The management challenge/multiple posts/character's ages & Sean

[Jen Reese]

> Ginger:  
> I code multiples as I would if each section was a seperate post.
> If I only code one part, then I only code one.  If I code more,
> then so be it.  I hit "multiple post" regardless.  The only time I
> don't is if there is nothing new in any section and I am rejecting
> the whole thing.  Which happens.  Depending on the topics.
 
> Carolyn:
> I think Ginger has the right approach. You need to tackle each 
> section of a multiple individually, and assess if it deserves a
> code. I have to admit that I am quite hard on them now, as Rita
> does repeat herself and has been posting almost from the 
> beginning. However, I admit to enjoying her flights of fancy, so
> if she accidentally bases something on canon (an oversight on her
> part usually), I let it through. 

Jen: That works for me. I've still been trying to code the bulk of 
the post, but this approach is better. Well, except for the end-user 
who has to scroll through the entire post to find the one tidbit 
coded to a category, but they can just pass it by if it's not worth 
the time. 

OK, so for now I won't do anything with the Multiple section, 
although we may end up having to weed through there eventually. 
There are 546 posts at the moment in that category, and using 
Ginger's idea, there are sure to be many in need of trimming. But 
it's not a priority at the moment. I'll continue on with the GOF 
review, then Characterization and if I have steam left, the Multiple 
category.

Carolyn:
> I would want to avoid any individual poster getting their own
> named section, as there is no need anyway - people will be able to
> search on any named poster, right across the database and get all
> the person's posts that we have decided to keep. >

Jen: I didn't actually want to name the Multiple category after 
Catlady, b/c Amy Z. and a few others consistently write multiples as 
well. The idea was to leave many multiples coded *only* to the 
Multiple category if they offered some tidbits of wisdom but weren't 
really candidates for either coding to the main sections or 
rejecting. But I think Ginger's plan is actually the best way to 
handle it.

Jen: 
> So then you would just switch the codes to these:
> 
> 1.2.11.9 Calculating Weasley Ages
> 1.2.11.10 Calculating Students' Ages
> 1.2.11.11 Calaculating Adult Ages

Carolyn:
> Please note that by implementing this suggestion I will have to re-
> number all the succeeding sections ....

Jen: Ack, is there a better way? ....Oh dear, just checked the 
database and see you've already changed things. My, you are speedy 
aren't you? 

Sean: 
> I must apologize for my relative absence for the last few weeks:
> the unexpected death of my landlord and change as carer has thrown
> my life into chaos and deep sadness, and not even the literary
> smell of burning Havisham can alter the fact that my circumstances
> are decidedly unstable. 

Jen: Sean, I'm so sorry for the upheaval in your life and glad to 
see you back at the same time. Somehow the balance wasn't the same 
without the penguin around. ;)

Jen, back to the salt mines to see if she can show up Miss Havisham 
and her spotless work ethic. hehehe.....