[HPFGU-Catalogue] Re: Too Much Snape Is Never Enough

[ewe2]

On 9/6/06, Debbie <elfundeb at comcast.net> wrote:
> 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.

A good number of them are. Ginger does make a point that we are trying
to reduce the snape code itself, so I'm trying to do that with the
good stuff where I can.

> 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%.

In my review's review I'm attacking posts where the snape cat is
itself redundant, particularly where snape posts reference taboulisms
such as LOLLIPOPS, recoding for MWPP (my fault entirely that I
overlooked this cat), and endless Sirius vs Snape wars. I still don't
think I'm going to do better than 30% in the end, my 1000 post block
has too many useful threads and FP's. A great deal of TBAY is in here.
The goodies aren't evenly distributed though, I've seen Ginger's work
in Snape and she got a lot of dreck, I got the tail end of it.

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

No, I think I'll just be a wee bit more ruthless.  Even in the great
TBAY FP's most 2.4.1's are redundant, it's the biggest fault of Snape
cat.

> Debbie
> who is at work where she is incapable of humor

ewe2, on a very rainy night which gets noisy in a caravan.

-- 
Emacs vs. Vi flamewars are a pointless waste of time. Vi is the best