Various comments

[Dicentra spectabilis]

I've been offline for a few weeks, so sorry to pipe up so late.

Barry:
BTW - you've a category for 'humour in the books' - how about one for
humour in posts? They can be entertaining in their own right but may
otherwise be rejected as adding nothing new to the discussion.

Carolyn:
No kidding ? Too funny. I think we should simply have a category
called 'just for a laugh' or some such...

Dicey:
"Just for a laugh" would be good for posts that don't contain canon
discussion.  There are, however, other posts that do contain canon
discussion AND are hilarious (notably TBAY posts).  If there's a
category called "Funny" or something like that, we could flag HPFGU
humor and in-jokes.

Barry:
Got to ask, is 1.3.4. intended for the sort of thing you've come up
against, or is it intended to be used for retrospective analysis - as
in "if we look back it's obvious that...? 'Cos I've been using it in
the former case - as in " Here's something we ought to take notice of
- bet it means something, but I'm not sure what." 

Dicey:
I don't think there's any need to differentiate between discussing
possible clues (whose meaning we don't know yet) and known clues
(whose meaning we do know).

Carolyn:
Returning to my problem, I was wondering whether to add a category
called 'prophecy' to the section on free-will, determinism etc. There
have been a lot of spot-on predictions about what both Trelawny's
prophecies were about; it might be useful to pull them out to read
separately. I have been linking them into the last-but-one chapter in
OOP where DD finally 'reveals' what it was all about, or the prophecy
chapter in POA so far.

Dicey:
"Prophecy" is definitely a separate category.  The issue itself is
dealt with in the books.  If a post speculates on what a Prophecy
means, you tick both "Prophecy" and 1.3.4.  If the post speculates on
how prophecy affects free will or whether Ron is a seer, you tick
"Prophecy" only.  If the post speculates on what happened to Sirius's
motorcycle, it's 1.3.4.

Barry:
Hate to keep doing this, but is it worthwhile listing the Sorting Hat
as a magical object in it's own right as a Magical Item?

Dicey:
I recommend that the Sorting Hat be in the Magical Items list. 
There's plenty of speculation on how its magic works.

Barry:
The problem is, the list is enormous already - if it gets much longer
we might as well give 'em the damn files and tell 'em it's all in
there somewhere.

Dicey:
Having a buttload of categories is a good thing -- or at least an
inevitable thing -- on HPfGU.  The more categories we have, the better
the search engine.  We also get bragging rights on how complex and
deep our discussions are, and the number of categories supports
arguments that HP is indeed worthy of academic study.

Barry:
Newer posters have independently developed many of the same thought
paths but probably haven't bothered to give them titles. Hopefully, by
defining every post by category, you won't need to know the acronym to
access the general theory, though it could be a useful shortcut *if*
you know the acronym. How many do?

Dicey:
I hesitate to key Snaped-loved-Lily theories under LOLLIPOPS if they
were written before the acronym was coined.  Maybe under "Snape/Lily"
ships (when the user selects the category) LOLLIPOPS is a subcategory.
 People can either see *all* the Snape/Lily ship posts or just the
LOLLIPOPS ships or just the pre-LOLLIPOPS ships.  Or not. :D

Barry:
The implications of this are exercising the minds on site - quite
entertaining. But since it's all based on inaccurate information
coupled with pre-publication hysteria I'm rejecting them all as "off
topic".

Dicey:
Would a "False Rumors" category be worthwhile?

Carolyn:
Ah, now we differ here. I think that provid[ed] TBAY posts are
identified as such in their subject line, as a warning to the
squeamish, they should take their place amongst the other posts, and
be coded up the same way. I wouldn't want them shuffled off anywhere
obscure. 

Dicey:
The problem is that TBAY was alive and well for a couple of months
before the TBAY prefix was implemented (the result of the first TBAY
war [TBacle] on the admin list).  The term "Theory Bay" didn't exist
until Tabouli coined it at the beginning of TBacle I.  I'm certain
that some readers will want to be able to call up *all* TBAY-style
posts, not just those that have the prefix.  I know I would.  TBAY
developed gradually and spontaneously.  I'd like to see how it did that.

So, when a thread is mixed TBAY and essay style, we should key posts
as TBAY when the writer uses the TBAY style but not if the writer uses
essay style (even though it has TBAY-style quotage or a TBAY prefix).

As for the mixed threads being listed as a complete thread, yes, I
think they should be kept together.  The Stoned!Harry thread, for
example, was a brilliant mix of TBAY- and essay-style posts.

Anne:
Those "manufacturers" seem to be long gone -- I wonder if
[flyingfordanglia] lurks anymore, even, though I seem to remember him
posting when I was new, in Autumn '02.

Dicey:
Neil was a Moderator until 17 Apr 03: I don't know the extent of his
lurkage, but sometimes he pops in on OTC.

--Dicey