Coding TBAYs

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, ewe2 <ewe2 at 4...> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 18, 2005 at 04:39:20PM -0000, CarolynWhite2 wrote:
> > Carolyn:
> > Um, I do disagree (with examples).
> > 
> > TBAY is far more than a commentary, it is advancing theories in 
> > another style mostly. It is really important that these posts get 
> > filed with the relevant theories, not left in a style category 
where 
> > no one will find them.

Sean: 
> Well this is the problem: do we treat TBAY differently as a 
category or not?
> You seem to be saying no we can't. If that's so then why set TBAY 
apart? Let's
> remove TBAY as a category unto itself, and concentrate on its 
content. 

Carolyn:
The reason we have the TBAY category, and why it is down in the Admin 
section, is because there were some early posts in TBAY style before 
the decision was made to ask posters to put TBAY in the subject head. 
We also wanted to make sure we captured all the posts in that style, 
so that those that don't like it can exclude them from their searches 
if they like, or conversely, those that like them can pull up the 
whole lot if they want.

That doesn't mean that the posts should not also be coded for their 
content in each case.



As a
> Listee I've never seen TBAY as anything else but its own thing and 
I can bet
> you most Listees (except perhaps the TBAYers themselves) take one 
look at a
> TBAY heading and move on, deciding it's a game specific to 
TBAYers.  Now you
> can beg to differ, but I'm merely expressing in code my attitude in 
the List
> world, and have to draw the line somewhere.

Well, I don't agree. IMO, TBAY is an interesting way of continuing 
discussions in another style, and certainly it would make a large 
hole in the development of some theories to leave them out of a run 
of posts on a particular theme. However, the header code is there for 
those who want to hop skip and jump past them if they want. 

I'm sorry you don't like them, but cataloguing is about dealing with 
all the stuff on the list, not taking sides. I dutifully code up 
SHIPping, and worse...

As to whether most posters want to avoid them, I just don't think you 
can make such generalisations. The catalogue will be used by all 
sorts of people who have never encountered the style before. Some 
will love it, others won't, just as when they first started 
appearing. 


> 
> Just from your examples, only the top two led to any non-TBAY 
thread, and
> while you chose TBAY posts that only referenced one or two major 
subjects,
> most TBAY posts reference many more, which violates our attempt at 
keeping our
> codes focussed.

I looked at the posts which you had coded just with the TBAY code, to 
see what else might be required. The suggestions I made would cover 
them I think - two or three codes. 

For others, whilst we need to be minimal in our approach, at the same 
time if a TBAY post really deserves more codes than that, it should 
get them. All we are trying to avoid from now on is coding things or 
characters which are *not* the main point of the post - 
the 'everything that moves' trap that we'd all fallen into.

Carolyn