Reviewing process...

[carolynwhite2]

Jen:
What is the trick I'm missing? Sean whips through posts like a hot
knife through butter, but it seems the more I do, the more that
needs to be done. Like if I keep post A coded to a chapter, well a
couple of posts up and down the thread that *didn't* get coded need
to be added for thread continuity. Or an entire thread is coded to a 
chapter, but really only the first two posts pertain to it. Where is 
my trusty sword? I used to slice and dice with great abandon, back in 
the day....

Sean:
There's really no trick to it. I keep a text file handy to mark down 
irrelevant posts on my subject. If a post cries out to be fixed, I'll 
fix it, but that should be far and few between, you'll go mad 
otherwise. For instance, discussions including Ron Weasley get 
included if the post is about Ron Weasley, not about Chapter 16 of 
GoF mentioning something Ron said and two paragraphs about how it 
makes Harry feel. OTOH, if you're coding for Chapter 16 of GoF and 
the thread is about vampire!Snape, is that at all relevant to
you?

IMHO you shouldn't be trying to code threads unless we are going to 
have a Fantastic Threads section (not a bad idea though), we're 
trying to keep the most relevant posts on a topic for useful 
searching.

Potioncat:
I'll take on Alastor Moody next. I already know there are some codes 
to Madeye that belong to Barty Jr. How would KellyK like me to recode 
those? Recode and add 5.6? or do not recode, but add 5.6 and a note?

Carolyn:
I think Sean is right. You have to have a certain amount of 
ruthlessness about this process, or we will never finish. The first 
and most important thing is only to think about the subject category 
you are dealing with, and that from the point of view of a reader 
coming to the topic expecting a coherent bunch of posts to look 
through, that doesn't diverge into other areas more than necessary.

I tend to read the category once through with great concentration, 
keeping notes as I go as to which ones don't fit the subject. 
Admittedly, it takes a little while to decide in your own mind what 
the core of the topic should be, and that may mean you get a quarter 
or a third in, and have to go back to the beginning and re-think 
what's for the chop and what isn't.

On some topics an obvious sub-category emerges, and I tend to use a 
highlighter on my handwritten list to indicate those as I go along.

Then, obviously, post your thoughts here to let people know what you 
are planning to do, request new sub-categories etc....and then do it.

As far as adding codes/recoding posts, I work on the basis of what's 
left on a post if I have to remove the code I am dealing with. If an 
obvious code has been left off, for whatever reason, then I add it 
and click 5.6, or if I spot an obvious error, I'll change it, but I 
don't primarily review for these problems. 

[Potioncat, your question about Alastor vs Barty Crouch Jr does 
probably come into the obvious error category, but be careful, as 
those posts often do deserve both codes as they are comparing what 
the real Alastor might have thought/done vs what the imposter does - 
some of them are fascinating bits of detective work].

This also means that when I go to actually implement my proposed 
changes, I am only dealing with posts where I think the code I am 
dealing with should be taken off. The ones that I leave as ok don't 
really get their coding reviewed again, unless I had marked it on my 
list as a really glaring error to address.

Remember to properly reject a post if there is no code left once you 
have removed your subject code.

On the definitions side, I am going to compile a list of what people 
have decided so far on the categories we have dealt with, but when we 
are reporting on a category it would be a good idea to say what 
should *not* be included, as well as what it should be about.

Any help?
Carolyn