewhere that lists
> all the proper names for people, spells and things.  Like "Avada
> Kedavra" for "AK," etc.  Not to mention correcting misspellings, to 
be thorough.  I notice Barry has taken to refering to Salazar 
Slytherin as "Sally" these days <looks askance>. 

Carolyn:
I think our coding will deal with the initial problem, in that any 
post we deem to be about Voldie, LV, Vapor!Mort etc etc, will be 
firmly labelled 'Voldemort'. However, this will be a problem when and 
if free text searching is made possible on the site (at the moment, 
our tech team is treating this as a secondary enhancement). Perhaps 
there is some cunning way that the dbase can be told to recognise all 
variations on a name, and find what you want all the same. Hm. Dunno.

> Anne
> who hope we can get through this before the book 6 avalanche comes
> out, but still thinks it's worth it

Courage, mes amis.. it will be wonderful.. pauses uncertainly, hoping 
that it will.




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Mon Mar  8 20:49:33 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2004 20:49:33 -0000
Subject: UPDATE & SUMMARY, Sunday 7th March
In-Reply-To: <c2he70+4he8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2im8t+p1fb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> Me being difficult again.
> 
> I downloaded the Suggested Search Screen file; OK for 6 pages but 
the last page showing the Fudge search was a mess. The same thing 
happened with your cataloguing screen example, which was why I may 
have seemed a bit tentative. Judging by the lack of message traffic 
I'm probably the only one afflicted.
> 
Carolyn:
AARGH.. I thought my Word files were readable by everyone. I am going 
to have a go at pasting both my screen layouts into Excel for you, 
and emailing that offlist. I hope you will be able to open that and 
see what I'm on about. However, the screen designs are evolving, so 
its not final by any means.

> Another point: Posters names that are to  be entered into the 
table - are these the site nom-de-plume, e.g. Kneasy, or the email 
identifier?

Carolyn:
The message index will use the email identifier, as per whatever the 
poster used for that message - see the examples on the spreadsheet I 
sent you of posts 1-1000. Not a lot we can do about names changing 
over time I think.






From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 10 03:53:52 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2004 03:53:52 -0000
Subject: Introduction
In-Reply-To: <c2i533+p3g2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2m3gg+gfqi@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Phyllis"
<erisedstraeh2002 at y...> wrote:
> Hi, everyone,


Hi, Phyllis!  Boy, you sound really busy!  *And* you find time to post
to the main list!

Welcome to the group.  I'm really hoping we'll have something very
worthwhile by the time we're done.

Anne
aka Annemehr





From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Thu Mar 11 17:07:59 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 2004 17:07:59 -0000
Subject: What shall we call this thing ??
Message-ID: <c2q6df+d576@eGroups.com>

Paul would like a name for our database. He suggested:

..something related to Mdme Pince, the librarian
..The Pensieve

I wondered about:

..The Restricted Section
..Alohomora!

Any brilliant ideas ?

Carolyn




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Fri Mar 12 19:52:44 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 19:52:44 -0000
Subject: What shall we call this thing ??
In-Reply-To: <c2q6df+d576@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c2t4ec+ptj8@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" <carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Paul would like a name for our database. He suggested:
> 
> ..something related to Mdme Pince, the librarian
> ..The Pensieve
> 
> I wondered about:
> 
> ..The Restricted Section
> ..Alohomora!
> 
> Any brilliant ideas ?
> 

Difficult.... Not easy to tie the function of the database with
any character or artifact in the books.
 
Arachne's Threads?
Flourishes and Blots?  (The spelling is intentional)
The Room of Requirement?

Things are a bit hairy at the moment. Work keeps intruding.
This morning I received an urgent request to compose the
specifications for another 250 scientific equipment items, 
with a warning of more to come. So if I seem to be slow
in responding, that's the reason.

Annoying - I've got 3 large-ish posts in various stages of
construction. Kneasy is not happy.

Barry






From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Sun Mar 14 06:09:39 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (Paul Kippes)
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:09:39 -0800 (PST)
Subject: testing HTML post ability
Message-ID: <20040314060939.40811.qmail@web13803.mail.yahoo.com>

This is just a test post to see if Yahoo permits HTML posts anymore.  I don't think that they do.  And I can't find any any settings to permit it.  But if they do, we've got 11 thousand well-behaved list members!


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20040313/7bc2ccca/attachment.html>

From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Sun Mar 14 06:44:39 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 06:44:39 -0000
Subject: testing HTML post ability
In-Reply-To: <20040314060939.40811.qmail@web13803.mail.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <c30v0n+jqt5@eGroups.com>

Does anyone know why HPFGU hasn't had an HTML post since post number 
172?  In the groups I control, I see no setting for this.  But I 
think originally there was one.  I also remember asking Penny to 
turn it off.  Yet in this group, my previous email was HTML....


--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Paul Kippes <paul-
groups at w...> wrote:
> This is just a test post to see if Yahoo permits HTML posts 
anymore.  I don't think that they do.  And I can't find any any 
settings to permit it.  But if they do, we've got 11 thousand well-
behaved list members!





From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Mar 14 15:15:47 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 15:15:47 -0000
Subject: testing HTML post ability
In-Reply-To: <c30v0n+jqt5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c31sv3+aduv@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...> 
wrote:
> Does anyone know why HPFGU hasn't had an HTML post since post 
number 
> 172?  In the groups I control, I see no setting for this.  But I 
> think originally there was one.  I also remember asking Penny to 
> turn it off.  Yet in this group, my previous email was HTML....
> 
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Paul Kippes <paul-
> groups at w...> wrote:
> > This is just a test post to see if Yahoo permits HTML posts 
> anymore.  I don't think that they do.  And I can't find any any 
> settings to permit it.  But if they do, we've got 11 thousand well-
> behaved list members!

Carolyn:
I am sure many people would have sent HTML if they were able to, if 
only because of default settings on their software that they hadn't 
noticed, so I think it must be banned ! The only place I have noticed 
an HTML option is in how you want your posts downloaded on joining a 
group. However, I don't think I've ever seen an option to post in 
this format.

For what its worth, Shaun Hately put up some intensive discussions of 
this issue on the Feedback list a while back - may be worth looking 
through, as he is another techie I think, and might have made some 
useful points.




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Mar 14 15:23:54 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 15:23:54 -0000
Subject: UPDATE, Sunday 14th March
Message-ID: <c31tea+r5gv@eGroups.com>

Well, not a lot to report this week folks.

The main activity has been on the tech front, and Paul has told me 
that we are close to having some kind of cataloguing system to look 
at, maybe as early as next week (so, no pressure there 
Paul...<bg> !). 

I have also done some work on a 'practice' thread (Cedric/Pettigrew), 
but like Barry, have been somewhat inundated by pesky RL work myself, 
and indeed, am sitting here working this afternoon. [Pause for dark 
thoughts on the nature of self-employment..]. I will try to put this 
exercise up soon - bet you all can't wait.

Cheers
Carolyn








From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Sun Mar 14 18:36:15 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (Paul Kippes)
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 10:36:15 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {groups} [HPFGU-Catalogue] UPDATE, Sunday 14th March
In-Reply-To: <c31tea+r5gv@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040314183615.86321.qmail@web13811.mail.yahoo.com>

I've mostly been working on perfecting the post import script.  And
because Yahoo has changed how they handle posts over time, I'm
getting to deal with it.


--- a_reader2003 <carolynwhite2 at aol.com> wrote:
> 
> Well, not a lot to report this week folks.
> 
> The main activity has been on the tech front, and Paul has told me 
> that we are close to having some kind of cataloguing system to look
> 
> at, maybe as early as next week (so, no pressure there 
> Paul...<bg> !). 
> 
> I have also done some work on a 'practice' thread
> (Cedric/Pettigrew), 
> but like Barry, have been somewhat inundated by pesky RL work
> myself, 
> and indeed, am sitting here working this afternoon. [Pause for dark
> 
> thoughts on the nature of self-employment..]. I will try to put
> this 
> exercise up soon - bet you all can't wait.
> 
> Cheers
> Carolyn
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam
http://mail.yahoo.com



From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Tue Mar 16 07:59:03 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 07:59:03 -0000
Subject: Corrupted posts
Message-ID: <c36c47+nh2h@eGroups.com>

In case this comes up:

Early after the switch (Jan 17, 2001), the HPFGU group had some 
corrupted messages.  Posts 9452 through 9470 were filled with 
garbage.  Those were deleted at that time.  I'm guessing that 9471-
9483 had similar problems.

Anyway, 9484 through 9495 are also corrupted.  Of those, I'm keeping 
9485 since it is the first post to have all its text.  I am cleaning 
up that post as well, though.

Because of how I'm storing message threads, the duplicate posts were 
not able to be stored--not that we'd want to anyway.

Actually, this problem was the driving force behind the archives 
after the Club to Group move.  Hence, no archive was taken before 
the mid-January glitch.





From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Tue Mar 23 08:48:49 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 08:48:49 -0000
Subject: screen resolutions
Message-ID: <c3otlh+bmjl@eGroups.com>

What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
lower than 1024x768?




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Tue Mar 23 09:22:03 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:22:03 -0000
Subject: screen resolutions
In-Reply-To: <c3otlh+bmjl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c3ovjr+qpma@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...> 
wrote:
> What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
> lower than 1024x768?

Carolyn:
Mine's set to 1024x768




From arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com  Tue Mar 23 17:11:52 2004
From: arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 17:11:52 -0000
Subject: screen resolutions
In-Reply-To: <c3otlh+bmjl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c3pr4o+rk4t@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...> wrote:
> What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
> lower than 1024x768?

That's the resolution I'm using.
I  could reduce it  if you want.

Barry




From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Tue Mar 23 18:19:14 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (Paul Kippes)
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 10:19:14 -0800 (PST)
Subject: {groups} [HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: screen resolutions
In-Reply-To: <c3pr4o+rk4t@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20040323181914.67793.qmail@web13810.mail.yahoo.com>

No.  Although I'll do my best not to target a particular resolution,
I'll see how well I can utilize a 1024x768 resolution.  

--- arrowsmithbt <arrowsmithbt at btconnect.com> wrote:

---------------------------------
--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...>
wrote:
> What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
> lower than 1024x768?

That's the resolution I'm using.
I  could reduce it  if you want.

Barry



---------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links

   To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/
 
   To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
HPFGU-Catalogue-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
 
   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.



__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance Tax Center - File online. File on time.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html



From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Wed Mar 24 08:22:29 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 08:22:29 -0000
Subject: The oldest reply
Message-ID: <c3rgg5+ggs9@eGroups.com>

Message #60948 is a reply to #1248.  Almost 3 years later!

I'm sure there are others.  But I just thought it funny.




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Mar 24 08:35:43 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 08:35:43 -0000
Subject: The oldest reply
In-Reply-To: <c3rgg5+ggs9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c3rh8v+m85k@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...> 
wrote:
> Message #60948 is a reply to #1248.  Almost 3 years later!
> 
> I'm sure there are others.  But I just thought it funny.

Carolyn:
We should keep a special list of these oddities..I read a post 
somewhere that someone was patiently reading the posts from the 
beginning, which was very commendable..maybe it was them replying to 
something they saw way back ?




From annemehr at yahoo.com  Wed Mar 24 16:53:23 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 16:53:23 -0000
Subject: screen resolutions
In-Reply-To: <c3otlh+bmjl@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c3see3+lig2@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...>
wrote:
> What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
> lower than 1024x768?

Mine is normally set at 800x600, but I can easily change it to
1024x768 when working on this, if necessary.

Anne





From annemehr at yahoo.com  Thu Mar 25 05:00:53 2004
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 05:00:53 -0000
Subject: Hi, Dicentra
Message-ID: <c3tp25+4jj1@eGroups.com>

I checked in tonight, and saw on the home page that the number of
members had changed to nine, so of course I had to look up who the new
one was!

Anne
who walked by a display of dicentra spectabilus (white and pink ones)
in Home Depot the other day.  Couldn't get any -- I don't have a spot
for them yet




From dicentra at xmission.com  Sat Mar 27 07:47:40 2004
From: dicentra at xmission.com (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 07:47:40 -0000
Subject: screen resolutions
In-Reply-To: <c3see3+lig2@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c43bis+jk5e@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "kippesp" <paul-groups at w...>
> wrote:
> > What screen resolutions do people have?  Does anyone use anything 
> > lower than 1024x768?
> 
> Mine is normally set at 800x600, but I can easily change it to
> 1024x768 when working on this, if necessary.

I'm at 1280 x 960.  I can also change, of course.

And you simply *must* find a place to plant Dicentras, especially the
pink ones.  I live in a Zone 6 desert, have the world's worst soil --
no nitrogen or potash and several decades-worth of leaves from
Ailanthus altissima, which contain herbicide -- and the Dicentras come
up bigger each year and drop little seedlings around their feet.

One of the best perennials available.

--Dicentra, who chose the handle because she thinks it sounds cool;
her favorite perennial is actually Aquilegia caerulea: Colorado columbine




From paul-groups at wibbles.org  Sat Mar 27 07:57:54 2004
From: paul-groups at wibbles.org (kippesp)
Date: Sat, 27 Mar 2004 07:57:54 -0000
Subject: What shall we call this thing ??
In-Reply-To: <c2t4ec+ptj8@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <c43c62+fvde@eGroups.com>

This is only for internal reference and pretty much only by me.  I'm 
basically using the name for documentation, source code management, 
and file directory purposes.  I just wanted something other than 
hpfgu-catalog.  Generally, nerds use such things as short-hand 
references so that other nerds know what they're talking about--but 
of course no one else does.  I don't consider myself a nerd, but 
like the idea of such sillyness.

Of course, being that this only matters to me, I don't even need to 
tell anyone.  But I finally came up with something with the help of 
the HP Lexicon.

Paracelsus - derived from the Bust of Paracelus, which is located 
halfway down the corridor leading from the Gryffindor Common Room to 
the shortest route to the Owlery

I thought it appropriate since our little project will provide the 
shortest path to good Yahoo Group content the seeker is interested 
in.  At least it should do that...eventually.

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "arrowsmithbt" 
<arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> > Paul would like a name for our database. He suggested:
> > 
> > ..something related to Mdme Pince, the librarian
> > ..The Pensieve
> > 
> > I wondered about:
> > 
> > ..The Restricted Section
> > ..Alohomora!
> > 
> > Any brilliant ideas ?
> > 
> 
> Difficult.... Not easy to tie the function of the database with
> any character or artifact in the books.
>  
> Arachne's Threads?
> Flourishes and Blots?  (The spelling is intentional)
> The Room of Requirement?
> 
> Things are a bit hairy at the moment. Work keeps intruding.
> This morning I received an urgent request to compose the
> specifications for another 250 scientific equipment items, 
> with a warning of more to come. So if I seem to be slow
> in responding, that's the reason.
> 
> Annoying - I've got 3 large-ish posts in various stages of
> construction. Kneasy is not happy.
> 
> Barry




From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Mar 28 09:19:25 2004
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 09:19:25 -0000
Subject: UPDATE, Sunday 28th March
Message-ID: <c465at+549u@eGroups.com>

Hi All

Well, there is some progress. Paul has a semi-working site which he 
has let me peer at. It finds past posts very fast, but currently 
hasn't had the cataloguing mechanism attached to it. Work continues 
on it, tiresomely interrupted by RL from time to time, but we are 
getting there!

I'm happy with the working name for the site - hope everyone else is?

Carolyn
Delighted to find that Dicentra and Anne are gardeners..I'm off to a 
rare plant fair at Hatfield House today (childhood home of Elizabeth 
I, and where she found out she was Queen of England..very atmospheric 
Tudor historic heap).