New & horrid task - our first review

[Jen Reese]

The wind is whipping the shutters against the side of the building 
with resounding force, and a driving rain beats down on the roof of 
the Catalogue office. Inside, a rather large group of coders has 
formed a ring around the fire, sipping stolen libations and chatting 
about the latest decree from Carolyn Havisham.

The door blows open and a figure walks in. The dim light from the 
fire makes it impossible to see who it is. The talk dies away and 
the coders hear the sound of water dripping on the floor, and a 
distinctive "squeesh, SQUISH, squeesh" as the figure moves closer. 
Swiftly the figure pulls the hood from her head and the coders laugh 
in relief. It's just Jen, back from her tour of duty on Theory Bay. 

"Didn't mean to break up the chit-chat, sorry about that. Oh....and 
sorry for this as well," Jen motions with her hand to the storm 
outside. "Theory Bay, you know. Elkins and Cindy were whipping up 
the Bay again and caused a change in the barometric pressure. Barely 
made it out alive, not to mention nearly starved to death. Kool-aid 
and Ritz crackers with cheese whiz--that's all they had to eat!" Jen 
surveys the food laid out on the table and a vast selection of 
drinks on the counter. "But I'm going in again as soon as the rain 
lets up. Load me up with some more posts!"

***************************************************************888

I just started looking over the posts in my category of "Reader 
response/subversive reading" so not much to report on that yet.

Carolyn:
> Alarmingly, there are currently 999 categories. The good news is 
that:
> - 174 have no entries as yet
> - 545 have under 50 entries
> - 132 have between 50-100 entries
> - 80 have between 100-200 entries
> - 61 have between 200-1000 entries
> - 7 have over 1000 entries
> 
> Once we have reviewed the categories, if we then went to correct a 
> post - ie remove a code, by doing this you replace the name of the 
> original reviewer with your own. Does this matter? Does anyone 
> mind?

Jen: I don't mind. I do think it's a good idea to review the early 
posts when the Catalogue was in draft form because the categories 
changed pretty drastically from then until now. As for later posts, 
would it really make a big difference? There will definitely be 
subjectivity in the coding since there are so many people involved. 
I've read some posts in my category that I wouldn't immediately code 
under there, but once I attempted to understand why the post was 
coded there, I realized the problem was my interpreting the category 
in a very narrow way, and someone else interpreting it broadly. 

Carolyn:
> Before starting any particular section, it is probably as well to 
> review and agree what its definition is supposed to be.

Jen: I would like to get consensus on how to interpret some of the 
more ambiguous categories. Like mine for Reader response/subversive 
reading. In my mind this category is for things like arguing over 
the canon interpretation of ESE!Lupin or wondering if there are 
clues for Draco's redemption. Theories that try to prove that 
certain canon examples are not as they seem, or are leading the 
reader to false conclusions. How do other people view this category?