From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sat Apr  1 21:32:10 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 21:32:10 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
Message-ID: <e0mrgq+9hs5@eGroups.com>

Ok, I've been absent a while, but just trying to catch up on one or 
two things, starting with our man Snape. I went back and looked at 
how our discussions went, and below is a summary of the main posts.

I quite like the idea of creating 'pro' and 'anti' buttons, to be 
clicked in addition to whatever main topic we are placing a post 
into. That way you would be able to pull up all the criticisms and 
all the appreciative purring in one place, though they would be very 
big categories probably.

So, what do we think of:

1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
2.Young Snape & MWPP
3.Who is Snape working for?
4.Snape & love
5.Vampire/bat/animagus!Snape 
6. Snape + Harry 
7. Snape + teaching style
8. Snape as a literary construct/character

There were two other suggestions:

TBAYS - I'm not in favour of having a separate Snape TBay section, as 
they should already be coded to TBAY anyway, and as you know, I'm in 
favour of finding them within specific topics, as a different kind of 
commentary but nevertheless alongside normal posts.

Significant Scenes - I'm a bit concerned about this one in case it 
doubles up on our various other significant scene sections, eg the 
two Shrieking Shacks etc. However, do we think there are some 
specifically-Snape scenes which don't yet have sub-sections of their 
own, and which could become sub-categories?

Votes please on the sections, and I'll get them created, so those 
that want to dive into the Snape section using Debbie's dbase can do 
so.

Carolyn

___________________________________________________________
CW made the following category suggestions in:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/message/2521

1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
Not related to plot incidents; reviewing what we know of him as a 
person, including his childhood

2.Young Snape & MWPP
Discussions of Snape at school with James, Sirius, Lupin and Peter 
including analyses of Shrieking Shack 

3.Who is Snape working for?
Analyses of motives for Snape working for either Voldemort or 
Dumbledore or both, including possible changes of allegiance, and 
analyses of Shrieking Shack II and Graveyard rebirth

4.Snape & love 
All theories about who he may have loved ranging from Lily, through 
Mrs Norris, Florence, Bellatrix and Narcissa

5.Vampire/bat animagus!Snape 
Allegations that Snape is some kind of animagi or half-human creature

& asked whether we needed:

6. Snape + Harry 

7. Snape + teaching style

8. Snape as a literary construct/character (this might be for fan 
response/JKR's ambivalent response to same)

Talisman made the following suggestions:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/message/2529


Pro/Anti
Character Analysis
Whose Man?
Young Snape
Snape and Love
Vampire/BatAnimagus
TBAYS
Significant Scenes

Jen responded:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/message/2574

Anne responded:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/message/2589

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Catalogue/message/2595

And Debbie created the database 'Snip, Snap, Snape'...









From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sat Apr  1 21:37:43 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 21:37:43 -0000
Subject: report and suggestion/Relationship with Muggle world
In-Reply-To: <dv42h9+bn5o@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0mrr7+4jum@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "quigonginger" 
<quigonginger at ...> wrote:
> 
> In tackling this massive category, I divided the posts into 4 
> categories:  Family (includes Muggle-born students and mixed 
> marriages), Culture (indludes technology, dress, language, 
> education...), History/Politics (includes government, but not the 
> Political Comparisons, which is already a sub-category), and Other.
> Other is a really wide category.
> 
> I propose that we make these sub-categories, in addition to the PC 
> category (which I now have to re-review as there were many posts 
that 
> I put there whilst weeding the main category).
> 
> If we did that, Other would just be the main heading.
> 
> The posts would stand as follows:
> Main: 49
> Family: 63
> Culture: 121
> History/Politics: 107
> Political Comparisons: about 50 at this time, but still to be re-
> reviewed.  Should only change by a few.
> 
> There are a handful (maybe a half dozen) that overlap between these 
> sub-heads.
> 
> I have, of course, taken notes and could quickly (in a few hours) 
put 
> them in their correct locations should we decide to go this route.
> 
> What say ye?

Ginger, multiple apologies for not having actioned this before. I 
will set up the categories straightaway. You want to have both 
History/Politics, and the sub-category 'Political Comparisons' ? Let 
me know if you want to adjust this.

Carolyn







From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sat Apr  1 21:44:19 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sat, 01 Apr 2006 21:44:19 -0000
Subject: Review of 3.8.4.1 Memory Charms
In-Reply-To: <e06l8b+m4l4@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0ms7j+78rb@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kakearney at ...> 
wrote:
>
> I just went to update this category description in the database, and
> saw that KathyK is listed as the reviewer for all the 3.8.4
> subcategories, although she isn't listed there in the allocation
> database.  Kathy, have you done anything with these categories
> already?  If not, should I go ahead and change those to me?  
> 
> -Kelly
>

Kelly, yes, please go ahead and change those categories into your name. 
KathyK isn't active right now :(

I should have changed both databases to reflect this, apologies.

Carolyn






From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Sat Apr  1 22:29:29 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 14:29:29 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: Relationship with Muggle world and Snape
In-Reply-To: <e0mrr7+4jum@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060401222929.42615.qmail@web30205.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


    Carolyn wrote:
  Ginger, multiple apologies for not having actioned this before. I 
will set up the categories straightaway. You want to have both 
History/Politics, and the sub-category 'Political Comparisons' ? Let 
me know if you want to adjust this.

  Ginger:
  No apologies needed.  You were sick and busy.
    Yes, I want both H/P and PC.  They are a bit similar, but there is enough difference and enough posts to merit both sections.  
   
  Basicly, H/P is about the relationship with the MW in the fictional setting, and PC is about how it compares to actual RL stuff.  
   
  H/P covers things like comparing the Apparation age to that of driving age, how a Wizard would go about getting a license to drive a Muggle car, the ethics of obliviation...things like that.
   
  The PC category is mostly comparisons of the WW situation to Hitler, Northern Ireland...things like that.
   
  Hope that makes that clear.  I'll do definitions if you feel they are needed.
   
  SNAPE:
  Are you sure we should have a category under Snape entitled "Who is Snape working for"?  Shouldn't it be "For whom is Snape working"?
   
  As to the other categories, your suggestions sound fine, but I'm not sure what other scenes we would have.  It seems there's a scene whenever we see Snape :)  Occlumency might come into play there when we do #5.  
   
  TBAY would sure save us a lot of acronym room.  Maybe as a temporary setting to be gone through later?  

Ginger, finishing Myrtle and Ghosts today, dementors tomorrow, and then will be done with Spirits.

		
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2/min or less.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060401/f97a73dc/attachment.html>

From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr  2 01:39:11 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 01:39:11 -0000
Subject: Weasleys
Message-ID: <e0n9vv+hk8c@eGroups.com>

Finished! Was 325 now 191. I should have had a bigger weed wacker. 
Should I start on another dynamic category or start coding Snape?


In a different post  Ginger said:
 Ginger, finishing Myrtle and Ghosts today, dementors tomorrow, and 
then will be done with Spirits.

Potioncat,finishing Merlot and Grigio(sp?) today, demon rum tomorrow 
and then will be done with Spirits.





  






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr  2 02:02:00 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 02:02:00 -0000
Subject: Double Check
Message-ID: <e0nbao+agp7@eGroups.com>

Carolyn,
Did Kathy K review the Dursley category? I have a note that says so, 
but it isn't marked off.

Did someone review the Trio Dyanamic category? Was DD's age finished? 

These seem like random questions, but they are codes that are close 
together. Ones that I thought I recalled someone posting about...I 
guess I 'could' go look for myself....

I'm surprised that there are only around 30 posts in the Crouch family 
section. I wonder if it was created after most of the Crouch/theories 
came out? guess I'll find out soon enough. I glanced through the Potter 
section, not many there and it looks like I'll taking quite a few out.

Potioncat....wishing she did have some spirits...







From kking0731 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  2 02:11:41 2006
From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King)
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 21:11:41 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0mrgq+9hs5@eGroups.com>
References: <e0mrgq+9hs5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a1ee8d580604011811q5f0e9d42ne37148566e431afe@mail.gmail.com>

The original email contained an attachment of type "text/plain; charset=WINDOWS-1252" but we could not retrieve it via the Yahoo Groups API.
-------------- next part --------------
The original email contained an attachment of type "text/html; charset=WINDOWS-1252" but we could not retrieve it via the Yahoo Groups API.

From willsonkmom at msn.com  Sun Apr  2 02:19:36 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 02:19:36 -0000
Subject: Double Check
In-Reply-To: <e0nbao+agp7@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0ncbo+2obe@eGroups.com>

Kathy W. asked. 
> Did someone review the Trio Dyanamic category? Was DD's age finished? 
> 
> 
Kathy W. answered:
yes, according to post 2090, DD  and DD's age were finished.

But were some of the dynamic codes done under a family code and then re-
coded?...haven't managed to get back that far.

(I talk to myself at my other job too.)








From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  2 02:33:22 2006
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 02:33:22 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <a1ee8d580604011811q5f0e9d42ne37148566e431afe@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <e0nd5i+i51n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Kathy King" <kking0731 at ...>
wrote:
>
> Carolyn:
> 
> 
> 
> 4.Snape & love
> All theories about who he may have loved ranging from Lily, through
> Mrs Norris, Florence, Bellatrix and Narcissa
> 
> 
> 
> Snow:
> 
> 
> 
> Just to clarify this for myself in future coding endeavors, any of
the Snape
> loved Lily posts would belong under Snape & love unless the LOLLIPOP
acronym
> was mentioned in the post? Most of the posts I have read assume that
> LOLLIPOP represents Snape loved Lily so would we put them under both
> subcategory topics? I'm a bit confused on this one.


Anne:
The acronyms end up as subcodes below the categories where they best
fit.  So, LOLLIPOPS would be a subcode of Snape & Love -- and if a
post was all about LOLLIPOPS, you would code it to that category only.
 If it was also about other love theories for Snape, you'd code for
that also (assuming it's worth coding for the other sections at all,
of course).

As for the Snape category list, I like all eight of Carolyn's picks. 
I haven't looked at the posts in the category much at all, yet,
though, so I can't tell if Significant Scenes would be useful.

Anne







From kking0731 at gmail.com  Sun Apr  2 02:52:49 2006
From: kking0731 at gmail.com (Kathy King)
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 21:52:49 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0nd5i+i51n@eGroups.com>
References: <a1ee8d580604011811q5f0e9d42ne37148566e431afe@mail.gmail.com>
	 <e0nd5i+i51n@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <a1ee8d580604011852l66873263y2faf5b873e3f220@mail.gmail.com>

The original email contained an attachment of type "text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1" but we could not retrieve it via the Yahoo Groups API.
-------------- next part --------------
The original email contained an attachment of type "text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" but we could not retrieve it via the Yahoo Groups API.

From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Apr  2 04:40:52 2006
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 04:40:52 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0mrgq+9hs5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0nkkk+jgcg@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
<carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
>
> Ok, I've been absent a while, but just trying to catch up on one
> or two things, starting with our man Snape. I went back and looked
> at how our discussions went, and below is a summary of the main
> posts.

"Oh no, not here *too*!" Jen sighed. She decided to do some 
reviewing to get away from conversations about Snape, only to 
discover her fellow cataloguers immersed in a conversation about 
Snape.  

Since no one seemed to be talking about his teaching style, the 
Pensieve scene or (gack) Occlumency lessons, Jen decided it's safe 
to post. "It's better than a whack on the head with a rusty poker," 
Jen thought, wondering tangentially if Mrs. Cole would have survived 
her job without massive amounts of liquor.

CW: 
> I quite like the idea of creating 'pro' and 'anti' buttons, to be 
> clicked in addition to whatever main topic we are placing a post 
> into. That way you would be able to pull up all the criticisms and 
> all the appreciative purring in one place, though they would be
> very  big categories probably.

Jen: Fine by me if it's in addition to the other categories.



CW:
> 1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
> 2.Young Snape & MWPP
> 3.Who is Snape working for?
> 4.Snape & love
> 5.Vampire/bat/animagus!Snape 
> 6. Snape + Harry 
> 7. Snape + teaching style
> 8. Snape as a literary construct/character

Jen: Could 1 & 8 go together? Maybe we could call number 3 'Snape's 
loyalty'?

CW:
> TBAYS - I'm not in favour of having a separate Snape TBay section,
> as they should already be coded to TBAY anyway, and as you know,
> I'm in favour of finding them within specific topics, as a
> different kind of commentary but nevertheless alongside normal
> posts.

Jen: This one confused me. Does that mean we'll keep each separate 
TBAY acronym under the Snape heading as it is now or just fold them 
into each of the above categories? 


CW:
> Significant Scenes - I'm a bit concerned about this one in case it 
> doubles up on our various other significant scene sections, eg the 
> two Shrieking Shacks etc. However, do we think there are some 
> specifically-Snape scenes which don't yet have sub-sections of
> their own, and which could become sub-categories?

Jen: Somehow I think the Pensieve scene and Occlumency will end up 
with sections of their own under the 'significant scenes section' 
when we start coding OOTP. The tower as well. So I don't think there 
needs to be a section under Snape for these. 









From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Apr  2 11:49:39 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 11:49:39 -0000
Subject: OT WOMBATS - For sharing!
Message-ID: <e0odok+r8dn@eGroups.com>

I typed this up for another site, and thought you'd all like it too. 
Yep, Ginger (re your post on TOC), we are definitely all certifiable. 
What was that sign-off line that some listee used to use - 'Reality 
is for people who have no imagination' ?!

Just for the record, as of tomorrow I take over a ??m division, some 
13 direct reports plus  20 others in a virtual team, plus scary 
external industrial politics. And I spend my Sunday typing up Potter 
trivia..! It's a coping mechanism I tell myself.

But if I'm even slower responding to queries here than I have been 
recently, that's why. But won't let you down, this is all much more 
interesting than the job, trust me..

Carolyn
Trying to remember the plot she lost a long time ago

***********

PART ONE: MAGICAL LAW
 
1. Which Ministry of Magic Department(s) and/or committee(s) would 
you contact to resolve each of the following dilemmas?
 
Part 1
Your neighbour is concealing a stash of flying carpets, some of which 
he is allowing to fly loose around his back garden.
(a) Wizengamot
(b) Department of International Magical Cooperation
(c) Misuse of Muggle Artefacts office
(d) Obliviators
(e) All of the above
(f) None of the above
 
Part 2
Your friend C possesses a Muggle Penny Farthing (old bicycle) that 
has been enchanted to skim an inch above the ground, achieving speeds 
over 100mph. C did not personally enchant the Penny Farthing, never 
rides it and merely wishes to keep it 'for sentimental reasons' as it 
was her grandmothers.
(a) Department of Magical Transport
(b) Improper Use of Magic Office
(c) Obliviators
(d) Misuse of Muggle Artefacts Office
(e)Committee on Experimental Charms
(f) None of the above
 
Part 3
Your sixteen year old nephew, D, has hexed his seventeen year old 
sister, E. E has retaliated with a Stunning Spell that missed D and 
hit a Muggle motorist, who has smashed into a lamppost.
(a) Department of Magical Accidents and catastrophes
(b) Department of Magical Accidents and catastrophes and Oblivator 
Squad
(c) Department of Magical Accidents and catastrophes, Oblivator Squad 
and Improper Use of Magic Office
(d) Department of Magical Accidents and catastrophes, Oblivator 
Squad, Improper Use of Magic Office and Wizengamot

Part 4
Your friends wizard A and wizard B are in dispute over which of them 
owns a field in which Mooncalfs dance periodically. A accuses B of 
using a nightly Summoning charm to collect the precious Mooncalf dung 
which is rightfully A's.
(a)	Improper Use of Magic Office
(b)	Wizengamot
(c)	Pest Advisory Board
(d)	Improper Use of Magic Office and Wizengamot
(e)	Improper Use of Magic Office and Pest Advisory Board
(f)	Wizengamot and Pest Advisory Board

Part 5
Witch F fed love potion to a Muggle man, who has married her. When 
you went around with a wedding gift you discovered she is using him 
as an occasional table.
(a)	Auror Office
(b)	Misuse of Magic Office
(c)	Obliviators
(d)	Wizengamot
(e)	All of the above
(f)	None of the above

2. Which of the following should be most SEVERELY punished by the 
Wizengamot?
(a) The injury of three Muggles due to a poorly performed 
Forgetfulness Charm
(b) The death of a chicken due to a poorly aimed Bat-Bogey hex
(c) The use of the Cruciatus curse on a shark about to attack a Muggle
(d) The use of the Imperius curse on a Muggle mugger

3. Which of the following should receive the LIGHTEST punishment from 
the Wizengamot?
(a) Horns created accidentally on culprit's mother, caused by broken 
wand
(b) Jellylegs Jinx performed on threatening Muggle
(c) Breeding fanged Puffskeins
(d) Underage witch performs Cleaning Charms in privacy of own home

4. Which of the following does NOT require a Ministry of Magic 
license?
(a) Crup ownership
(b) Sale of Magical Artefacts
(c) House-elf ownership
(d) Apparition

5. Which of the following wizarding laws, in your view, stands in 
most urgent need of change?
(a) The detection of under-age magic in all magic households 
(currently impossible)
(b) The ban on goblin possession of wands (ought to be lifted)
(c) The re-classification of centaurs and merpeople (ought to take 
their views into account)
(d) The guidelines on house-elf welfare (need to be enforced)
(e) Definitions of `muggle baiting' (need to be made less stringent)

PART TWO: MAGICAL TRANSPORT

6. Which mode of transportation would you advise for a young mother 
travelling with one-year old twins with a low boredom threshold, her 
grandmother, who suffers from severe motion sickness, and her 
husband, who has never mastered the three `D's' ?

(a)	Apparition
(b)	Broomsticks
(c)	Floo powder
(d)	Knight bus
(e)	Portkey

7. Which of the following unorthodox  means of transport is 
considered the most serious breach of the International Statute of 
Secrecy

(a)	Thestrals
(b)	Abraxan horse-drawn giant carriages
(c)	Hippogriff
(d)	Flying muggle vehicle (eg, car, motorcycle)
(e)	Underwater ship

8. Which mode(s) of transportation could you use to reach/enter each 
of the following wizarding institutions?

Part 1 Azkaban
(a)	Brooms
(b)	Brooms/floo powder
(c)	Brooms/Knight bus
(d)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus
(e)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus/Apparition

Part 2 Gringotts
(a)	Brooms
(b)	Brooms/floo powder
(c)	Brooms/Knight bus
(d)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus
(e)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus/Apparition

Part 3 Hogwarts
(a)	Brooms
(b)	Brooms/floo powder
(c)	Brooms/Knight bus
(d)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus
(e)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus/Apparition

Part 4 Ministry of Magic
(a)	Brooms
(b)	Brooms/floo powder
(c)	Brooms/Knight bus
(d)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus
(e)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus/Apparition

Part 5 St Mungos
(a)	Brooms
(b)	Brooms/floo powder
(c)	Brooms/Knight bus
(d)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus
(e)	Brooms/Floo powder/Knight bus/Apparition

PART THREE: EVERYDAY MAGIC

9. Which of the following would, in your opinion, provide the best 
security for a convention of broomstick salesman in a large, Fire-
bolt shaped marquee?

(a)	Fidelius Charm
(b)	Muggle-repelling charm
(c)	Confundus charm
(d)	Disillusionment charm
(e)	Unplottable marquee
(f)	Forgetfulness charm
(g)	Giant three-headed dog

10. Which of the following should not be used in cooking?

(a)	Alihotsy leaves
(b)	Bubotuber pus
(c)	Daisy roots
(d)	Dragon blood
(e)	Mandrake leaves
(f)	Murtlap tentacles
(g)	Shrake
11. Which of the following would most effectively clean up a spillage 
of wart cap powder?

(a)	Deletrius
(b)	Diffindo
(c)	Episkey
(d)	Evanesco
(e)	Scourgify
(f)	Tergeo
(g)	Mrs Skower's All Purpose Magical Mess Remover

12. A doxy-bite can be healed most quickly and safely using:

(a)	Bubotuber pus
(b)	Bundimen secretion
(c)	Dittany
(d)	Dr Ubbly's Oblivius Unction
(e)	Murtlap essence
(f)	Reparo
(g)	Skele-gro
(h)	Spellotape

13. Which of the following commonly held wizarding beliefs is 
actually true?

(a)	If an inanimate object appears to think for itself, Dark 
Magic has been involved in its creation
(b)	The use of magic in front of a Muggle is prohibited unless 
the witch or wizard is under threat of personal injury
(c)	Releasing a Portkey before it has arrived will result in 
death or serious injury
(d)	`Finite Incatatum' should be used as a precaution when a 
Muggle rings the doorbell
(e)	Bad luck can be prevented by turning three times on the spot 
and deliberately splinching one's thumbs

PART FOUR: THE NATURAL WORLD

14. Which of the following small creatures would you CHOOSE to 
accompany you on a perilous journey?

(a)	Augurey
(b)	Crup
(c)	Jarvey
(d)	Kneazle
(e)	Murtlap
(f)	Niffler
(g)	Runespoor

15. Which of the following is NOT listed as a pest by the Pest 
Advisory Board?

(a)	Bundimen
(b)	Chizpurfle
(c)	Doxy
(d)	Gnome
(e)	Horklump
(f)	Knarl
(g)	Pixie

16. A dog acting in a suspiciously un-canine manner is most likely to 
be:

(a)	An animagus
(b)	A boggart
(c)	A Crup (or part Crup)
(d)	A grim
(e)	Imperius-ed
(f)	Magically trained
(g)	A Patronus

17. Which of the following plants has NO curative, restorative or 
protective properties?

(a)	Alihotsy shrub
(b)	Belladonna
(c)	Bubotuber
(d)	Snargluff tree
(e)	Venomous Tentacular
(f)	Wolfsbane
(g)	Whomping Willow







From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  2 17:14:24 2006
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 17:14:24 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0nkkk+jgcg@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0p0pg+3uil@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...> wrote:
 
> CW:
> > 1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
> > 2.Young Snape & MWPP
> > 3.Who is Snape working for?
> > 4.Snape & love
> > 5.Vampire/bat/animagus!Snape 
> > 6. Snape + Harry 
> > 7. Snape + teaching style
> > 8. Snape as a literary construct/character
> 
> Jen: Could 1 & 8 go together? Maybe we could call number 3 'Snape's 
> loyalty'?

Anne:
The two are actually quite different. Category 1 is for examining his
character from within the story -- e.g. is he emotional, evil, nasty,
poetic, prejudiced?  Category 8 is more for literary criticism --
what's his function in the narrative? Is he a Byronic hero?  Things
like that, looking from without.

Anne








From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  2 17:37:57 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2006 10:37:57 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] OT WOMBATS - For sharing!
In-Reply-To: <e0odok+r8dn@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060402173757.78138.qmail@web30210.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Oh!  Not fair!  Not fair at all, I say!  What about those of us poor sods who had to sit the test without being able to look up the questions in advance?  We'll get a lower score!  What's the point of taking a test if you can't brag about your marks later?
   
  I protest!  What ever happened to the honour code?  Sure, all these 15-yr-old twits out there who've read the book once will be outscoring me.  
   
  I'm telling JKR on you.  Fraud!  Dishonesty!  I'm filing a grievance with Prof. Tofty.  Harrumph.  Next thing you know, they'll be condensing the classics into little pocket sized books so people don't actually have to read them for literature classes.  Not in my day did we do that.  No, sir!  We studied properly, we did.
   
  Kids nowdays.  It's a wonder we aren't all overtaken by the French.  Sad, sad state of affairs, indeed.
   
  Ginger, having sorted out the Rw/the MW, and now off to write definitions for the categories.  I think they need them.

			
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. PC-to-Phone calls for ridiculously low rates.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060402/a94ecadc/attachment.html>

From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Sun Apr  2 18:00:12 2006
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 18:00:12 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0p0pg+3uil@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0p3fc+8co9@eGroups.com>

> > CW:
> > > 1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
> > > 2.Young Snape & MWPP
> > > 3.Who is Snape working for?
> > > 4.Snape & love
> > > 5.Vampire/bat/animagus!Snape 
> > > 6. Snape + Harry 
> > > 7. Snape + teaching style
> > > 8. Snape as a literary construct/character
> > 
> > Jen: Could 1 & 8 go together? Maybe we could call number 
3 'Snape's 
> > loyalty'?

 
> Anne:
> The two are actually quite different. Category 1 is for examining 
his
> character from within the story -- e.g. is he emotional, evil, 
nasty,
> poetic, prejudiced?  Category 8 is more for literary criticism --
> what's his function in the narrative? Is he a Byronic hero?  Things
> like that, looking from without.


Jen: I didn't include my explanation for putting both those two 
together. First, I like reading about the character from both sides 
of the story at once, just as I still like the idea of not 
separating out the pro- and anti- posts (but accept being outvoted). 

I'm finding from doing Characterization that the character studies 
for the most part are coded to the individual character names 
instead of landing in the actual 'characterization' category. Some 
of the analysis from outside the story has ended up in 'originality 
and stereotypes' or other subs within the Characterization section, 
but they are all still coded to the character name as well. So by 
default the characters are being analyzed from both sides of the 
story within each of the individual categories. I just don't see why 
Snape should get his characterization sections separated if no one 
else does, as "he is neither special, nor important" in my book. ;)


Jen, FWIW 






From annemehr at yahoo.com  Sun Apr  2 22:13:28 2006
From: annemehr at yahoo.com (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 22:13:28 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0p3fc+8co9@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0pia8+rg7p@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...> wrote:
>
> > > CW:
> > > > 1.Severus Snape ? general character studies
<snip>
> > > > 8. Snape as a literary construct/character
> > > 
> > > Jen: Could 1 & 8 go together? Maybe we could call number 
> 3 'Snape's 
> > > loyalty'?
> 
>  
> > Anne:
> > The two are actually quite different.<snip>
> 
> 
> Jen: I didn't include my explanation for putting both those two 
> together. First, I like reading about the character from both sides 
> of the story at once, just as I still like the idea of not 
> separating out the pro- and anti- posts (but accept being outvoted). 
> 
> I'm finding from doing Characterization that the character studies 
> for the most part are coded to the individual character names 
> instead of landing in the actual 'characterization' category. Some 
> of the analysis from outside the story has ended up in 'originality 
> and stereotypes' or other subs within the Characterization section, 
> but they are all still coded to the character name as well. So by 
> default the characters are being analyzed from both sides of the 
> story within each of the individual categories. I just don't see why 
> Snape should get his characterization sections separated if no one 
> else does, as "he is neither special, nor important" in my book. ;)
> 
> 
> Jen, FWIW
>

Anne again:
Ah, I see what you mean.  It's not unique to Snape, though -- Harry
and Voldemort have "literary construct" sections too.  It's because
their categories were so huge, and we had to divide them up somehow.

Anne








From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  3 03:43:06 2006
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 03:43:06 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0pia8+rg7p@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0q5ka+hnj5@eGroups.com>

> Anne again:
> Ah, I see what you mean.  It's not unique to Snape, though -- Harry
> and Voldemort have "literary construct" sections too.  It's because
> their categories were so huge, and we had to divide them up somehow.

Jen: OK, I guess there's no way around it. When we start coding Snape, 
there may be sections clicked like 'characterization'; 'character 
development'; or 'originality and use of stereotypes'.  I suppose the 
best thing to do is convert these to one of the two Snape 
characterization codes, whichever is most fitting. It seems redundant 
to keep both sets of codes. People will figure out pretty quickly the 
biggest characters have their own sections. 

The only thing that seems inconsistent to me now is that DD doesn't 
have his own characterization codes? Is Boyd done with that section or 
will there be new sub-sections for DD when all is said and done? I'm 
guessing most of the characterization posts are in the big first 
category (Albus Dumbledore, 612 posts).

Jen, down to the last 200 posts in the 500+ 'originality and use of 
steretypes' section and making a note to self not to leave the biggest 
section for the end next time.






From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Mon Apr  3 11:01:04 2006
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 03 Apr 2006 11:01:04 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <e0q5ka+hnj5@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e0qv9g+r2hs@eGroups.com>

> Jen: OK, I guess there's no way around it. When we start coding
> Snape, there may be sections clicked 
> like 'characterization'; 'character development'; or 'originality
> and use of stereotypes'.  I suppose the best thing to do is convert
> these to one of the two Snape characterization codes, whichever is 
> most fitting. It seems redundant to keep both sets of codes. 

Answering myself here, I should have added: if the post talks about 
characterization in general and uses Snape as a specific example 
within the post, then a general characterization code and one specific 
to Snape would not be redundant.

Jen, who also talks to herself in various settings just like Potioncat.






From boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com  Mon Apr  3 22:04:34 2006
From: boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com (Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA})
Date: Mon, 3 Apr 2006 17:04:34 -0500
Subject: The Snape debate
Message-ID: <FDCCEEC6AAC8DD4AA2DD0C28E41D283201C2CE23@pepwmu00020.corp.pep.pvt>

I live!

Never did quite finish DD, but slogged through about 40,000 on last
check. Guess it's about time to get back to it.

As for characterization, surprisingly little on that topic for old
Dumbly. What there is would be found in the main heading for him, but
even the vast majority of posts were primarily treatises on his
agenda(s) and powers.

My vote is to leave that out of DD unless I spot a chunk of it in what's
left. Keep in mind that there has always been a significant difference
in how DD was discussed vs. more grey characters such as Snape and even
Harry. At least, that is, until we got to all the horcruci in a later
tale....

As for Snape, I leave it to the more informed Snapologists of our group.
Since his description and character are such fundamentally important
aspects of where we're headed, however, I would assume we'd want those
subcats available.

Boyd



From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Tue Apr  4 11:34:33 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 04:34:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: The Snape debate & dementors
In-Reply-To: <FDCCEEC6AAC8DD4AA2DD0C28E41D283201C2CE23@pepwmu00020.corp.pep.pvt>
Message-ID: <20060404113433.60934.qmail@web30215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



"Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" <boyd.t.smythe at fritolay.com> wrote:    I live!

  Ginger:
  Yay!  Boyd's back! Now it's party time.  Rejoicing!  Gladness!  Other good stuff!
   
  Now on to dementors.  
   
  As you may know, I am in the middle of reviewing dementors.  I have already done Azkaban and dementors, as well as the Magical illness...St. Mungo's category.
   
  I'd like a consensus on this:  My thought is to put posts about what happens to a person after the Kiss in the Illness/Mungo's category. 
   
  How the Kiss is administered would be under dementors, how the govt decided who should be Kissed would go under Azk/dementors, but discussions of what happens to the person who was Kissed really has more to do with the person and medical stuff than with the dementors, unless, of course, the post is discussing what happens to the soul of the person and the listee is wondering if that is how dementors breed or how often they have to eat or something like that, in which case it would remain under dementors.  Right?
   
  Let me know what you think.  I plan to rereview those 3 categories and sort out the finer points this weekend.
   
  Ginger, Queen of run-on sentances

		
---------------------------------
New Yahoo! Messenger with Voice. Call regular phones from your PC and save big.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060404/7e5d1ccc/attachment.html>

From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Tue Apr  4 21:24:02 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Tue, 04 Apr 2006 21:24:02 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate
In-Reply-To: <FDCCEEC6AAC8DD4AA2DD0C28E41D283201C2CE23@pepwmu00020.corp.pep.pvt>
Message-ID: <e0uo5i+bgvc@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Smythe, Boyd T {FLNA}" 
<boyd.t.smythe at ...> wrote:
>
> I live!
> 
> Never did quite finish DD, but slogged through about 40,000 on last
> check. Guess it's about time to get back to it.
> 

Bad!Boyd... a reply comes from the wilderness (I last emailed him in 
January).

There is something about this insane project that people just cannot 
stay away from (fortunately..).

Welcome back!

Carolyn






From stevejjen at earthlink.net  Wed Apr  5 03:15:49 2006
From: stevejjen at earthlink.net (Jen Reese)
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 03:15:49 -0000
Subject: The Snape debate & dementors
In-Reply-To: <20060404113433.60934.qmail@web30215.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e0vcp5+jg0f@eGroups.com>

>   Ginger:
>   Yay!  Boyd's back! Now it's party time.  Rejoicing!  Gladness!  
Other good stuff!

Jen: He might be an imposter. There was no music, no dancing, no 
polyester.....Nah, hey Boyd! It's been too long, thanks for clearing 
up the DD question.



Ginger:
>   How the Kiss is administered would be under dementors, how the 
govt decided who should be Kissed would go under Azk/dementors, but 
discussions of what happens to the person who was Kissed really has 
more to do with the person and medical stuff than with the 
dementors, unless, of course, the post is discussing what happens to 
the soul of the person and the listee is wondering if that is how 
dementors breed or how often they have to eat or something like 
that, in which case it would remain under dementors.  Right?
>    
>   Let me know what you think.  I plan to rereview those 3 
categories and sort out the finer points this weekend.


Jen: I thought we didn't know for sure what happens to people who 
are kissed? I mean, whether they go to St. Mungos. What if there's 
nothing that can be done for them except, you know, to sort of 
exist. Course Barty Crouch Jr. didn't have a home to go back to so 
maybe he is in St. Mungos. (Do you ever have moments when the 
absurdity of what you're writing about hits you full on?<g>).  
Having not illuminated that issue at all, I'll go along with 
whatever you think is best. There.








From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Wed Apr  5 12:32:07 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2006 05:32:07 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: The Snape debate & dementors
In-Reply-To: <e0vcp5+jg0f@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060405123207.64225.qmail@web30201.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


    
Jen: He might be an imposter. There was no music, no dancing, no 
polyester.....Nah, hey Boyd! It's been too long, thanks for clearing 
up the DD question.

Ginger:  
  My bad.  My light bulb burnt out and I thought it was a strobe light.

Jen: I thought we didn't know for sure what happens to people who 
are kissed? I mean, whether they go to St. Mungos. What if there's 
nothing that can be done for them except, you know, to sort of 
exist. Course Barty Crouch Jr. didn't have a home to go back to so 
maybe he is in St. Mungos. 
  (snip)
   
  Ginger:
  Actually, the whole category is Magical Injuries, Cures, Illnesses & St. Mungo's.
   
  It falls under a Magical Injury, of a sort.  There were Kissy posts there, and in dementors and in Azkaban/dementors, and I thought it would be nice to group them all together by topic depending what angle of the issue they were addressing.
   
  Just to note:  there was a mention or 2 of the Kiss in the Shipping posts, but I think they can stay there unless someone wants to go back and reread all the shipping posts.  My goodness, Miss, for someone who has been sick, you sure do duck quickly.
   
  Oh, yes, as long as I have your attention, Carolyn, I wrote up definitions for the new R w/ MW subcats and put them in the database where we have definitions.  You may peruse them at your leisure and let me know if they are clear enough.  Or if anyone else has questions, fire away.  The posts have been properly sorted, so that's that.  

Ginger, 
  Do a little dance, make a little love, get down tonight, get down tonight.  

		
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060405/6cc787f0/attachment.html>

From elfundeb at comcast.net  Sat Apr  8 18:51:34 2006
From: elfundeb at comcast.net (Debbie)
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 18:51:34 -0000
Subject: Werewolves
Message-ID: <e190nm+uciq@eGroups.com>

Whilst indulging in a fit of tax evasion, or rather tax return 
preparation avoidance (as tax evasion is illegal) last night, I 
finished going through the Werewolf category, trimming it from 150 
to 85 on my initial review.  But I might be able to trim it further 
if we can decide on a single home for certain topics which I've left 
alone for now:

1.  The functions of various government agencies (Werewolf Registry, 
Werewolf Support Services) and whether they help or repress 
werewolves).  Some of these posts are cross-coded to a government 
subcategory, but I'm inclined to leave them here.

2.  What is the meaning of "full moon", when does it occur, and when 
when werewolves transform, how long they remain werewolves?  Some of 
these posts are in Lycanthropy, some not.  Many (but not all) of 
these posts are discussions of Lupin's transformation in POA ch. 20 
and whether it is a flint.  I'm inclined to say these posts should 
be under Lycanthropy.

Thoughts?  I need ammunition in order to achieve my goal of a 50% 
overall reduction in Beings posts.

Debbie
who did the taxes this morning and owes a *lot* of money to the IRS











From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Sat Apr  8 19:04:09 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 12:04:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Werewolves
In-Reply-To: <e190nm+uciq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060408190409.75559.qmail@web30203.mail.mud.yahoo.com>



Debbie <elfundeb at comcast.net> wrote:    1.  The functions of various government agencies (Werewolf Registry, 
Werewolf Support Services) and whether they help or repress 
werewolves).  Some of these posts are cross-coded to a government 
subcategory, but I'm inclined to leave them here.

2.  What is the meaning of "full moon", when does it occur, and when 
when werewolves transform, how long they remain werewolves?  Some of 
these posts are in Lycanthropy, some not.  Many (but not all) of 
these posts are discussions of Lupin's transformation in POA ch. 20 
and whether it is a flint.  I'm inclined to say these posts should 
be under Lycanthropy.

  Ginger:
  I did lycanthropy.  You are right.  There are a lot of posts there about full moon times.  I think *when* a werewolf transforms (from or to) is a vital aspect of the illness, and does indeed belong there.  Whether or not it belongs in Werewolves is, of course, your call.  Should you wish to trim it, I don't think you'll remove a lot from the catalogue as a whole, just from your category.  
   
  I also did MOM departments, and there were a few mentions of the werewolf divisions.  As I recall, it was a sparse category to begin with.  On those posts, I'd recommend saving anything original that isn't coded somewhere else as I don't recall seeing very much in the govt cats.
   
  Debbie:
who did the taxes this morning and owes a *lot* of money to the IRS

Ginger:  
  I'm getting money back, but I sent it in and got it back because *blush* I forgot to enclose my W-2 forms.  I've been doing it by phone for so long that I just threw the 1040 in the envelope and sent it off.  How embarrassing.
   
  Ginger, trying to concentrate on dementors, and just not focusing this weekend.

		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1/min.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060408/313a1030/attachment.html>

From kakearney at gmail.com  Sun Apr  9 00:41:52 2006
From: kakearney at gmail.com (corinthum)
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 00:41:52 -0000
Subject: Werewolves
In-Reply-To: <e190nm+uciq@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e19l8g+nfom@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "Debbie" <elfundeb at ...> wrote:
>
> Whilst indulging in a fit of tax evasion, or rather tax return 
> preparation avoidance (as tax evasion is illegal) last night, I 
> finished going through the Werewolf category, trimming it from 150 
> to 85 on my initial review.  But I might be able to trim it further 
> if we can decide on a single home for certain topics which I've left 
> alone for now:
> 
> 1.  The functions of various government agencies (Werewolf Registry, 
> Werewolf Support Services) and whether they help or repress 
> werewolves).  Some of these posts are cross-coded to a government 
> subcategory, but I'm inclined to leave them here.
> 
> 2.  What is the meaning of "full moon", when does it occur, and when 
> when werewolves transform, how long they remain werewolves?  Some of 
> these posts are in Lycanthropy, some not.  Many (but not all) of 
> these posts are discussions of Lupin's transformation in POA ch. 20 
> and whether it is a flint.  I'm inclined to say these posts should 
> be under Lycanthropy.
> 
> Thoughts?  I need ammunition in order to achieve my goal of a 50% 
> overall reduction in Beings posts.

If you give me a day, we can also look at the overlap with the
Wolfsbane Potion category.  It only holds 59 posts right now, so I
should be able to do that tomorrow.  

 
> Debbie
> who did the taxes this morning and owes a *lot* of money to the IRS

Kelly, who despite everything didn't benefit from a single Hurricane
Katrina tax deduction.  Oh well, I'll take a wonderful insurance
company over some tax breaks any day.






From kakearney at gmail.com  Sun Apr  9 19:10:34 2006
From: kakearney at gmail.com (corinthum)
Date: Sun, 09 Apr 2006 19:10:34 -0000
Subject: 3.8.4.2 Wolfsbane Potion
Message-ID: <e1bm7a+f1cj@eGroups.com>

3.8.4.2 Wolfsbane Potion
------------------------
Originally: 59
Now: 44
  
Discussion of the potion... what's in it, how it works, required
dosage, inventor, side effects, etc.  Removed a few passing reference
posts and a few that were discussing events (specifcially, Shrieking
Shack II) with mention of the potion only as a plot device.

Regarding overlap with lycanthropy and werewolves, I think this
category was already pretty well distinguished from those two.  There
were a few posts cross-coded both here and in Lyncanthropy which
discussed possible reasons why Lupin's tranformation seemed delayed on
the SSII night, e.g. whether it was a side effect of regular Wolfsbane
use, or whether that was normal behavior for a werewolf.  I think
these can comfortably stay in both categories, so I left them alone.

-Kelly








From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 10 01:07:06 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 01:07:06 -0000
Subject: Spirits
Message-ID: <e1cb3q+mhls@eGroups.com>

Spirits is now done.  There are now 433 posts, with Dementors being 
the biggest category at 152. 

I am reversing my earlier decision.  Forget about any St. Mungo's 
crossover.  I re-looked at that category, and apparently when I 
reviewed it, I removed any Kiss referrences to the dementor category, 
so that is where they will stay.

In re-reviewing dementors, I realized that the vast majority of "what 
happens when someone is kissed" posts included the actual dementor 
angle, and there weren't enough posts just talking about the person 
to bother with the transfer.

So, Kiss posts remain under dementors.  Talking about the legality of 
the kiss is still under Azkaban and Dementors, where I think it 
should be, and there is a lot of crossover, with posts discussing 
both, but that's ok.  They fit.

<Heaves huge sigh> 

So that said, Spirits is done.

Um, is there anything else left to do before we start Snaping?  Does 
anyone have a stray category they'd like me to look at?  Is there a 
section that I didn't see that still needs review?

I'll just do laundry for now.
Ginger







From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Apr 11 13:20:52 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:20:52 -0000
Subject: stay categories was Re: Spirits
In-Reply-To: <e1cb3q+mhls@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e1gafk+57qf@eGroups.com>

 >Ginger wrote:
> Um, is there anything else left to do before we start Snaping?  Does 
> anyone have a stray category they'd like me to look at?  Is there a 
> section that I didn't see that still needs review?
> 
> I'll just do laundry for now.
> Ginger


Kathy W:
Sorry to say, there are still some sections under Group Dynamics that 
haven't been done.









From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Tue Apr 11 20:07:49 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 13:07:49 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] stray categories was Re: Spirits
In-Reply-To: <e1gafk+57qf@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060411200749.20989.qmail@web30214.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


    
Kathy W:
Sorry to say, there are still some sections under Group Dynamics that 
haven't been done.

Ginger:
  Whee!  Which one do you want me to take?  I'll have some time on Friday, then I am out of town for a couple of days, but will be back Sunday night, and can do some work then.  Nothing over 1000 posts, please.
   
  Ginger, who took the liberty of adding an r to the subject line.

		
---------------------------------
Blab-away for as little as 1/min. Make  PC-to-Phone Calls using Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060411/a51b7b19/attachment.html>

From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Apr 11 21:13:37 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 11 Apr 2006 21:13:37 -0000
Subject: stray categories was Re: Spirits
In-Reply-To: <20060411200749.20989.qmail@web30214.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e1h661+7r9e@eGroups.com>

 
> Ginger:
>   Whee!  Which one do you want me to take?  I'll have some time on 
Friday, then I am out of town for a couple of days, but will be back 
Sunday night, and can do some work then.  Nothing over 1000 posts, 
please.


Kathy W, in full pirate costume replies:

The Dursleys, Crouches and Trio are waiting. Take your pick.

Thanks for the "R", matey.







From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Wed Apr 12 11:43:33 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Wed, 12 Apr 2006 04:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] stray categories was Re: Spirits
In-Reply-To: <e1h661+7r9e@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060412114333.65629.qmail@web30211.mail.mud.yahoo.com>


    Kathy W, in full pirate costume replies:

The Dursleys, Crouches and Trio are waiting. Take your pick.

Thanks for the "R", matey.

Gingerrrrrrrrrr:  
  Not a problem.
    I put myself down for the Dursleys.
   
  The other two were...um, daunting.
   
  On the other hand, when you get to the Crouch Novena, just say, "yup, that belongs here" and skip it.  We should have them memorized by this point.
   
  Just to vent my spleen and make all of us feel superior:
   
  There is a note at work saying:
  We will be (blah, blah, blah).
  We are doing this because (blah, blah, blah).
  Thank you for your cooperation in this manner.
   
  In just what manner do they think we will be cooperating?  
   
  Ginger, betting her superior couldn't get an EE on his WOMBATs.

		
---------------------------------
Love cheap thrills? Enjoy PC-to-Phone  calls to 30+ countries for just 2/min with Yahoo! Messenger with Voice.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060412/e7e0266c/attachment.html>

From willsonkmom at msn.com  Mon Apr 17 11:30:26 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 11:30:26 -0000
Subject: Site down?
Message-ID: <e1vu8i+tbk0@eGroups.com>

Is the site down? I can't get in to review the Crouches.

Kathy W






From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 17 22:15:39 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (Ginger)
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:15:39 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [HPFGU-Catalogue] Site down?
In-Reply-To: <e1vu8i+tbk0@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <20060417221539.80233.qmail@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

  Is the site down? I can't get in to review the Crouches.

Kathy W

  Ginger says:
  I tried to get in to do the Dursleys on Fri. and Sun. and couldn't get in then either.  I thought it was just me.
   
  Ginger

		
---------------------------------
Talk is cheap. Use Yahoo! Messenger to make PC-to-Phone calls.  Great rates starting at 1/min.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://archive.hpfgu.org/pipermail/hpfgu-catalogue/attachments/20060417/a55b87a6/attachment.html>

From kakearney at gmail.com  Tue Apr 18 00:57:14 2006
From: kakearney at gmail.com (corinthum)
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 00:57:14 -0000
Subject: Site down?
In-Reply-To: <20060417221539.80233.qmail@web30208.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <e21dha+gb0r@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Ginger <quigonginger at ...> wrote:
>
>   Is the site down? I can't get in to review the Crouches.
> 
> Kathy W
> 
>   Ginger says:
>   I tried to get in to do the Dursleys on Fri. and Sun. and couldn't
get in then either.  I thought it was just me.
>    
>   Ginger

No luck here either.

-Kelly






From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Tue Apr 18 18:58:56 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2006 18:58:56 -0000
Subject: Site down?
In-Reply-To: <e21dha+gb0r@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e23ctg+t220@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kakearney at ...> 
wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Ginger <quigonginger@> wrote:
> >
> >   Is the site down? I can't get in to review the Crouches.
> > 
> > Kathy W
> > 
> >   Ginger says:
> >   I tried to get in to do the Dursleys on Fri. and Sun. and couldn't
> get in then either.  I thought it was just me.
> >    
> >   Ginger
> 
> No luck here either.
> 
> -Kelly
>

Nor me.. have emailed Paul. Sorry not to have been around recently..
Will try to catch up soonest. Job dreadful.

Cx






From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Wed Apr 19 08:07:55 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2006 08:07:55 -0000
Subject: Site down?/Back up now
In-Reply-To: <e23ctg+t220@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e24r4r+v28n@eGroups.com>

--- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "carolynwhite2" 
<carolynwhite2 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, "corinthum" <kakearney@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In HPFGU-Catalogue at yahoogroups.com, Ginger <quigonginger@> 
wrote:
> > >
> > >   Is the site down? I can't get in to review the Crouches.
> > > 
> > > Kathy W
> > > 
> > >   Ginger says:
> > >   I tried to get in to do the Dursleys on Fri. and Sun. and 
couldn't
> > get in then either.  I thought it was just me.
> > >    
> > >   Ginger
> > 
> > No luck here either.
> > 
> > -Kelly
> >
> 
> Nor me.. have emailed Paul. Sorry not to have been around 
recently..
> Will try to catch up soonest. Job dreadful.
> 
> Cx
>

Further, from Paul:

The server was power cycled last week.  The website wasn't set to
start back up.  I've started it again and made it start should the
server be cycled again.

Paul






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Thu Apr 20 13:58:59 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2006 13:58:59 -0000
Subject: Crouches
Message-ID: <e28433+h6tk@eGroups.com>

Kathy W, hard at work here...

I'm looking over the Crouch dynamic category....how would you 
punctuate that? It looks like the Crouches have a dynamic 
category...OK, the 'Crouch dynamic' Category...where was I...


Any way, I came across this post that had me in tears of laughter. 
Read the whole post.


Post 5: 
Number: 34846 (GROUP) 
From: judyserenity <judyshapiro at e> 
Date: Thu Feb 07, 2002 05:25:48 PM 
Subject: Re: the Crouch Family -- An Embarassing Correction 
Categories: 2.1.2 Barty Crouch Sr
2.10.4 Barty Crouch Jr
1.2.11.6 Crouches 
 
In my last post, I said:

> Also, Junior said his dad rescued him out of love for Mrs. Crouch, 
> who *did* her son. So, Crouch Sr.'s rescue of his son was done out 
> of love....

Before we get into any long discusions of Barty Jr.'s oedipal 
complex, 
let me say that was a typo. I intended to say that Mrs. Crouch *did 
love* her son, not that she *did* her son. I meant "love" in the 
maternal sense, of course. 

(Sheesh! I said Mrs. Crouch "did" her son, right after Cindy 
speculates on whether Snape ever "had" Lily. What is this list coming 
to?!) 

-- Judy 


Kathy W again:
Actually, I can imagine "Snape had Lily" better than I could 
imagine "Snape had loved Lily."


No, wait, I didn't exactly mean that either!







From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 23 08:44:39 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 08:44:39 -0000
Subject: Dursleys
Message-ID: <e2fepn+1ucd@eGroups.com>

The Dursleys are done.  Was 204, now 125.

Can you believe some people think that they mistreat Harry?

Who knew? 

What shall I do next weekend?

Ginger, who seems to have gotten something yucky on her shift key.






From kakearney at gmail.com  Sun Apr 23 18:44:18 2006
From: kakearney at gmail.com (corinthum)
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 18:44:18 -0000
Subject: Dursleys
In-Reply-To: <e2fepn+1ucd@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e2ghu2+c3ec@eGroups.com>


> What shall I do next weekend?
> 
> Ginger, who seems to have gotten something yucky on her shift key.

Seeing that I'm moving at a snail's pace through 3.8.4, you can grab a
few of those if you'd like.  I've finished Memory Charms and Wolfsbane
and am working on Veritaserum; the rest are still waiting.  You can
see my reviews of those first two to get an idea as to how I'm
tackling these subcategories.

-Kelly







From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Sun Apr 23 19:38:55 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2006 19:38:55 -0000
Subject: 3.8.4 (was Dursleys)
In-Reply-To: <e2ghu2+c3ec@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e2gl4f+uebe@eGroups.com>

Kelly wrote:
 I've finished Memory Charms and Wolfsbane
> and am working on Veritaserum; the rest are still waiting.  You can
> see my reviews of those first two to get an idea as to how I'm
> tackling these subcategories.

Ginger:
It looks to me that we tackle with the same attitude.  Kind of "if 
it's not about this topic, it's out" type of thing.

So- How's about I start at the bottom, and work my way up until we 
meet.  Judging from how small the ones at the bottom are, I should be 
able to whip through some of them tonight.  (I noticed the bottom one 
only had 3 posts.)  

Ginger, almost done tiling her bathroom wall- which means the 
remodeling project will be complete until such time as I can afford a 
new tub- but that can wait.  I'll just cover it with the shower 
curtain.







From quigonginger at yahoo.com  Mon Apr 24 07:25:30 2006
From: quigonginger at yahoo.com (quigonginger)
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2006 07:25:30 -0000
Subject: 3.8.4 (was Dursleys)
In-Reply-To: <e2gl4f+uebe@eGroups.com>
Message-ID: <e2huha+glu6@eGroups.com>

> Ginger:
> So- How's about I start at the bottom, and work my way up until we 
> meet.  Judging from how small the ones at the bottom are, I should 
be 
> able to whip through some of them tonight.  (I noticed the bottom 
one 
> only had 3 posts.)  

Replying to myself, but not talking to myself:

I noticed that 3.8.5 (animagi) didn't seem to have been done.  KathyK 
was signed up for that, but she was the one signed up for the rest of 
the ones that we are looking at.  I have done 3.8.6 and on, so I know 
those were done already. 

Animagi has 435 posts, so I'll just put myself down for that one for 
now and do it.  That'll keep me busy for a week or so.  Then we can 
continue on, with me working from the bottom and Kelly from the top.

Agreed?  

Ginger, who can see from peeking at the posts in "animagi" that she 
will be screaming about Latin pluralization for a week.






From willsonkmom at msn.com  Tue Apr 25 14:46:53 2006
From: willsonkmom at msn.com (potioncat)
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:46:53 -0000
Subject: Talisman's Dumbledore Thread
Message-ID: <e2lcot+4jei@eGroups.com>

For those of you who don't linger around HPfGU, you should go check out 
the new thread Talisman has started about Dumbledore. It's a doozy! 
Here's her first post on the subject:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/151314

Potioncat...

OK, OK, it's really a Snape thread, and I know some of you avoid Snape 
threads even more than Harry avoided Occlumancy, but DD plays a crucial 
role..yes, he definitely has a role to play... and what a role it is!
Potioncat






From carolynwhite2 at aol.com  Sun Apr 30 11:33:36 2006
From: carolynwhite2 at aol.com (carolynwhite2)
Date: Sun, 30 Apr 2006 11:33:36 -0000
Subject: New Fforde on its way!
Message-ID: <e327ag+kvjh@eGroups.com>

I realise I should be cataloguing, but excited to find a new Nursery 
crime on its way:

http://www.jasperfforde.com/special.html

Carolyn