UPDATE, Sunday, March 6th

[potioncat]

> REJECT/NON-REJECT status
> It's been a while since I combed through for these, so they are 
> higher than usual. Erm, Potioncat..what can I say (!). I think this 
> number must be related to a section you sorted out and forgot to 
> finish or something....

> Potioncat: 34124, 14988, 18643, 28690, 28691, 36973, 37535, 32362, 
> 39614, 32632, 35722, 36671, 28304, 28398, 36671, 29960, 28360, 27750


KathyW.
Hmmm. I can't be the only one, but it appears I am. See, I told you I 
could take something simple and make it complicated. In looking at a 
few of these, here is what's going on: 

In reviewing McGonagall, I've determined these posts ought to be 
rejected. However, they have codes that "belong" to other reviewers. 
Some of these I'm sure will agree and maybe for a few, the post will 
earn a "keep" status. So I've removed the McGonagall code, added both 
5.6 and reject.

Where the post was good, but not really about McGonagall I only 
removed the McGonagall code and did not add reject. 

Where a previous coder had checked reject & 5.6 leaving only 
McGonagall, I completly rejected it. Or if an unclaimed catagory 
remainded, I also went ahead and rejected it.

So...how should I proceed both with these posts and the ones I'm 
about to tackle?

Kathy W.