Replies

[carolynwhite2]

 Talisman:
I've finished coding posts 42601-42700. 48 Rejects. Lots of 
erroneous repetative blather about what Avadra Kedavra 
means /erroneous and repetative blather re Figg is a polyjuiced 
witch /erroneous repetative blather re Snape was in Ravenclaw ... 
etc.


Regarding 3.09.2. Unforgivable Curses I propose the follwing 
definition:


C: Assuming this means you would like some more (?): 43401-43500
And your proposed amendment looks fine to me. 


************************************* 

Potioncat:
It isn't a filk, but the entire time I was reviewing Timelines, the 
tune from an old sitcom kept playing in my head:
"It's about time, it's about space, about two men in the strangest 
place..."

C: I'm no filker, as everyone knows, but this reminded me that there 
is a new series of Dr Who starting Saturday. Do you all know it 
outside the UK? Timelords, the Tardis, Cybermen and Daleks? Cult 
watching when I was young, with all the special effects made out of 
cardboard boxes and sink plungers more or less. Bet the new series 
ruins it all...

> KathyW:
> Comparing WW to Muggle 1.2.9.3 was 33 now 0>
> Carolyn:
> Where did the rest get put? I was interpreting this code as 
> difficulties in making JKR's and RL timelines agree. Are these now 
in section 1.2.9.4?

KW: Yes. But I don't want to do away with it until I really look at 
1.2.9.4. If we keep it, I'd like to change it to Comparing WW to Real 
World



C: Am I right in thinking that you don't need me to make any changes 
to any of the timeline headings as yet?

&..and wondering vaguely what the Sherwood Schwartz jinx is ..

********************
Sean:
42701-42800
scratch that batch :)

Talisman, you're a bad influence: 32 rejects in this lot :) 

STILL no broadband. More posts please!

Carolyn:
I'm finding it quite useful to do a bit of coding and a bit of 
reviewing together. It really makes you mean about categories, or 
whether to code at all. 

But I trust that people are looking back at the discussions we've 
had, and thinking what is supposed to be in a section? I am going to 
take some time tonight to review my own definitions, and make sure 
they are up to date.

Sean - some more posts: 43501-43600

I am only doling them out in small chunks because I think it is quite 
important to get different people to work on different parts of 
threads. Avoids bias, enables sharing of opinions on how things ought 
to be coded.