Too Much Snape Is Never Enough

[Debbie]

The amazing Penguin wrote:
> But to the task at hand! Today I reviewed 1000 Snape posts and to my
> shock and chagrin could only de-Snape 24 of them! My congratulations
> to the coders, reviewers and not least the posters for the most
> concentrated potion of TBAY, Fantastic Elkin posts (zomg the size of
> them), and all-round tenacious threaded Snapeology!!
> 
> It's hard for me to admit, but for hundreds of posts, there wasn't a
> useless one. I'd venture to suggest that a good 50% of the best of 
the
> list is here, and we really have a problem now about redundancy. 

Debbie, who recalls those days, replies:
I vote we keep them all, redundancy be damned.  Those threads were 
priceless and worthy of enshrinement in the Hall of Fame.

I
> cannot see how much further we can take several of the Snape-related
> arguments/theories after this lot. 

Debbie:
I thought so too at one point.  And them CHOP came along.

The equally amazing Ginger wrote:
> Dear, do you mean that you couldn't get them out of the main Snape 
> category or that you couldn't get them out of the whole section?    
> I know Debbie and I had said that Snape/MWPP posts all went under 
> the "Young Snape" category due to the fact that their relationship 
> started when they were young.  
> 
> I know for the posts that I did, I ended up with about a 20% move 
> rate, and a 50% reject or uncode rate.  Most was due to 
repetition.  

Debbie, also full of shock:
Ahhh!  I wondered why everyone else's review seemed to be going so 
fast while I plod along.  For the posts I've done, I have a move rate 
of 80%.  I have been working on the assumption that our goal is to 
reduce the main Snape category to a manageable figure.  My 
reject/uncode rate is very low, probably only 20%.

So, do we need more subcats?  I did some review last night, and we 
were still at 1600 posts in main Snape.

Debbie
who is at work where she is incapable of humor