<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1491" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>What a tasty dish of CRAB CUSTARD this category
turned out to be! There were 218, mostly very good posts, though a
significant number probably shouldn't have been coded here. I
haven't done anything to the coding yet, because I've lost track of the
guidelines and I want to make sure I do it right.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>43 posts weren't sufficiently about Crouch Sr. to
be coded to him. Ithink I am supposed to untick his name and
add 5.6.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>3 should have been coded to Jr rather than
Sr. I'll switch and add 5.6.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>7 repeat points already made and should be
rejected. I'll reject and add 5.6.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I would add additional codes to 4 posts. If I
understand this right, I put into the comment section what I think should be
done, add 5.6 but *don't* make the change? Or do I make the change and
comment? This is where I'm confused.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Finally, the Nel question on rulebreaking was
here. Do we keep it coded to Crouch Sr?There was only a 1-word
reference askingreaders to consider Crouch Sr. in analyzing the
question.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Back to the issue of family dynamics vs.
name-specific codes. I was mostly done with Crouch Sr. before noticing
that a lot of these posts could have been coded to family dynamics, but they
were mostly about Crouch himself. Part of the problem is that making sense
of his treatment of Barty Jr is quintessential to understanding his character,
but it also sheds light on his attitudes toward rulebreaking, the importance of
maintaining his public persona, etc. To me, these posts were more about
Crouch himself than family dynamics. It didn't even occur to me to
recode.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In my previous comment, I meant to keep *both*
codes. Part of my thinking is that readers won't be as familiar with the
headings and may not know to look under family dynamics, especially if it isn't
under character analysis. This would not be a problem, though, if (a) we
go with the subheadings under family dynamics, and (b) the index for catalogue
users includes the family dynamics subheading under F&G as well as wherever
else it appears.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Maybe I've been doing it wrong all along. For
example, if I code to Dumbledore's Agenda, am I not supposed to code to
Dumbledore as well?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Debbie</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>who would be interested in
History/Economics/Politics/Law and Order if some one else would be interested in
sharing its 1888 posts</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>