[HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: Hello everyone/Filch

[Ginger]

Jen Reese <stevejjen at earthlink.net> wrote:
Jen:
> In theory I agree completely with Carolyn, that in reviewing posts 
> we shouldn't presume to know more than another coder would know 
> about his/her section and make unilateral decisions. But in 
> principle ....

Responding to my own post. What I meant here was agreeing with 
Carolyn in theory but not in 'practice'. Just to reiterate, we don't 
know where some people are in their reveiws, and I *should* only 
review and un-code the category I'm in. But in reality it's 
difficult to leave a post a post alone when I know it may not be 
reviewed by launch time.  Esp. if it doesn't look coded correctly, 
is overcoded, or is in need of rejection. I'm placing my subjective 
view on the posts without looking at the category, true. The 
alternative seems to be letting the posts languish until they're 
reviewed. 

But others may not agree with this and if so, I'll stop un-coding 
anything but my own category when reviewing.

Ginger adds:  I did quite a bit of uncoding of others when I did ships.  If I had 25 posts that say that Ron is jealous of Krum that were coded to ships, Ron, Herm and Krum, and I kept, say, 7 of them, I totally rejected the others, including the Ron, Herm, and Krum categories.  If I knew it had been said there 25 times, why not make it 7?  

The only things I uncoded were obvious errors.  Like a code to Snape in one of those R/K/H posts where he wasn't even alluded to.  The check was a mistake.

This was, however, the exception, not the rule.

Ginger, gonna be late for work if she doesn't get moving!


		
---------------------------------
Do You Yahoo!?
 Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20050530/8d1ec773/attachment.html>