Rules for Coding Predictions - hang on!

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" 
<boyd.t.smythe at f...> wrote:
> 
> OK, Boyd here again, and sounds as though we're going to go more 
with
> predictions as entertainment. Fine enough! I'll keep anything merely
> entertaining in the 'without canon' buckets, while making sure that 
only
> those defended reasonably stay in 'with canon.' Further, I'll 
uncode from
> Predictions those that are truly theories, leaving them their other 
more
> appropriate codes (e.g. Vampire!Snape) or adding the recode tag if
> necessary. Finally, I'll remove the repeated tripe.
> 
> So going forward, the rules are,
> 
> 1) Code to predictions only if the post is almost entirely a 
prediction--no
> general theories here, please.
> 2) Code to 'with canon' only if the prediction is well-defended
> somehow--we'll be liberal as to what canon means.
> 3) Code to 'without canon' only if it's unique. Err on the side 
of "toss the
> boring, keep the entertaining."
> 
> --Boyd
> "...working at the car wash, yeah..."


Oy, trouble, you there - I think Barry is someplace battling with 
British Rail today. I know he feels strongly about this section - the 
canon/no canon division was his idea as I recall. Maybe give him a 
chance to respond before going ahead and deleting too much? (Not that 
I suppose he'd bother about the tripe, mind, but for all I know he's 
spent hours coding up the with-canon predictions..).

Carolyn