Update & catchup, Sunday 16th October

[carolynwhite2]

Dear AllSorry I have been so absent. I just cannot believe this job thing. It seems they want you to turn up every day..is this normal? Doesn't half take up a lot of time when I could be doing useful things like re-reading Macbeth, in order to respond to Talisman's fascinating new theory. Otherwise I've been struggling for months now sorting through a mass of files which were turfed out of my office when it was re-decorated back in the summer. I was determined not to put anything back that hadn't been weeded through. Anyone else this mad? I've been finding 1970s knitting patterns and yarn catalogues. ::group collectively boggles at the idea that I can knit:: Well, I can. Just not for babies, ok? Creative, *designer* knits... PROGRESS:We've now done another 5 review groups, taking us up to 84 out of 106 review sections, . Two further sections are very nearly finished, apart from some final sub-sections which need completing, as follows: Group 1: Good vs evil (1.1.1.1 -1.1.1.5)Dicey did a lot of this, but when I asked: > When you tackled the Good n'evil section, did you include in your
> review the sub-sections on religious influences, Wicca, Redemption and the theory LAMBASTING ?

she replied offlist:I don't believe I did. I only looked at the one category: Good Vs. Evil. I did
not look at the subcategories. I don't recall reading about Wicca at any
point, nor the LAMBASTING theory, though I do know that from time to time I
added a category to a post if it seemed to merit such. CW: So, if anyone would like to pick up the sub-sections here, that would be great. Please note that Sean did 1.1.1.3 Religious banning. The other group which is nearly finished is Group 17 Back History, which Barry did most of, but sub-sections 1.2.8.8 and 1.2.8.9 were added to the group after he finished it. So, if anyone would like to pick them up, that would be another group finished. ********************Kelly:I would like to combine this category [1.2.13.6] with 1.2.13.10 Astrology (rename Stars and Astrology?), since star symbolism almost always refers to astrology.  The two posts here were definitely astrology-based; I have marked them to be moved to 1.2.13.10.  CW - I don't have a problem combining stars and astrology - anyone else?? [Re Hans & section 1.2.13.8]Where did all those posts go?  Were they all rejected?  Or are they hiding in another category somewhere? CW - I ran my eye down the list and he is there, but he goes under a couple of different names. One is Ibot Bracchae-Breves, and the other is Ivan Vablatsky, plus Hans. However, his email address is always ibotsjfvxfst at y... Clearly multiple personality disorder is one of his numerous problems.. [re Numbers sub-categories]Pending group decision, I'd like to trash the subcategories altogether and just put everything (only 22 posts total) in 1.2.13.11. CW - I would be happy to do this - anyone else??***************Ginger:Ginger returns from the family reunion, recovers from the ensuing 
illness, and gets back to work. C - sympathies; any family reunion brings me out in hives <g> ************** Debbie:"Hello? Anyone around? I'm back from TWC, fresh and invigorated 
from hours of canon discussion. Having carefully chosen to attend 
programming that corresponded to my own review sections, I'm sure 
there will be no problem ::cough cough:: approving these few little expenses

What? That's not enough to justify approval? But TWH motivated me 
to complete lots of cataloguing this week! Seen in that light, 
surely Miss Havisham will agree that these are reimbursable 
expenses . . . .  CW: Welcome back Debbie (and Anne). Trust there was more light than heat? All expense claims are going through on the nod at the moment, in the hope that you never discover how I'm fiddling the books. Oh, the embezzlement you can get up to using virtual galleons. What, you want paying in *dollars*...oh.  Debbie:I want to tweak the category definitions, but I'm not sure where to do it. In the three databases which break down each subcategory? This hasn't been updated to reflect all the shifting we've done with some of these categories. Shall I do it?
 CW: Yes, there are in fact four databases. Please could you tidy up any incorrect references that have moved on since they were uploaded. Also, when you change a definition, put 'Debbie/edited' in the far right hand column so we can see which have been changed? I plan to go through those four databases in one go, transferring the changed definitions to the live dbase. Don't want to do it bit by bit or I will never know which ones I've done. ***********
CW:
> Also, I wondered if you had made any progress on Mrs
> Figg, which I think you were going to take a look at?
 Dicentra:
I got about halfway through the category, and found that there was little
repetition or fatuous posting in the category. Consequently, I deleted few
posts.  CW - I think I would still rather this category was completely looked through before signing it off, if anyone would like to look at it (it's quite a short one). ***********Ginger:
I found this post. It was uncoded, so I thought I'd take a look at
it. Usually if I find one, I just do it and go on with things, but
this one is a multi-post and quite long. C - I didn't see anything that should be especially coded, though it was a good guess about Tom becoming Riddle. ******** Ginger:I've looked at the Households and Families posts, and I must say they are a hodge-podge.  So I was wondering, what was the original idea behind this category? Do the posts now contained herein reflect this idea? Have new categories been added that makes this one redundant? There are
currently 50 posts. CW - I am pleased to say that this category was all Barry's idea. The original point, IIRC, was to have a place that you could put posts that talked about households as a socio-economic unit. How big families were, how they functioned in WW society. I see Anne thinks there is some merit in what's got in there, so will leave it to your excellent judgement as to what should be kicked out.. CarolynApologising yet again for absences, but thinking the sound of Anne's voice at the bottom of a tin can was a hoot. [Elsewhere we've been experimenting with VOIP phone calls - PC to PC. Free with Yahoo Messenger now. Only snag is, although I can hear people, I cannot get my microphone to transmit my voice as yet. I'm working on it - just think, I could really bark down the megaphone, for real!!]  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20051016/5ba9536a/attachment.html>