Hello everyone/Filch

[carolynwhite2]

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Ginger <quigonginger at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> Madga's observations:
> 
> 1.  People who don't snip properly or adequately (or - especially - 
at 
> all) should die.  Period.
> 
> Ginger: Amen to that.  Same goes for people who just start in with 
their part of the post with no break from what they are quoting.  And 
poepel hoo dont uze gud speling.

Carolyn:
A lot of people should die. Period. So far we have killed over 30000 
of their effusions, and counting. Keep up the good work.


> 
> 2.  Some posts seem to have been coded just because a character's 
name 
> is mentioned in it.  Should I just worry about Filch codes and 
ignore 
> the others?
> 
> Ginger:  I can tell you only what I did when reviewing:  Worry only 
about your code (Filch) and let the others hang (unless you feel 
someone hit a wrong key by mistake-it happens).  If it's Filchy, keep 
it, if not, uncode.  Back in my early days of coding, I wanted to be 
a thourough little coder and hit everything that was mentioned in a 
post.  I have now seen the grave error of my ways.  Don't be afraid 
to uncode.

Carolyn:
Yes, this is an important principle and why I thought you should 
start with a review section rather than leap into coding. You should 
mark to remove the Filch code from any posts where he is not the main 
subject, but has just been clicked in passing because he got a 
mention.

However, it is hard to judge the relevance of other codes when you 
are concentrating on just one category, so on the whole I would leave 
them unless it seems obvious that they should not be there. The 
problem is that someone else reviewing for say, Snape, might want to 
keep something that is otherwise mainly about Filch just to preserve 
the run of a thread, or simply for the light it sheds on Snape. You 
just can't tell, unless you are reading all the Snape posts and by 
that point are thoroughly sick of all Snape+Filch speculations.

So, unless very sure, don't try and assess any other categories other 
than the one you are immediately dealing with.



> 
> 3.  Let's say someone asks a question and three people give pretty 
> much the same answer.  Just pick the best (IMO) answer? (I assume 
yes.)
> 
> Ginger:  You got it.  I reviewed the Ship categories.  There is we 
27 people saying the same thing.
> 

Carolyn:
Yes, you can be fairly brutal in doing this. As you go on, you look 
more and more carefully for the posts that say something different, 
put a new spin on an old question. Jungle justice - those that said 
it first tend to keep the glory, others have to be better to be kept.

However, having said this, you might decide to keep an entire new 
thread on an old topic just because it winds its way to some 
different conclusions, is simply funnier, cleverer and better put 
because of the people involved second (or zillionth) time round. 


> 4.  If someone answers a question with a keeper answer, should the 
> post asking the question be kept too for consistency?  (I assume 
no, 
> but just checking.)
> 
> Ginger: Again, I can only answer for what I do, but if the question 
(or a reasonable amount thereof) appears in the answering post, 
delete the question.  I got rid of tons of shop posts this way.  It 
keeps things managable.  Of course, if the question post also 
contains keeper stuff, then keep it.
> 
Carolyn:
Yes, try and do this wherever possible, as it cuts out a lot of 
repetition.


> Welcome aboard, Magda, we're glad to have you!  Your turn to bring 
treats (hint: Carolyn likes alcohol).
> 

Trust me, it's the only way to approach cataloguing. Considered 
soberly, the full madness of the project is somewhat daunting.