From hebrideanblack at hebbyelf.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 01:40:44 2003
From: hebrideanblack at hebbyelf.yahoo.invalid (Hebby Elf)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 01:40:44 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
Message-ID: <bpjqes+medp@...>

Hello!

Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback. We hope this forum will promote 
discussion between yourselves, the members of the HPFGU groups, and 
ourselves, the List Admin Team. We'd like to hear about your 
concerns about the groups, your ideas for the groups, any 
suggestions you might have. We also know you have questions, but we 
thought we'd get the ball rolling by asking a few of our own to 
start. <g>

If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
with it? 

Again, we welcome you here, we're looking forward to hearing what 
you have to say, and we hope we'll all benefit from the discussions 
that take place here. 

:-)
Hebby Elf
For the List Admin Team




From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 05:08:13 2003
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 05:08:13 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpk6jt+t3r1@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "joywitch_m_curmudgeon" <joym999 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: joym999 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <joym999 at ...>

The fact we can't seem to decide whether we are HPfGU, HPFGU, or 
HP4GU.

> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

Yes.  Long-time posters, defined as anyone who joined before GoF came 
out, should be retired with a pension of 1000 galleons/month, and a 
bronze statue erected of each at Hexquarters, which should be 
polished daily by the list elves.
 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it?

Don't let them join unless they can spell both Sirius and Trelawney 
correctly.

Oh, wait, this is HPFGU-Feedback, not HPFGU-Wiseass.  OK, I'll say 
something more useful:

I'd like to have some discussion of how new list elves/admin team 
members are chosen.  Is there a more democratic way of doing this?  
What are the advantages/disadvantages of a more democratic system, 
such as elections?

I've got some thoughts on this issue, but for now I just want to 
throw the question out there.  And I want to thank the admin team for 
providing this forum.  I know you guys have had a rough time of it 
lately.

--Joywitch M. Curmudgeon







From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 15:51:34 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 15:51:34 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bplca6+djn8@...>

Hebby Elf:
 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: stevejjen at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <stevejjen at ...>

Jen: I'm fairly new, been posting since July. This group is really 
impressive for the wealth of information and level of discussion! 
I've had a good experience as a newcomer. 

My one pet peeve is posting etiquette: enormous amount of posts on 
the main list that aren't canon-based or where people don't read the 
entire thread and state something that another poster already said.

I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). There are quite a 
few posts every day with incorrect quotes, 'guesses' at what the 
canon said b/c the books aren't handy, or even making comments on 
another person's misquote. (Not correcting the mistake, just writing 
about something using the wrong information!)

This is definitely the one thing I'd love to see changed, although 
frankly, I can't imagine how with a group this size. But that's my 
wish ;).

Hebby Elf: 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

I think the History of HPFGU, Fantastic Posts and Hypothetic Alley 
do a good job of giving credit where credit is due. There's so much 
to read as a newcomer, which is good and bad. I'm still finding 
resources all the time, and along the way have come to recognize who 
the 'old-timers'are and who started what theory. 

I think it helps too, when original theorists continue to be on the 
list remarking on and defending their theories. I've seen Pippin 
posting on ESE!Lupin, Elfundeb on ESE!Mcgonagall, and Pip & Melody 
on MD--those posts keep the theories current and give us all 
something to refer back to. 

Hebby Elf: 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

(Since I don't know Admin policy with Yahoo, some of these might not 
be feasible)

1) Restricting the list size 

2)Like an insurance company (in America at least) could you 
have "open enrollment" period a couple times a year, then advertise 
when the next open enrollment would be on the home page?

3) I've always wondered about the many members who never post. How 
about offering a limited time to lurk (say 3-6 months) and if a 
person doesn't post they are taken off the list? This might turn into
an administrative nightmare, though.

4) My other thought was cleaning out the member list by having a 
link on the homepage for say 2 months, where everyone who wants to 
continue being a member has to click on that link. Anyone not 
registering by a certain date would be taken off (but could re-
enroll).







From whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 17:10:58 2003
From: whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid (whizbang)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:10:58 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bplgv2+hu88@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf"  Hello!
 If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be
> 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "whizbang" <whizbang121 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: whizbang121 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <whizbang121 at ...>

Perhaps a members only forum like Hogsmeade.  It would be by 
invitation only and extended to longtime members who meet certain 
expectations.  Abiding by rules, regular activity, thoughtful posts, 
etc.  It might relieve some of the pressure on the main board as 
well.  It would give serious and experienced posters a place to 
advance theories.  It probably shouldn't be too much of a mystery 
though, or there may be malcontents insisting on admission.
> 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 
A seperate board to discuss the new movie?  Perhaps this is a 
problem that is best solved by considering an honest to goodness 
forum style board, with different topics and threads.  There is one 
free one I've heard has a reasonably good reputation, and I don't 
imagine it will have more ads than yahoo does.  Of course, the ideal 
is to own a forum.  
> 
> Again, we welcome you here, we're looking forward to hearing what 
> you have to say, and we hope we'll all benefit from the 
discussions 
> that take place here. 
> 
> :-)
> Hebby Elf
> For the List Admin Team





From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 17:30:42 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:30:42 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpli42+kh49@...>

Hi, everybody!
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "annemehr" <annemehr at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: annemehr at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <annemehr at ...>

First, thanks to all the elves for picking up yet another
responsibility, but I'm thinking this group is going to be helpful.

On to the topic at hand:
 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

It's nothing that we can deal with here.  I was wishing some of the
long-time posters who've disappeared since before OoP would post once
in a while.  Maybe only once a month or so?  Maybe, as Tabouli says
about herself (on OTC), they're burned out, on to other things.  I'm
just disappointed that some people who were around even when I joined
(Sept. '02), and then faded away, never returned to discuss OoP even
after the list calmed down.

And, thanks to all you long-timers who still do!

> 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

Hmm.  Well, that would mean another task for someone, wouldn't it?  I
don't know, I think such posters automatically earn recognition from
the rest of the list.  The epitome might be when Elkins became "The
Elkins" -- that was cool, spontaneous, and well earned.  I'm not sure
it's good to pick out some people as "good" posters because it'd be
too easy to hurt the feelings of some who are left out, but maybe
"long-time" could be done.

> 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

Though on OTC I once agreed with trying a "no-post, enforced lurker"
status for new listies, I've changed my mind.  I think the best thing
is to make sure there are enough trained elves to handle the surge
(and the PoA movie surge ought to be much smaller than the OoP book
surge, I'd think), and also for experienced posters to be as good
examples as possible.  Maybe, just *before* a new book or movie is
released, a special notice could be sent out to current members
suggesting we review the HBFile just to reinforce our memories as far
as what good posting practices are.

Anyway, I'm feeling pretty good about the state of the main list these
days -- it's recovered quite nicely, and many of the newest members
are now some of the best posters.  TBAY, I'll admit, is still pretty
devastated, but hey, that was some hurricane!  (And yes, I'm reading
Evil!Bill/BB GUN and expect to wander out of the Safe House with
something to say!)  ;-)


Finally, even thought I've joined this group, it's not because I
actually have any gripes!  I even think the main list will fare better
when book 6 comes out because of experience earned after the OoP
release.  I also think the current method of choosing new elves is
better than having general elections, because the current elves have a
much better idea of who would be good than the list at large.

Maybe, if you want to try electing some elves, some of these ideas
might help:

-Don't replace the whole team with elected elves.  Instead, elect a
few to replace retiring members or increase elf numbers if needed.  If
you want to have regular elections, don't replace more than a quarter
of the team at once.  And I wouldn't be against having some
"permanent" team members, either (i.e. not subject to elections).

-Even if we are electing some elves, maybe the Admin. team should
still be able to invite people to join the team if they think they
would be valuable members?

-Maybe there should be something like a "voting age," meaning perhaps
only people who have been members for, I don't know, six months or
something should be able to vote.  I don't actually have any idea how
long the time period should be, but it should be long enough to get a
good feel for the list.

-I don't think a yahoo group is necessarily a democracy.  If you do
decide to try elections, and they end up hurting the list, you need to
be able to put a stop to them.

-I'm certainly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and some of my
suggestions might be baloney.  I just think they're worth discussing.
 I don't see what goes on behind the scenes, but the lists I'm on
(main and OTC) actually seem to be pretty healthy and to be able to
weather a storm -- and I'd hate to see anything jeopardise that!

Annemehr
having gone on *way* longer than she expected...





From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 17:36:17 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 17:36:17 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bplieh+433u@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "a_reader2003" <carolynwhite2 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: carolynwhite2 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <carolynwhite2 at ...>

> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
> 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
> 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 
> 
Hi, I've been a member since July 03, and was delighted to find such 
an educated discussion group. I'm really keen to see its quality 
preserved, so thanks for having the courage to start this 
experimental feedback group. Hope it does some good.

The one thing I would like to see changed is a simpler, and more 
effective way of finding out what has been posted before. Searching 
85000 messages is becoming impossible. I sent a detailed proposal to 
the admin team in August outlining one way this might be achieved, 
but despite a prompt acknowledgement, never heard any more. It was 
only a suggestion, but if deemed useless, I would nevertheless like 
to know what else was being considered to solve this problem, either 
via FAQs or the Fantastic Posts sections. (I can re-post my proposal 
here if anyone wants to see it - tell me if this is permitted).

In response to both your other points, one idea I had was that 
experienced/long-time/interesting posters could be requested to use a 
debating forum that all members could see and follow, but couldn't 
join in with unless they met certain quality criteria. A sort of 
glass cage, I guess.

In following through the recent admin row on OTC, one of the most 
upsetting things for me was to see confirmed that there was a small 
group of long-term/original members who had formed their own inner 
sanctum to discuss ideas. I had heard this rumoured before, but 
thought it was just one of the usual conspiracy theories. Mainly I 
found it upsetting because I would just like to read what they were 
thinking. Personally I wouldn't dare try to join in such rarified 
discussions unless I had done a lot of thinking and research.

This two-step concept of membership would allow all new members to 
continue to have the pleasure of posting things and responding to 
each other in the normal way, as an outlet for their burning desire 
to discuss the books which prompts most people to join in the first 
place. However, it would also allow more dedicated/thoughtful members 
a less high-volume environment to continue to develop their ideas, to 
the benefit of everyone.

I leave it others to determine what the criteria for membership of 
the smaller group might be. (Will you have OWL and NEWT levels she 
wonders nervously... will there be written and practical exams..will 
I need a wand ?? <g>).

One further point. Despite all the thunderous messages from the elves 
about the rules for posting, it seems to me that they are violated 
all the time by newbies, and I can't understand how this happens as 
surely most of them must still be on moderated status ? Has the 
system broken down completely ?

Carolyn






From june.diamanti at junediamanti.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 18:57:00 2003
From: june.diamanti at junediamanti.yahoo.invalid (junediamanti)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 18:57:00 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpln5s+n2os@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> Hello!
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "junediamanti" <june.diamanti at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: june.diamanti at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <june.diamanti at ...>

First of all, a very big hello back. Thanks to the admin for 
providing this opportunity to "shape our destiny" - well alright, 
discuss things.  

let's hope now that the fire has died down a bit from last week's 
storm we can do this in a relatively civilised way.

Let me say first of all, I have very few issues with the way the 
list is run.  In a list this size, there has to be some rules and 
administration and I believe it's largely a thankless job - SO 
THANKS ELVES!  

My reason for coming onto this list is that I was dismayed by the 
emotive tone of some of the posts that went on HPFGU-OT last week - 
and some got downright insulting to other members and I think that 
needs addressing.  So I'm largely here, because if there is change 
to be done, I'd like to be a part of it, rather than moaning later 
that no one consults anyone - because in this case that's precisely 
what the Admin team is doing.  
> 
> Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback. We hope this forum will promote 
> discussion between yourselves, the members of the HPFGU groups, 
and 
> ourselves, the List Admin Team. We'd like to hear about your 
> concerns about the groups, your ideas for the groups, any 
> suggestions you might have. We also know you have questions, but 
we 
> thought we'd get the ball rolling by asking a few of our own to 
> start. <g>
> 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

First of all, I like the list and though I've joined a number of 
others since it's still the Daddy in many ways.  Over time I've 
become more selective about the threads I follow, because I've often 
already said all I want to say about a particular topic.  

Someone else on this list has mentioned improving one's ability to 
research previous posts to avoid re-hashing things too much and I 
think that's a good idea if it can be managed. However, new members 
will want to discuss things that have already been covered and I 
believe they have the right to do so. 

An alternative, could we subdivide the posts in some way?  Then it 
would be easier to track posts on the characters/subjects that 
interest you and not bother with the others.   

Ooops. that was two things.  Sorry.  So lets mix them together and 
suggest some way of organising posts or threads.  

> 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

Coming off moderation and it being known?  I'm not a long-time 
poster (almost 6 months) though I will be sticking around.  I think 
I can be a good poster though.  And I've never been rude to anyone.  
A funky icon system?  I know a gossip mailing list where if people 
come up with a hot gossip item over ten times, they get an icon.

Bear in mind though that there might well be a great poster out 
there who is yet to join.

I'm concerned about some of the odium that gets heaped on newbies.  
Everyone was a newbie at some point, even the people who founded the 
list.  For example, I might be a comparative newbie in posting terms 
but I've been reading the books since 1997.  I think newbies are 
entitled to speak.  They're moderated carefully here and that should 
be enough.  People leave, others take over and that's what keeps the 
community vibrant.  I don't approve of issuing lurker only status to 
newbies.  If I hadn't been allowed to post for several weeks, I 
wouldn't have stayed.  I like to participate, not just spectate.

Trust me, it was some weeks of lurking before I dared say anything 
around here.  I was new to forums in general and so nervous as 
hell.  I wanted to read a lot of fantastic posts, FAQ's and get a 
feel for what was going on, and that's what I did. I tend to take 
instructions fairly seriously.  Also I was blown away by some of the 
debate, it was just post publication of OOP and though I had a good 
many theories of my own, I realised there was a lot more to choose 
from!  The quality of the posting was great too, and I had a lot of 
laughs reading some of them too.  So when I finally dared post (and 
if my post had been audible it would have been squeaky!) I was 
nervous.  Then I wrote my first long post and got some very kind 
feedback from other "senior" board members and that was very nice 
and encouraging.  I want to stress these factors because there was a 
lot of criticism last week by members about the admin, yet for me 
some of the best encouragement I got was from members of the admin 
team.  

Now I know some new members will need more watching.  And I also 
know that some people do wade in.  But mine was a positive 
experience and I think that should be the rule wherever possible, 
and not the exception.  Having said that, there will also be new 
members who will just ignore the rules and they need some element of 
control over them.  
> 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

Shoot them?!  Seriously, moderation at first, keep the rules to the 
fore.  But where possible, encourage them rather than otherwise.

June







From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 20:19:41 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:19:41 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bplieh+433u@...>
References: <bplieh+433u@...>
Message-ID: <1069445986.28D6FDFC@...>


On Fri, 21 Nov 2003 12:51pm, a_reader2003 wrote:


> In following through the recent admin row on OTC, one of the most
> upsetting things for me was to see confirmed that there was a small
> group of long-term/original members who had formed their own inner
> sanctum to discuss ideas. I had heard this rumoured before, but
> thought it was just one of the usual conspiracy theories. Mainly I
> found it upsetting because I would just like to read what they were
> thinking. Personally I wouldn't dare try to join in such rarified
> discussions unless I had done a lot of thinking and research.
>

I know I'm jumping in here without answering the questions, which I do 
pledge to do, but I need to post about this.

I am on The Old Crowd. I've been on it since mid-june.

We're not discussing the books. We barely have discussed the books. It's 
more a way for real-oldbies (those of us who still consider, say, 
Elkins, to be a newbie) to keep in touch and chat about hp topics, yes, 
but also off topic and general fandomy things.

There is no rarefied discussion, and anyone who claims there is is 
lying.

The existence of the list has been used as an excuse, a justification, 
if you will, but only by people who are not on that list.  and this is 
certainly not the first list that people who were actively involved with 
hpfgu (including hpfgu administration) have set up. Steve has discussion 
boards at the lexicon, I'm an admin on fictionalley along with other 
current and former hpfgu-team people. Nobody ever complained about those 
things, so why on earth should the creators of TOC have thought that 
some disgruntled person would show up and start blaming the existence of 
that list for, well, anything.

Many of the fandom oldbies who are still discussing the books outside of 
hpfgu do so on livejournals (mine is heidi8.livejournal.com), through 
writing fanfic or by participation in message boards in places like the 
lexicon, fictionalley.org's fictionalley park, sugarquill, etc., and 
there's  a different reason for every person who's moved away from the 
main list.

A lot, though, were shocked, saddened or otherwise thrown off balance by 
ootp. I probably wouldve left the fandom entirely were it not for nimbus 
and fictionalley, because of my responsibilities, not to actually, you 
know, discuss anything.

But in the four months since, I've realised that I actually like the 
bloody tome after all. Whew and yay. But for someone like me, who read 
at least a few lines of every post for two and a half years, it's hard 
to jump back onto hpfgu's main list discussion, and so I've stuck to FA, 
where I'm more familiar with the territory, just from having modded 
there nonstop.

Now...


Back to TOC.

Everyone is free to discuss whatever they want to here, but if someone 
again blames the fifty or so canon discussion posts on toc for anything, 
I reserve the right to laugh.

And here's why: there's no brilliant discussion there because (a) we 
don't really need there to be, but also because (b) you need newbies to 
keep discussion going! Newbies are the ones who force old discussion 
topics back into strong relief. They sometimes ask really silly 
questions, and honestly, there's little to add on some sibjects, but 
theuyre the ones who ask, and force the oldbies to flesh out a concept 
more, or explain something a different way, or even reexamine a take on 
someone.




From risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 20:36:20 2003
From: risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid (Melissa McCarthy)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 16:36:20 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
References: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <003901c3b06f$1fa26260$6401a8c0@vaio>

I'm very glad to see that this idea is being tried!  Right now I just have a
few comments on some things that have been posted.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: Melissa McCarthy <risako at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: risako at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <risako at ...>

Joywitch:
> I'd like to have some discussion of how new list elves/admin team
> members are chosen.  Is there a more democratic way of doing this?
> What are the advantages/disadvantages of a more democratic system,
> such as elections?

I think there are a lot of disadvantages to elections.  The one time I saw
it tried elsewhere, it made things much worse.  The problem is that first of
all, few people would probably be bothered to vote, so it wouldn't be any
more representative than the current system.  Second, an election runs the
risk of turning membership in the list administration into a popularity
contest, and turning the admin itself into a clique.  I was willing to
support the idea of an election only when it looked to me like the current
list-admin system was a *lot* more broken than it is.  The lists I
co-moderate aren't democracies, they're benevolent dictatorships.  That
system works well for those smaller lists (tiny in comparison to HPFGU!) and
it should be able to go on working here.

Hebby Elf:
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

I want people to stop quoting oodles and oodles of previous posts in their
replies.  I read the list through email, not at the site, and it is terribly
annoying to have my mailbox filled up with quoted text that doesn't need to
be there.  The Elves probably can't make that happen, though... ah well, I
can dream.

So, to avoid irritating myself with a lot of quoted text <g>, I'm just going
to say here that I agree wholeheartedly with everything Annemehr said in her
post.

Hebby Elf:
> > Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

whizbang:
> Perhaps a members only forum like Hogsmeade.  It would be by
> invitation only and extended to longtime members who meet certain
> expectations.  Abiding by rules, regular activity, thoughtful posts,
> etc.  It might relieve some of the pressure on the main board as
> well.  It would give serious and experienced posters a place to
> advance theories.

I'm not sure I like this idea.  What's wrong with having those serious
posters advancing their theories on the main list?  Wouldn't that just sap
the main list's talent and make it a less interesting place to be?  If this
forum were to be used as a sort of breeding ground for new theories that
would later be posted to the main list, that might work out, but if it
simply becomes a retreat from the main list... I don't know.

As for formal recognition, I've always thought that was the purpose of
Fantastic Posts!

Melissa, still unable to come up with any good ideas






From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 20:42:35 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 20:42:35 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpltbr+mqnd@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
I agree with Joywitch: figure out if it's HPfGU, HPFGU, or HP4GU (My 
personal vote being HP4GU because it breaks up all the letters!  
*grin*)
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Blair" <SnapesSlytherin at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: SnapesSlytherin at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <SnapesSlytherin at ...>

> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
Perhaps there could be a list made that says who started what 
theory.  I often cannot remember who began MAGIC DISHWASHER or any 
of the others, and Yahoo!Mort doesn't let me search very often.  (Of 
course, I remember SILK SHIRTS because it's mine!  *grin*)

> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 
There's really no way to deal with it.  There's utter chaos when new 
things come out.  I was lucky, when I joined the list it wasn't 
during a new book/movie.
I do not agree with the idea of taking people off-list if they 
lurk.  Sometimes I get frustrated and stop reading posts for a while 
(like the Good!Slytherin thread...oy...), but that doesn't mean that 
I want to be taken off!  I'm not sure how to do this though...

Oryomai





From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 21:33:11 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:33:11 -0000
Subject: One way of sorting out 85000 emails...
Message-ID: <bpm0an+bu5b@...>

Earlier this evening I said:

"I can re-post my proposal here if anyone wants to see it - tell me 
if this is permitted."

Wendy replied offlist:

Posting your proposal here is very much permitted, and would be a 
great idea. That is exactly the sort of thing we'd love to see on 
this list. So, feel free to post it whenever you'd like.
:-)
Wendy
Aka Hebby Elf

Ok Wendy..here it is, a little bit tidied up and edited after a few 
second thoughts since August. [Retires, donning tin helmet].

Subj:	Ambitious editorial idea for for HPfGU Admin Team..	
Date:	05/10/2003	
To:	hpforgrownups-owner at yahoogroups.com	
	
Hi
I have only been a member since about July this year, so apologies 
first of all for the temerity in sending in a radical restructuring 
suggestion for the site! 

However, foolishly emboldened by Amanda Geist's recent encouragement 
to Kneasy (82268), I thought I would send you some ideas I have been 
thinking about for a while now, which may fit in with what he is 
suggesting, or indeed, what you may be working on already.

It seems to me that the basic problem with the site at the moment is 
that there are too many messages for people to search easily. This 
leads to many of the repetitions and silly questions that people 
object to. This problem is exacerbated by bad headings and Yahoo's 
peculiar threading function.

Although there are resources, such as FAQS, Fantastic Posts, and the 
Lexicon to help, nevertheless people do have difficulty in finding 
out what has been discussed before.

My suggestions for sorting this out are first and foremost, aimed at 
the website, to improve its usability right now. However, they could 
also be the basis of an interesting publication eventually (more 
below on this).

1. ???First, form a working group of about 100 keen HPfGU members.

2. ???Then, allocate a set of posts to each of these people. At the 
time of writing, there are approaching 83000 posts, so this would 
mean 830 posts per person - a fairly manageable number, as many are 
quite short. Each group probably no more text than GoF or OoP if laid 
end to end !

3. ???Next, decide on an initial list of possible headings. Everyone 
is familiar with the posts - it should not be difficult to anticipate 
what subjects are likely to be discussed. Fantastic Posts already has 
some useful headings, but it needs a lot of expansion to cope with 
all the extraordinary stuff that comes up. Filks need parking 
somewhere as well.

4. ???The next stage is for each member to go through their 830 posts 
and correct the headings, using the agreed subject list, so that they 
properly reflect the content that they find. There will need to be a 
stop-and-pause process to discuss new heads that inevitably come up 
during this stage.

5. ???If posts address multiple subjects serially, and can be easily 
split apart under different headings, then this should be done at 
this stage. Where posts address several topics, but in a more 
integrated way, probably the best thing is to copy the post as many 
times as required for the different headings.

6. ???Once fixed, all the posts then need to be sorted into groups as 
per the headings, and (very importantly) put in date order.

7. ???The piles of posts then need allocating to different people to 
work on - probably a smaller group than the original 100-strong 
working party, or maybe not if there are more than 100 topics (could 
easily be, I suppose).

8. ???Then, for each topic, once it is in date order, the editor 
needs to go through and slice out any repetitive text, where it is 
not essential to understanding a reply. This will enable someone to 
read post 1, then all the replies, expansions, queries etc that this 
post generates in their correct order. Text only needs repeating 
where someone chooses to reply paragraph-by-paragraph to something. 
This exercise in itself will considerably shorten the total amount of 
text on each subject.

9. ???It is important to preserve the flow of the debate, so even 
highly contentious ideas should be left in, providing they are not 
based on wrong canon. It would otherwise take too long and be too 
difficult to make decisions in many areas. (You can just hear the 
heated discussion: 'sorry, I just don't agree that Snape is anything 
other than a model teacher, so I cut out all this nonsense about bats 
and vampires'
.or.. 'I'm a practising Christian, I don't think this 
sort of thing should be debated at all
)!

10. ???The process of doing this cutting and ordering will 
undoubtedly reveal repeated waves of the same question being asked on 
some popular topics. I think this should be left as it is, and 
possibly even labelled 'wave 1' 'wave 2' etc, to highlight when the 
argument starts all over again! The reason I suggest this is that, 
although the initial question might sound similar the 3rd, 10th, even 
20th time, in fact what tends to happen is that new shades of answers 
come back from new minds on the problem, or as a result of new 
information (especially post-OoP publication). In the case of named 
theories, it would definitely do no harm at all to show how the ideas 
have evolved over time 
 (this is where Kneasy's idea fits in I think)

11. ???Probably the editor working on one topic should finally swap 
with another editor when finished, so there is a second eye on the 
decisions that have been made, and bias does not creep into 
contentious areas 


12. ???These tidied, cleaned, shortened and ordered sets of posts 
should then be put up on the site as per their subject headings, so 
that people can quickly and easily find them and read themselves up 
to date on any given subject, from the original posts.

Although it sounds like a lot of work, I don't believe the whole 
process would really take more than a couple of months if it was well-
organised, and it would contribute so much to finding out what had 
gone before. I don't know much about the underlying structure of the 
Yahoo database, but I would think it likely that some of the initial 
sifting and ordering work could also be done electronically to save 
time. 

By the way, I am not suggesting deleting the main list, that should 
stay as it is, as a primary resource, as with all the other 
documentation - although the new files might be a radical replacement 
of the current Fantastic Posts section.

Obviously, there then needs to be put in place an ongoing update 
process, so new posts can regularly be added, to keep a subject up to 
date. 

That's Part 1 of my suggestion (don't groan, Part 2 is much shorter).

If this process is carried out, and kept up to date, you then have 
the basis of a fantastic book, to be pulled together at some suitable 
point after the end of Book 7. My initial concept of this was as a 
tribute volume to be presented to JKR, as a thank you for giving us 
so much pleasure over the years. However, I think a lot of HPfGU 
members would also like a copy (I know I would !), so perhaps it 
could be published on a purely charitable basis, all surplus to go to 
good causes after printing costs had been met.

For this book version, there would need to be much more editorial 
intervention - probably to choose the best posts, or best series of 
posts on the various topics, rather than include everything. However, 
it should definitely still preserve the original text of the posts, 
and not become a smoothed over and edited summary - half the 
amusement is following the various listies as they lock antlers. I 
can also think of a least a couple of posts which would make great 
headings in themselves. There was the listie who asked 
plaintively 'what is this canon, I would like to read it', and 
another who asked indignantly 'what is this Tbay stuff ?'? A 
perfectly reasonable question, of course
..

Another issue is copyright and attribution - as a publisher myself, I 
know these are big issues (I don't publish in this area at all, I 
hasten to add - my area is business and management!). The simple 
solution as far as the actual posts go is to attempt to ask each and 
every person their permission to use their post in this way. If they 
have disappeared, it may be ok to publish the posts anonymously. 

As far as the material quoted within the posts from the HP books, and 
many other sources, I guess you'd need to talk firstly to JKR about 
this, to see if she'd allow this (rather extensive use). If there 
were problems, you could get round it by just giving the book and 
page refs to long passages. For other quoted material, the same goes -
 give correct attribution, contact copyright owner in cases of doubt.

But it would make a highly unusual publication - a documentation of a 
publishing phenomenon. People just wouldn't believe the topics which 
have come up as a result of these books !

Well, I hope you'll give the ideas some consideration.

Cheers
Carolyn




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 21 21:55:18 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 21:55:18 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <1069445986.28D6FDFC@...>
Message-ID: <bpm1k6+qo63@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Heidi Tandy <heidilist at t...> 
wrote:
> 
> A lot, though, were shocked, saddened or otherwise thrown off 
balance by 
> ootp. I probably wouldve left the fandom entirely were it not for 
nimbus 
> and fictionalley, because of my responsibilities, not to actually, 
you 
> know, discuss anything.
> 
> But in the four months since, I've realised that I actually like 
the 
> bloody tome after all. Whew and yay. 
> 
> Now...
> 
> 
> Back to TOC.
> 
> Everyone is free to discuss whatever they want to here, but if 
someone 
> again blames the fifty or so canon discussion posts on toc for 
anything, 
> I reserve the right to laugh.
> 
Carolyn:

Well, I'm so relieved to read this..I thought I'd been missing the 
cream of the TBay posts ! And I was driven to find people to talk to 
after the awfulness of Oop, I had to share my disappointment. Good to 
know many long-term members thought the same thing; its sometimes 
hard to tell. Despite the fantastically high volume since July, I 
don't regret wading through it all, as its helped me see the book in 
lots of very complex contexts.(Although I still think its poorly 
written and structured). Now, however (see my other posts), I'd 
really appreciate some help in grouping some of that stuff together, 
so as not to lose the themes.





From drednort at ...  Sat Nov 22 00:19:10 2003
From: drednort at ... (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 11:19:10 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <3FBF462E.7564.52888A@localhost>

On 21 Nov 2003 at 1:40, Hebby Elf wrote:

> Hello!
> 
> Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback. We hope this forum will promote 
> discussion between yourselves, the members of the HPFGU groups, and 
> ourselves, the List Admin Team. We'd like to hear about your 
> concerns about the groups, your ideas for the groups, any 
> suggestions you might have. We also know you have questions, but we 
> thought we'd get the ball rolling by asking a few of our own to 
> start. <g>
> 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

Practically speaking - I'd like to see basic posting standards enforced. What I 
mean by that is people being expected to quote messages in a standard way - 
basically the way I am doing it now. The message you are replying to is indented 
by >

Messages the message you are replying to are replying to are indented > >

This is an internet standard - but more and more people aren't using it. There are 
a considerable number of people who reply to messages and there's no indenting 
at all - and then when someone else replies to those messages, there are 
complaints by people saying: "I didn't say that!". On a high traffic list like HPFGU, 
if consistent standards aren't enforced you wind up with problems.

Now, I know this would be fairly hard to implement and I'm not really expecting it 
to be - but that is the one thing I would change if I had power.

Well - there is one other thing, but it is totally impractical and unenforceable. I'd 
like to see people be told that it is expected that under normal circumstances, 
members will read (or at least glance at) every message sent to the list. I find it 
incredibly frustrating to see someone start a thread that has already been 
discussed over the last 24 hours - and it happens a fair bit, and if they'd bothered 
to read the list messages, they'd know that. There seem to be a significant 
number of posters who view the list as simply there for their convenience - for 
them to ask questions they have, but who aren't willing to take the trouble to read 
and reply themselves. My view is that on a discussion list, people should be 
expected to participate in both the asking and answering of questions - and if 
people aren't reading they can't do that.

Now - I know this is pretty much enenforceable. But I do wonder if the list would 
benefit by some sort of explicit statement being included somewhere that 
members are expected to participate in the list. Sure a lot of people would ignore 
it - but it might get some people thinking about things.

And I'm not (IMHO) an unreasonable person - I don't expect people to read every 
message all of the time - real life does get in the way sometimes - but I think 
expressing a view that the list is likely to function better if *most* people read 
*most* posts *most* of the time could be reasonable.

And even stronger - people should be asked, IMHO, to please read all messages 
in any thread they are participating in. I tend to write fairly detailed posts a lot of 
the time - and on occasion, I've noticed that somebody started a thread and I've 
made a detailed reply to it - and then twelve hours later, people who are just 
joining the thread at that point are asking the same questions I (or someone else) 
answered hours ago. Half the time when I write a post, I never see any sign that 
anybody has even read it - and I see plenty of signs that obviously people 
haven't. That can be pretty demoralising and I wonder if some people abandon 
interest in the list because they think they are being ignored. Not me - I get 
enough feedback to know my posts do get read by some people, and I really don't 
care a massive amount - but I do wonder if some people feel it's not worth 
bothering to post. And some discussion we've had at times - especially after OotP 
came out, where people were talking about their 'list strategies' and some people 
were saying they only read the 'best posters' and things like that - well, I can 
really see some people deciding it's not worth writing stuff nobody is going to 
read.

I don't know how to solve that problem - but I think expressing a view that:

(1) People should read all messages for any thread they are participating in.
(2) People should read as many messages on the list as they practically can.

might make some people less concerned that their messages are just going to be 
ignored.
 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

Ideally, yes - practically I'm not sure. I think in an environment where posters feel 
their posts are ignored (and I'm afraid I think HPFGU may be getting that 
reputation) acknowledgement like this might leave new members feeling very 
much like second class citizens.

Just one note I wanted to add.

I've been on e-mail lists for... well, over a decade now. I've probably been on 
nearly 1000 lists, several hundred of them actively at various times. I'm currently 
on over 1000. I run about a dozen lists - none as big as the HPFGU lists, but a 
couple have topped the 1000 poster level, and the 1000 posts a month level. 
These lists cover areas from hobbies up to political and educational advocacy.

My view is that electing list administrators is a *very* bad idea. I won't say it can 
never work - but I've very rarely seen it work. I do not believe HPFGU should go 
down that path. I think it would probably kill the list.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia





From fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 01:34:21 2003
From: fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:34:21 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpmeet+l381@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Potterfanme" <fc26det at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: fc26det at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <fc26det at ...>

Susan:
I have only been a member since earlier this year.  I have to say 
that I was quite frustrated when I was posting on the main list as I 
would read every post and try to emulate the older posters in the way 
that I posted.  Unfortunately no matter how I posted, it seemed I did 
it wrong.  I would follow the elf's instructions and lo and behold a 
different elf would reprimand me for that way of posting.  It got so 
frustrating that I started watching other posters who posted just 
like I did.  Now, I do realize that I have no way of knowing if these 
other posters received howlers or not but they continued to post the 
same way time after time so I (possibly wrongly) assumed that they 
were not reprimanded as I was.  I finally just gave up and decided to 
not post anymore.  The point I am trying to make is that the rules 
should be followed by all, not just new people.  I was told by one 
elf that the reason one of the others was not reprimanded was that 
they had been posting for so long and always had interesting posts.  
One elf was excessively rude.  This was the last straw.

Hebby: 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

Susan:
I think that the other places like fantastic posts and such and the 
open admiration of the members is already doing this.

Hebby: 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

Susan:
I don't know how these things work but would it be possible to have a 
group for each of the books?  I realize that there would still have 
to be a general (main) list for those that meld their ideas through 
the entire epic, but a lot of the posts only pertain to one book.  Do 
you think this would be a significant enough reduction from the main 
list to be feasible?  Plus for those that do not want to discuss 
certain books, they simply do not have to receive the emails from 
them.  And maybe a Tbay/FILK list.  I personally don't read 
them...not because they aren't good, as a matter of fact they are so 
good that I get quite confused with what is fake and what is real. 
(yes, I am a blonde!)

Hebby: 
> Again, we welcome you here, we're looking forward to hearing what 
> you have to say, and we hope we'll all benefit from the discussions 
> that take place here. 

Susan:
I appreciate your willingness to hear what we have to say.  This 
shows growth in itself.  Hopefully we can make this a better place 
for all of us. 







From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 01:59:14 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 01:59:14 -0000
Subject: An Idea for the release of the PoA movie
Message-ID: <bpmftj+oene@...>

Hi,
I've heard that people are starting to plan strategy to handle an 
expected large influx of new members after the release of the movie 
PoA.  May I suggest that after a particular date, e.g. June 1, 2004, 
new members be allowed to post only on the movie list until a second 
date, say July 4, 2004, after which they be allowed to post on any of 
the lists?  My thinking is that since June 4, 2004 is a release date 
for a movie, and not for Book VI, any new member will be most likely 
to be primarily interested in the movie, and will bear their 
inability to post on the other lists with relative equanimity.  If it 
is possible to allow these new members to read messages from all the 
lists during this time, all the better. This is a seperate issue from 
whether to moderate, or how long to moderate these new members' posts.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Haggridd" <jkusalavagemd at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: jkusalavagemd at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <jkusalavagemd at ...>

By the time the month has passed, these new members should be well-
assimilated into the HPfGU culture.

No action whatever should be necessary vis-a-vis existing members.  I 
doubt their posting patterns will change much with the release of the 
new movie, and they already know to post on the appropriate list.

Haggridd





From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 02:33:13 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 02:33:13 -0000
Subject: Lots of Subjective Development History
In-Reply-To: <bplieh+433u@...>
Message-ID: <bpmht9+sqqf@...>

The presumption is, I believe, that unless an admin team member 
says "I Am The Voice Of The Team," we are speaking as ourselves, but 
just to be clear--I am speaking here as myself, neither on behalf of 
the team or officially.

Carolyn:
> In following through the recent admin row on OTC, one of the most 
> upsetting things for me was to see confirmed that there was a small 
> group of long-term/original members who had formed their own inner 
> sanctum to discuss ideas. I had heard this rumoured before, but 
> thought it was just one of the usual conspiracy theories. Mainly I 
> found it upsetting because I would just like to read what they were 
> thinking. Personally I wouldn't dare try to join in such rarified 
> discussions unless I had done a lot of thinking and research.

Let me clarify this one. That wasn't what happened. A former admin 
and long-term member formed his own group. It doesn't have any 
affiliation to HPFGU at all, except that there is some overlap in 
membership. 

It is not a "subset" of the main list or of the admin team, and his 
intent never was to siphon away any HPFGU support or involvement. He 
just wanted a smaller forum, with people known to him and who could 
foster the close-knit ambience he remembered from this list, when it 
was small.

It was invitation-only, which of necessity implies some exclusion. 
This is any group owner's right and option, and since it was a 
totally independent group, he could set it up as he preferred. 

It was the exclusion flip-side that upset some older listmembers--
some who were not invited, found out about the group and were quite 
upset not to be included; and some who were invited didn't feel 
comfortable unless anyone could join, and declined the invitation or 
left the group.

The main list didn't miss much--the members of The Old Crowd who were 
HPFGU members as well, tended to double-post to TOC and the HPFGU 
lists anyway. It was very much an "as well," not an "instead of."

Carolyn:
> One further point. Despite all the thunderous messages from the 
elves 
> about the rules for posting, it seems to me that they are violated 
> all the time by newbies, and I can't understand how this happens as 
> surely most of them must still be on moderated status ? Has the 
> system broken down completely ?

Caveat: This is totally my take on it--it's been quite a long time 
since I was an elf myself. (morphs into Amanda Binns) I will now 
delve into some history, so get yourselves comfortable. Other old you-
know-whats, if you have a different view or memory, please jump in.

When I joined the list, there were about 250 members, it was very 
much a small forum, and all kinds of discussion took place in 
addition to canon.

As the list grew, so did the volume. The Chatter list was established 
after a particularly fun, but off-topic, discussion on British food; 
I remember, because I was involved ("clotted cream" sounded vile to 
me, but in context, it sounded like a good thing). The regional lists 
came about to avoid having specialized discussions (i.e., of interest 
to a smaller group of people) on the main list. Etc.

Also as the list grew, so did the administration. The main focus was 
always preserving the atmosphere and the focus.

My point with this, is that this set of groups and the rules they run 
under is not the product of a bunch of people sitting down and 
drawing up areas, setting out guidelines. In a very real sense, it 
grew, very organically. List rules were first articulated, and then 
refined, to meet an evolving need.

The list rules, then, are the product of two things:
(1) an attempt to articulate, to put into words, what had been done 
by feel or instinct--in separating out Chatter, in separating out 
Movie--how much discussion of the book makes it "canon-based"? This 
is harder than it sounds. Many things that someone "just knows" are 
incredibly difficult to set down as uniformly applicable, hard and 
fast guidelines.
(2) an attempt to maintain the friendly and open atmosphere that had 
existed on the main list from the beginning.

It is only in the past year or so, I believe, that the list 
administration has been consciously trying to shift gears. Organic 
growth is inherently responsive, not directed. The fundamental shift 
being attempted is to move from being reactive (how do we meet this 
need that has arisen; how do we answer this question) to being 
proactive (how can we best plan to meet this need we foresee). This 
list is one manifestation of this perspective shift.

As to your question--remember you asked a question?--the origin of 
the rules, I believe, plays a big role in how they are applied. They 
came into being as evolved responses to evolving needs, rather than 
as planned-out clear distinctions. Many decisions are case-by-case 
and made in light of how the rule evolved and the original intent 
behind it.

The list doesn't see this, but the list rules have been revisited, 
debated, borderline posts discussed, etc., over and over and over. 
It's utterly thrilling, I can tell you. It continues to this day ("Is 
this pending post on the main list too off-topic?"). It will likely 
continue forever. The content is subjective to begin with, and the 
rules themselves are attempts to define the intuitive.

Many posts have a very high "gray area" factor, especially those of 
newer posters who haven't been around long enough for that "you just 
know" experience or intuition to kick in. When a post is borderline, 
and it is a newcomer, I believe the decision is often to let the post 
through, rather than to discourage new posters. (practicing elves? Is 
my perception correct?)

Posting to a list of 11,000-plus is terribly intimidating. It used to 
be like getting up on a table to talk to the people at a really big 
party. Now, it's like addressing the crowd at a major concert. Adding 
over-regulating admins (and many feel we *are* over-regulating 
admins) only adds to the intimidation factor.

The admins are responsible for enforcing the rules, yes--but do not 
despair of the ones that slip by. The new people will get it. You 
have to have been here for a long time to perceive it, but there has 
always been a very strong self-correcting aspect to this list. 

By this, I don't mean criticism or overt "you broke a rule!" posts--
tolerance has always been one of the best things about the list. What 
I mean is, rude, intolerant, or completely off-topic posts tend to 
get ignored. Tentative ones tend to be answered by more experienced 
posters, encouraging the author. Those which make a good point amid 
others of more doubtful worth, have their good point answered and the 
rest ignored. The reaction of the list itself is an inculturation 
process that all active posters assist with. Helping new members 
along, helping them "get it" has *never* been exclusively the purview 
of the admin team. [The thing is, there's an endless supply of new 
people. *sigh* It works out.]

Again, this is just my take. 

Okay, I've talked a lot. Be careful what you ask for, Carolyn, at my 
height I was one of the most prolific posters on the list and most of 
it was about Snape. (who is *not* a vampire)

~Amanda





From zanelupin at zanelupin.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 04:44:10 2003
From: zanelupin at zanelupin.yahoo.invalid (KathyK)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 04:44:10 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpmpiq+lh0p@...>

Hi Everyone,
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "KathyK" <zanelupin at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: zanelupin at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <zanelupin at ...>

I am excited about this trial Feedback forum.  I'm very interested 
in hearing what other listmembers think about different subjects 
pertaining to this list, if only to gauge if my thoughts are out in 
left field somewhere and to see if I need to reevaluate them.  
Thank you, List Elves!

Question from the List Elves:

>>If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?<<

KathyK:

I'd like to echo the sentiments of Annemehr and wish that some of 
the older listmembers who haven't been posting would come back and 
do so.  If only because I'm so new, I feel I've missed out on a lot 
of the fun.

Also, I have noticed a lot of rule breaking going on these days (and 
I have also noticed the Onlist Admin responses, which I very much 
appreciate).  For instance, in the last couple days there's been an 
increase in the number of posters using the "Now Me" approach in 
their responses rather than using their name.  This could be a cause 
for some of the improper attibutions going on lately.  

Relating my wish with my observation, I have to say that I think an 
increased presence of List Elves posting on the Main List would help 
to lead by example and show members how it's done.  I know many List 
Elves already post on the list and that maintaining such a large 
group can be nothing other than very time-consuming so this may not 
be plausible.  

Personally speaking though, I picked up my posting etiquette from a 
few members who post fairly frequently and whose posts are always 
both entertaining and thoughtful.  Some of those posters I learned 
from are list elves.  I didn't post much before the deluge after 
OoP's release and got off moderated status shortly after the 
release.  I can't recall properly but I think maybe one of my 
messages was sent back to me while being moderated but I can tell 
you I didn't learn proper posting etiquette from being on moderated 
status.  I learned by watching the list.  So at first, my posts were 
very messy with not nearly enough snipping, as were many during that 
crazy time.  Oh, and I just realized I forgot to change the subject 
heading on my last post to the main list and I know better.  Yikes!  
I'm part of the problem, too!

In addition to List Elves posting more being helpful for listmembers 
(note: I do not mean *new* members, as I have only been here almost 
6 months) to remember to snip and attribute correctly, it would also 
give some of the listmembers the chance to get to know the list 
administration team a little better.  That might help when the next 
person decides to accuse the elves of being a despotic clique or 
some other nonsense, if the members can see that the List Elves are 
still normal posters just like the rest of us.  I think, too, I 
would be more comfortable discussing questions or problems if I knew 
to whom I was addressing these problems.

Shaun wrote in message 13:

>but I do wonder if some people feel it's not worth bothering to 
post. And some discussion we've had at times - especially after OotP 
came out, where people were talking about their 'list strategies' 
and some people were saying they only read the 'best posters' and 
things like that - well, I can really see some people deciding it's 
not worth writing stuff nobody is going to read.<

KathyK:

Well, that I just have to jump in on because I'm one of those people 
who seriously considered giving up after reading about posting 
strategies on OTC.  But quite a few listmembers kindly wrote to me 
and told me this was *not* the way to go.  And they're right.  Even 
though I continue to feel my posts are largely ignored, I still get 
a great deal out of writing messages and reading responses to them 
if there are any.  I, too, know some people do read my posts and 
they're not nearly the caliber of Shaun's.

Shaun:

>(1) People should read all messages for any thread they are 
participating in.
(2) People should read as many messages on the list as they 
practically can.<

KathyK:

As for (1) I thought this was already a rule?  Or at least something 
that Admin reminds us of from time to time?  

I like (2) mainly because of that same irritation at reading the 
same topic on different threads in the same week, when it wouldn't 
take much effort to go back a couple days to see if anything similar 
has been discussed lately.  But I don't know if it will help with 
this issue.  And as someone who feels ignored but has had to be 
highly selective in her message reading and even more selective in 
her posting of late due to RL intrusions, I don't know if this will 
make anyone who is discouraged at a lack of responses feel any 
better about it because they could also not be reading many 
messages.  I feel badly every time I see someone write a message 
saying it's their first post and I don't have time or the 
inclination to respond and always hope someone else writes something 
about it.  Now I'm babbling, I think, so I'll stop.

The List Elves asked:

>>Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time 
posters?<<

KathyK:

Like some of the others who responded, I thought the way to 
recognize the good posters was throught Fantastic Posts.  Also, on 
the FP page in "The History of HPfGU" appears an appendix at the end 
listing the Hall of Fame members-based on number of posts-of each 
list and the number of posts those members have made.  Perhaps all 
that is necessary is an update of this list and if more recognition 
is needed, remove it from an appendix and give it it's own space.  I 
very much enjoyed reading the first posts of some of the Hall of 
Famers.  

The List Elves:

>>If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
with it?<<

KathyK:

I'm not really sure on this one but I wanted to respond to a few 
people who made suggestions.

Jen Reese in message 3:

>1) Restricting the list size<


KathyK:

While this may be helpful to the problem, I see this suggestion as 
highly unfair to people who might want to join but can't.  Besides, 
if list size was restricted, who's to say HPFGU wouldn't be 
excluding an amazing potential poster with all sorts of wonderful, 
different ideas?  I get the same feel for the "open enrollment" 
idea, that it could be helpful in controlling an influx of new 
posters but could drive away a number of people looking to read 
about and discuss HP *right now.*  Both have the feel of exclusivity 
(don't know that it's a word but, what the heck) that this group 
tends to avoid and wants to avoid, I think.

Jen Reese:

>3) I've always wondered about the many members who never post. How
about offering a limited time to lurk (say 3-6 months) and if a
person doesn't post they are taken off the list?
>4) My other thought was cleaning out the member list by having a
link on the homepage for say 2 months, where everyone who wants to
continue being a member has to click on that link. Anyone not
registering by a certain date would be taken off (but could re-
enroll).<

KathyK:

My best friend is one of those who has never posted a message.  He 
considered it, when he first joined in early July, but soon gave up 
on the idea after being flooded with mail messages.  I told him to 
go to Web View and I encouraged him to post but he was overwhelmed.  
Therefore he sticks with part-time lurking.  No need to lurk all the 
time as I always tell him about the interesting ideas proposed on 
the list.  I think he would be more than annoyed if he were taken 
off the list for not posting.  And he never visits the website and 
may miss an Admin message in his mailbox telling him he'd better go 
there if he wants to stay subscribed.  
I don't know that he'd bother to resubscribe and he wouldn't walk 
away from the experience with a warm, fuzzy feeling for this group 
to tell all his friends about. 

Susan wrote in message 14:

>I don't know how these things work but would it be possible to have 
a group for each of the books? I realize that there would still have
to be a general (main) list for those that meld their ideas through
the entire epic, but a lot of the posts only pertain to one book. Do
you think this would be a significant enough reduction from the main
list to be feasible?<

KathyK:

I think a separate list for each of the books would be massively 
confusing and nearly impossible to maintain because of how much 
cross-referencing of the books is done on each thread.  Besides, I 
have hard enough time keeping up with the lists we have, divided 
very clearly, I think.  I've had to give up on the movie list 
entirely at this time.  If I had to search through five lists apart 
from the main one for canonical discussions, I might start pulling 
out my hair in frustration.  

Susan:

>And maybe a Tbay/FILK list. I personally don't read them...not 
because they aren't good, as a matter of fact they are so good that 
I get quite confused with what is fake and what is real.<

KathyK:

This is less complicated than separating out the list by books but 
I'm still not in favor of the idea.  The reason these posts are 
labeled as such is so that listees know what's in the message and 
can just skip over them if they don't want to read them.  

I think Haggridd's idea in message 15 is interesting but I'd have a 
lot of questions about that before thinking it's a good idea.  I'd 
ask them now but I've been writing this response for the past three 
hours and I'm getting a little tired.

I agree with Annemehr and June's thoughts on the matter, really.  
Prepared, well trained list elves, model posters, patience, visible 
rules and encouragement are the way to go, I think. 

Thank you again, for giving us the opportunity to discuss these 
things.  I love HPFGU and plan to be around for quite a while.  And 
thanks for all the hard work you put into these groups.

KathyK, with the sneaking suspicion that she's still going to be 
standing all alone in left field





From carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 07:26:11 2003
From: carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid (snazzzybird)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 07:26:11 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpn32j+t1pb@...>

--- "Hebby Elf" <hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> Hello!
> 
> Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback. We hope this forum will promote 
> discussion between yourselves, the members of the HPFGU groups, and 
> ourselves, the List Admin Team. We'd like to hear about your 
> concerns about the groups, your ideas for the groups, any 
> suggestions you might have. We also know you have questions, but we 
> thought we'd get the ball rolling by asking a few of our own to 
> start. <g>
> 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "snazzzybird" <carmenharms at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: carmenharms at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <carmenharms at ...>

Others have mentioned it, but it's been a pet peeve of mine for so 
long that I simply must say it: the Search!  I've been using it (or 
trying to) more lately, when new posters have brought up topics that 
have been discussed before -- sometimes with an entirely new 
viewpoint.  Is this an unchangeable characteristic of Yahoomort -- or 
can something be done to improve it?
> 
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

I don't think so.  They *are* recognized, by definition -- "By their 
works shall ye know them".  Any attempt at a ranking system by 
quality of posts would be sure to hurt feelings.  As for ranking by 
number of posts, I've seen that done, and the result is that some 
people post a lot just to drive up their post count.  That would make 
more work for the elves, and is not the behavior we want to drive.
> 
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

I don't see a real need for change in that regard.  There will be a 
flurry of activity, and then it will settle down again.  
> 
> Again, we welcome you here, we're looking forward to hearing what 
> you have to say, and we hope we'll all benefit from the discussions 
> that take place here. 
> 
Thank you for the opportunity to offer my opinions.  I think this was 
a great idea!

--snazzzybird





From abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 16:27:23 2003
From: abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid (abigailnus)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:27:23 -0000
Subject: Ignored Posts and Reading Strategies (was: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback)
In-Reply-To: <3FBF462E.7564.52888A@localhost>
Message-ID: <bpo2pb+qod2@...>

Full disclosure: I am a list elf, and have been one for about two months.  I've 
also been a member of the Fantastic Posts writing group since June.  I'm 
writing this letter in my own personal capacity as a member of HPfGU.

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
> I think in an environment where posters feel 
> their posts are ignored (and I'm afraid I think HPFGU may be getting that 
> reputation) 

Sorry to snip so much, but this particular comment seems very important 
to me.  Is this your own personal impression, Shaun, or is it something 
you've noticed other people commenting about?  How about other people 
here?  Do you feel that your posts are being ignored?

I've been a member of HPfGU since December '01.  When you consider the 
length of that period, I'm not a very prolific poster - I posted my 100th post 
only a few days ago.  Some of my posts were ignored, and others created 
massive threads, albeit often spinning off in directions which I hadn't 
intended to discuss, and was often not interested in pursuing.  I never 
experienced the group as an everybody-knows-your-name kind of place the 
way some of the veteran posters did - there were already 4000 members 
when I joined, which may seem like a little now that we've passed 11,000, 
but it isn't.  Being a rather shy person, I never expected a response to most 
of my posts (although I hoped for it), and was often more surprised to get 
feedback, on or off-list.  So, I'm a little tickled by the perception that one is 
automatically entitled to a response on any thought one posts - if that is 
indeed what I'm seeing here.  However, here are a few thoughts on reading 
posts on HPfGU:

1. Don't assume that a message that hasn't been replied to hasn't been read.  
Before OOP came out, when membership was "only" 7000 strong, I worked 
out that in order to support the message volume as it was then, the list 
required only a few hundred active posters.  My calculations were posted on 
OTC, and anyone who looks them up can see that they are highly debatable 
- I assumed that my posting volume was an average one, which by no means 
a foregone conclusions.  I also didn't take into account the fact that posting 
volume changes - most HPfGU members start out posting large amounts of 
messages and then taper off.  For that matter, I didn't take into consideration 
the many members who leave the group without ever unsubscribing, thus 
artificially inflating the list's membership.  

Flawed as my calculations no doubt were, anyone reading the list can see that 
only a fraction of its membership actively contributes to discussions - this is 
as it has always been.  Periods of intense activity such as post-GoF or OOP and, 
to a lesser extent, following the release of the movies, are the exception rather 
then the rule.  What this means in essence is that, even though none of the 
relatively small group of posters felt like responding to your post, chances are 
good that a very large group of people read it.  Which brings me to...

2. Write Feedback.  If you've just read a great (or even just a good) post, and 
can't think of anything to add to, write to author off-list and say so.  As a 
recipient of feedback, I can't even begin to tell you how good it feels to know 
that someone took a few minutes out of their day to write me a few appreciative 
words.  Feedback keeps good posters posting, and inspires them to put more 
time and effort into their posts.  The feedback that I got on my Generational 
Parallels post back in August inspired me to write my Snape the Iconoclast post, 
which until that point had only been and idea buzzing in my mind.  

Another thing that feedback does is help to keep list volume down. Right now 
there are a lot of cases in which a response to a post won't say much more then 
'I think this is a really neat idea'.  Often these responses are couched in terms 
that place them more or less within the boundaries of posting guidelines, but 
they don't really add anything new to the discussion.  My general rule of thumb 
is that unless I have either a counter argument or additional canon, I don't post 
a response to the list.  I admit, I don't always write feedback when I should, but 
whenever a post truly catches my interest, I try to let the author know.

3. Shaun mentioned 'reading strategies', which came up in the OTC debate back 
in August.  A lot of veteran members admitted to skipping the messages of 
unfamiliar posters and concentrating on known quantities - people they knew 
from before publication who could be counted on to deliver good posts.  There 
was an understandably upset reaction from the newbies in that discussion.  I'd 
like to point out that while I myself often engage in this kind of behavior, it is 
more for finding exceptions to the rule then for determining exactly which posts 
I will read.  In other words, if I see a poster I recognize, I might read their post 
even if the subject line alone wouldn't necessarily prompt me to do so.  

When deciding whether to read a post, the most important factor for me is 
almost always  the subject line.  Quite apart from letting me know whether or 
not a topic is of interest to me (for example, I find discussions the time-travel 
mechanics in PoA rather wearying, and find Snape infinitely fascinating), the 
subject line is often a quick indicator of the kind of post one can expect to find 
when clicking through.  

I prefer subject lines to be descriptive and distinctive.  A subject line like 'Snape' 
tells me nothing about the post, but it does indicate to me that the poster might 
be a relative newbie, who is still making his way through a backlog of theories 
that I've already covered (this is not meant as a criticism of this hypothetical 
newbie.  I was a newbie once myself, and I also considered most of the topics 
that this newbie is now considering.  He or she should enjoy themselves, but I no 
longer feel a need to engage in that discussion).  A more elaborate subject line 
lets me know that I should give a post my attention, as the author's notions are 
now a little more structured, and there's a greater chance of my seeing 
something new.

Some posters try to make their subject lines enigmatic as a way of catching 
peoples' eye.  In general, I think this tactic backfires.  A few days ago, someone 
posted a message to the list with a subject line to the effect of 'A new theory 
about Snape'.  I debated with myself for a few minutes before opening that 
message, because the odds were against this theory being new to me.  As it 
turns out, it was a theory I had been unfamiliar with, but a subject line like 
'Snape and the DADA Jinx' would have had an easier time catching my interest. 

Finally, it's important to keep subject lines relevant to the discussion.  Threads 
often drift in various directions, and it's very helpful to change the subject line 
of any message that does this.  This allows your target audience to change with 
the discussion.  For example, a few weeks ago I posted a message about 
Dumbledore's leadership skills, but the discussion soon drifted towards Snape, 
without changing the subject line.  Making sure your subject lines stay current is 
actually in the posting guidelines, but it's a rule that people often ignore.

In general, I've found that HPfGU is, as Amanda wrote, self-correcting.  Posts 
that deserve attention will usually find it.  While it is unfortunate that some 
veteran posters don't frequent the list as often as they used to, and hence 
some newbies posters feel as if 'the establishment' is ignoring them, it is also 
to be expected.  Eventually, discussion topics are exhausted, and some 
members don't feel the need to keep up with the list as religiously as they used 
to.  In my experience, newer members who are also of high quality will tend to 
rise to the top in these older members' stead.  As long as there's always a 
sufficient contingent of veterans capable of instilling the HPfGU atmosphere in 
new members, the list will maintain its character even if its composition changes.

Abigail




From pengolodh_sc at ...  Sat Nov 22 16:58:05 2003
From: pengolodh_sc at ... (=?iso-8859-1?q?Christian=20Stub=F8?=)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:58:05 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpmpiq+lh0p@...>
Message-ID: <20031122165805.8503.qmail@...>

--- Jen Reese wrote:
[snip]
> Hebby Elf: 
> > If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> > posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> > with it? 
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: pengolodh_sc at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <pengolodh_sc at ...>

As a comment of my own - I am not certain there is much which can be done apart from what
has been done earlier.  Possibly the idea about letting people subsribe only to the
movie-list for a limited time-period has merit, but there *will* be people who will
resent that, as some subscribers will be interested in discussing the books as well, and
some new subscribers will only be interested in discussing the books.  I recall the great
debate back when the first movie was released, which resulted in the decision to create
the separate list for movie-discussion.  I think that by making certain new members know
where to go for what sort of discussion, a lot will be achieved in smoothing things.

[snip]

> 3) I've always wondered about the many members who never post.
> How about offering a limited time to lurk (say 3-6 months) and
> if a person doesn't post they are taken off the list? This might
> turn into an administrative nightmare, though.

I do not really see how this deals with surges of new *posters*, as differentiated from
new *members*.  What happens after each release of a new movie or book in this series, is
that we have large numbers of new members, many of whom post a lot.  This causes a lot of
additional mail-volume, sometimes needlessly so, as answers are duplicated,t riplicated,
etc., as people do not check if someone else has said the same thing already.  This, over
time, settles down, until the next release of a book or a movie.

To purge the list of lurkers really does nothing to reduce email-volume on the list,
since lurker don't contribute to email-volume in the first place.  Also, if this policy
becomes known, then you will see all the nominal lurkers make a single post within a
small timeperiod - it would result in a short period (say a couple of weeks) with
5000-8000 emails in addition to the normal list-colume, which I think would be a rather
frightening prospect for many members.  It would also be nigh-on impossible to keep track
of those persons that do not post very often, but on occasion find an interesting topic -
average list-volume tends to be 1500-2000 posts monthly, with peaks around releases of
books and movies.

> 4) My other thought was cleaning out the member list by having a 
> link on the homepage for say 2 months, where everyone who wants to 
> continue being a member has to click on that link. Anyone not 
> registering by a certain date would be taken off (but could re-
> enroll).

This also seems to me a bad idea.  For one thing, it will annoy many members that they
have to opt-in again when they already have done so once, by subscribing.  Those that
didn't catch the announcement will be even more annoyed - angry, even.

 --- Potterfanme wrote: 
> Hebby: 
> > If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> > posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> > with it? 
> 
> Susan:
> I don't know how these things work but would it be possible to have a 
> group for each of the books?  I realize that there would still have 
> to be a general (main) list for those that meld their ideas through 
> the entire epic, but a lot of the posts only pertain to one book.  Do 
> you think this would be a significant enough reduction from the main 
> list to be feasible?  [...] And maybe a Tbay/FILK list.  

I think this would serve mainly to increase email-volume for thsoe subscribed, as well as
increasing confusion and workload on the admin-team.  Many posts are applicable to more
than one book, and so may find themselves posted to mroe than one list.  The admins would
also need to keep an eye on the specific book lists, ands trike down posts that are about
the wrong book, and in addition one would see a lot of emails from lists about the
specific books copied to the general list.  People replying to a post which has appeared
mroe than one place then amy end up replying to the wrong list.  New members will tend to
subscribe to all lists, and so will need moderation on all lists, greatly increasing
workload on the elves.

 --- KathyK wrote: 
> Hi Everyone,
> 
> I am excited about this trial Feedback forum.  I'm very interested 
> in hearing what other listmembers think about different subjects 
> pertaining to this list, if only to gauge if my thoughts are out in 
> left field somewhere and to see if I need to reevaluate them.  
> Thank you, List Elves!
> 
> Question from the List Elves:
> 
> >>If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?<<
> 
> KathyK:
> 
> I'd like to echo the sentiments of Annemehr and wish that some of 
> the older listmembers who haven't been posting would come back and 
> do so.  If only because I'm so new, I feel I've missed out on a lot 
> of the fun.
> 
> Also, I have noticed a lot of rule breaking going on these days (and 
> I have also noticed the Onlist Admin responses, which I very much 
> appreciate).  For instance, in the last couple days there's been an 
> increase in the number of posters using the "Now Me" approach in 
> their responses rather than using their name.  This could be a cause 
> for some of the improper attibutions going on lately.  
[snip]

Confusion is best avoided by simply using the existing Internet norm for quoting - which
norm exists for the express purpose of avoiding confusion.  Shaun laid out that norm in
an earlier mail - by using that norm, combined with appropriate snipping, and indicating
the name of the person quoted at the top of the quote (as I have done here), it will be
very clear who is saying what.

=====
Best regards
Christian Stub
------------------------
It has come to the attention of the management that you exist. Please cease and desist. Thank you.




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 18:05:26 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 18:05:26 -0000
Subject: OCELOTS and the return of the old list members
Message-ID: <bpo8h6+1hag@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "KathyK" <zanelupin at y...> wrote:
 
> I'd like to echo the sentiments of Annemehr and wish that some of 
> the older listmembers who haven't been posting would come back and 
> do so.  If only because I'm so new, I feel I've missed out on a lot 
> of the fun.

In message 80924, Remnant coined the acronym OCELOTS (Once-zealous
Crew of Elder Listees Oddly Taken Silent) to refer to those oldbies. 
I've heard quite a few queries and comments about when these OCELOTS
will return to the main list and recapture their former glory.

What you might not know is that the OLD listmembers aren't usually
writing the good posts: it's the NEW ones. To take the example of the
now-legendary Elkins, she joined the list in Dec 2001 (and before
posting read the *entire* archive, which at the time comprised 33,000
posts).  She delurked on 21 Jan 02 with post 33804, <fangirl> in
response to *my* post </fangirl>.  Elk posted like a madwoman for the
next year or so, but then RL stuff and stress-related fatigue from
being a Mod caused her to slow, then stop her posting.  (I don't know
if she's coming back, but one can always hope.)

Many other OCELOTS followed a similar pattern: they jumped in with
both feet, posted like crazy, then slowed way down and sometimes
stopped.  There are *tons* of OCELOTS that y'all don't know about
because their glory days were back in 2000-01, right Amanda?  Their
posts formed the theoretical foundation on which the later OCELOTS built.

Why is this?  

1) The kind of mental and emotional energy required to write those
types of posts (especially TBAY) inevitably runs out -- they're only
human, after all.  Sometimes folks get a second wind, sometimes not.

2) When one is *that* involved in HPfGU, one's RL interests and
obligations tend to get neglected.  After awhile, the little bitty
weeds in their flowerbeds become shrubs, new life spontaneously erupts
in their refrigerators, clean underwear runs out, and spouses and
children put their faces on milk cartons.  Eventually, RL demands win
the day, and the Legendary Poster has to cut back or be declared
legally dead.

3) The "good" posters often end up as List Elves, which takes up much
of their time and energy.  Unfortunately, some become discouraged over
the occasional Elf Squabbles and quit the list entirely.  On the other
hand, some just keep on posting as before.

4) Some of the OCELOTS really didn't like OoP.  I don't get that at
all, but there you are.

5) Like many obsessions, HPfGU can wear off after awhile.  As Heidi
said, sometimes you do HPfGU until you've had your fill and then turn
to other HP-related pursuits such as fanfic, the convention, or other
HP discussion lists.  Or you do Buffy.  Whatever.

6) Some OCELOTS had the time to post prolifically because they were
out of work, in school, or otherwise had sufficient free time.  Then
they graduate, get a job (or a new job), have a baby, get married,
move, or have health problems.  So much for that free time.  It's a
drag, but it happens.


In short, don't wait for the return of the OCELOTS to have fun on the
list: create your own fun.  It's not taboo to revisit old theories
from a year ago.  If you want to re-evaluate the Memory Charm
Symposium (52858-60) in light of OoP, go right ahead.  One thing I've
noticed after being on the lists for nearly two years is that every
time an old theory gets rehashed, it's done slightly differently. 
Sometimes it's being explored from different angles, or the discussion
that led up to it (or away from it) adds other implications than were
evident the first time around.  Any time you get new people
participating, you get new perspectives.

It's the constant influx of new members that keeps HPfGU interesting,
not the OCELOTS.  After all, they were the most interesting when they
were new, too.

--Dicentra, speaking in her own, unofficial capacity




From jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 17:26:36 2003
From: jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid (jwcpgh)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:26:36 -0000
Subject: reactions to prior posts
Message-ID: <bpo68c+ot8a@...>

First, I echo the thanks of many posters-the admins have had a 
trying time of late, it appears, and I appreciate their willingness 
to hang in and try some new measures.  
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: jwcpgh at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <jwcpgh at ...>

Second, I want to commend the listees, both those who have posted to 
this new list and those on the general list.  I joined after 
attending Nimbus and have so much enjoyed my time here.  As a rule, 
I think the quality of posts is very high and deliciously thought-
provoking.  Keep up the good work, y'all!

It sounds to me like those people with experience in these matters 
are discouraging election of admins.  Their arguments have been 
persuasive to me.  This list is not, in fact, a democracy.  I, for 
instance, didn't do any of the work to start it and I don't do 
anything to help maintain it.  I don't have to deal with Yahoo-
related problems or floods of emails from posters.  I can just fire 
up my computer and jump in.  Since I don't do any of the work and I 
don't even know exactly what is involved in being an admin, I don't 
think it's reasonable to want to tell those who do the work who they 
have to work with.  It's comparable to recruiting new members to a 
board of directors.  The current members decide among themselves 
whom to invite to join the board.  They know best what skills are 
required and who's likely to have them.  Just to keep the process 
from becoming completely closed, though, it might be reasonable to 
announce when it's time to replace and/or add new admins, in case 
anyone wants to volunteer.  I know how hard it is to find a good, 
reliable volunteer, believe me!  The admins would have to retain the 
right politely to turn down an offer of participation, of course.

The admins could write job descriptions that would be available for 
anyone to read who was interested in volunteering their time.  Once 
people see how much work is really involved (and I imagine it's 
considerable), some self-selection will take place.  I'm not sure 
that relying solely on the quality of posts is a great way to 
recruit new admins.  There may be listees who aren't superb writers 
but might be terrific editors.  

I liked Carolyn's ideas about how to sort and file posts.  If the 
admins decide to go with some or all of those ideas, I'll volunteer 
to work on a topic.  I also loved her idea about a book-that's so 
cool!  I'd help work on that project too, although I imagine it 
wouldn't be able to get rolling for real until after the last book 
comes out.  

Ignored posts: just because a post doesn't get a response doesn't 
mean no one read it.  Sometimes the post just says it all and the 
only possible response is "Yeah-what s/he said!".  Abigail's 
reminder that feeback works was most welcome to me-I don't do it as 
often as I should and I know I love getting off-list mail.  I'm 
corresponding with several listees regularly and enjoying it very 
much.  

Again, thanks to the admins for their hard work.  Please let me know 
if there's anything I can do to make that work easier.

Laura, emerging from a delightful haze of Two Towers-extended 
version joy...Aragorn...Legolas...life is good!





From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 19:35:45 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:35:45 -0000
Subject: Attribution problems
Message-ID: <bpodqh+tqho@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...>
wrote:
> On 21 Nov 2003 at 1:40, Hebby Elf wrote:

> > If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
> 
> Practically speaking - I'd like to see basic posting standards 
> enforced. What I mean by that is people being expected to quote 
> messages in a standard way - basically the way I am doing it now. The 
> message you are replying to is indented by >
> 
> The message you are replying to are replying to are indented > >
> 
> This is an internet standard - but more and more people aren't using
> it. 

Shaun is describing "nested attribution," which is indeed a very old,
established way of doing things online.  For example, in this very
message, Hebby Elf's message is set off by two angle brackets at the
beginning of the line, Shaun's with one, and mine with none
(indicating original material).

However.

Many people read and post to HPfGU from the digests or individual
e-mails.  If their e-mail applications happen to use the angle
brackets and nested attribution, they're in luck.  If they post from
Web view, they'll get the nesting, too. But many e-mail apps don't do
this any more.  Instead, they open a space above the quotage and don't
set off the quotes with angle brackets, thus:



[space for response]

-- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
Practically speaking - I'd like to see basic posting standards
enforced. What I mean by that is people being expected to quote
messages in a standard way - basically the way I am doing it now.



If you're using one of these types of e-mail programs at work (where
e-mail exchanges consist of short notes, not essays), you get the
original material at the top of the window so that you don't have to
scroll through miles of quotage to see what's new.  Underneath the
original material is a long trail of all the previous stuff, in
reverse chronological order.  Generally speaking, in business it's
considered good form to leave the quotage intact because you don't
have to look at it unless you want to.  It also leaves a record of the
conversation so that people can backtrack through it without having to
search their in-boxes for all of the messages in a thread.

Messages in this format show up in the pending messages queue all of
the time.  Depending on circumstances, we'll move the original
material to the bottom, label it appropriately, and send it through
(sending the writer a note of explanation), or we'll send the message
back to the writer and ask that s/he do some judicious snippage and
rearranging.  

When we send messages back, the old post won't have been set off by
the right number of brackets. (Yahoo puts one angle bracket on *all*
the message lines, except for the Elf's note at the top.)  Similarly,
when experienced list members respond from their non-bracket-adding
e-mail apps, they have to figure out how to clearly attribute the
quotage.  

Hence the practice of setting off quotage with a label such as
"HebbyElf:"  The other alternative is to manually add the angle
brackets (and some people do), but unless your e-mail program has the
same or fewer characters per line as Yahoo, you'll get those maddening
line breaks where one line is fine, the next two words long.  That's a
Yahoo characteristic: reading soft line breaks as hard, and their
Wrap/Unwrap Lines feature doesn't help.  If we knew a spell to correct
this, we'd use it even if it were Unforgivable.  (Well, *I* would.)

To further add to the confusion, many of our list members are...
well... "TechnoSquibs," who know how to respond to an e-mail, but
that's the extent of their expertise.  When we try to explain our
posting style to them, they can get awfully confused.  Sometimes they
just ignore us and do what they know, sometimes they get frustrated
and quit, sometimes they catch on.  The more experienced list members
-- especially those who have been on the Internet since Bill Gates was
in diapers -- get really frustrated with the TechnoSquibs.  To an
extent, "amateurish" use of posting software is something we'll just
have to grin and bear.  HPfGU requires participation, not technical
expertise.

It's a lot of work to get a post into good shape, and because most
other Internet sites don't give a flying gnome about format, some list
members don't see why it's important.  For every list member who
complains about poor posting format, there's another who wonders why
so many jack-booted fascists have this much free time on their hands.



KathyK:

> [I]n the last couple days there's been an 
> increase in the number of posters using the "Now Me" approach in 
> their responses rather than using their name.  This could be a cause 
> for some of the improper attributions going on lately.  

Ah, the infamous "now me".  Ironically, it's the unintended
consequence of a crackdown on bad attribution.  Because so many e-mail
apps don't add the brackets, it can be difficult to tell where the
quotage ends and the original material begins.  Someone started using
"now me" to clarify things, and other newbies followed suit.  Despite
many ADMINS begging list members to cease and desist, the habit
persists.  It's the down side of using other messages as an example.

KathyK is right: it messes up attribution because the identity of "now
me" changes as soon as someone replies.

Any suggestions on how to rid list members of this bad habit?



Susan:

> I have only been a member since earlier this year.  I have to say 
> that I was quite frustrated when I was posting on the main list as I 
> would read every post and try to emulate the older posters in the way 
> that I posted.  Unfortunately no matter how I posted, it seemed I did 
> it wrong.  I would follow the elf's instructions and lo and behold a 
> different elf would reprimand me for that way of posting.  It got so 
> frustrating that I started watching other posters who posted just 
> like I did.  Now, I do realize that I have no way of knowing if these 
> other posters received howlers or not but they continued to post the 
> same way time after time so I (possibly wrongly) assumed that they 
> were not reprimanded as I was.  I finally just gave up and decided to 
> not post anymore.  

If it's any comfort at all, I got *seven* messages bounced back to me
before I got off moderated status, each for a different infraction. 
IOW, I feel your pain.  As for Elves giving you contradictory
instructions, would you mind writing me offlist and sending me those
messages?  I'd like to see what happened.


--Dicentra, speaking in her own, unofficial capacity




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 21:09:29 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:09:29 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Attribution problems
In-Reply-To: <bpodqh+tqho@...>
Message-ID: <3FC06B39.24962.3E67DAF@localhost>

On 22 Nov 2003 at 19:35, Dicentra spectabilis wrote:

> To further add to the confusion, many of our list members are...
> well... "TechnoSquibs," who know how to respond to an e-mail, but
> that's the extent of their expertise.  When we try to explain our
> posting style to them, they can get awfully confused.  Sometimes they
> just ignore us and do what they know, sometimes they get frustrated
> and quit, sometimes they catch on.  The more experienced list members
> -- especially those who have been on the Internet since Bill Gates was
> in diapers -- get really frustrated with the TechnoSquibs.  To an
> extent, "amateurish" use of posting software is something we'll just
> have to grin and bear.  HPfGU requires participation, not technical
> expertise.


All right - so is HPFGU going to suddenly turn into a technicoloured group with 
lots of people using different sized texts and different coloured texts (basically 
html posting). Because an increasing number of people are now using e-mail 
programs that don't have a plain text setting (a lot of aol users, for example, are in 
this situation now) or where the plain text setting is difficult to set (way too difficult 
for the average casual user?).

I'm aware of all the problems with nested attribution and some modern e-mail 
programs - but it is an internet standard, and personally I think it can be 
reasonably expected that people on a mailing list follow the internet standards. I'm 
not saying you kick someone off automatically because they don't - there needs to 
be flexibility, IMHO - but if you don't set high standards you're never going to get 
close.

Now nested attribution may be a minor point - but I think the html issue is a 
serious one that the admins need to consider. Because more and more e-mail 
programs over the next year or so are likely to only be capable of rich 
text/html/whatever you want to call it posting. And if the admin is setting list 
policies about quoting based on the fact that they know that a lot of e-mail 
programs no longer follow the accepted practices that have evolved over time, I 
do wonder how html posts are going to be handled.

If they are allowed, I think you will lose a lot of members. If they are not allowed, 
then you're basically going to be in a situation where you're restricting a lot of 
people's options in joining.

That's a side issue for me at least - but one that I think needs to be considered for 
the purposes of consistent policy.

With regards to nested attribution the list admin already require people to format 
their replies in a particular way (at least in theory: "Hence the practice of setting 
off quotage with a label such as "HebbyElf:").

I think that's fine - but if you're going to set requirements like that, then personally 
speaking, I think they should comply with the accepted practices of e-mail. Bear in 
mind that a lot of people aren't just on HPFGU. A lot of people are on a lot of 
mailing lists. If *all* those mailing lists requiring specific posting methodologies, it 
becomes quite complex to keep them all straight - now, I don't have a problem 
with that - but my point is that HPFGU's current 'quotage' practice requires 
posters to do extra work anyway - so, personally, I think if you are going to do 
that, you may as well go all the way and require nested attribution even though 
some e-mail programs don't do it automatically. If HPFGU wasn't imposing any 
standard, I think it'd be a different matter - but it does, so I honestly think it makes 
sense for those standards to match accepted internet/e-mail practices.

Please understand - these are fairly minor points IMHO. I wouldn't raise them at 
all except we've been asked for feedback. But - well, for reasons I don't want to go 
into (it basically would require a massive essay to explain - fundamentally it's a 
visual problem) having to go back and insert names in front of paragraphs I've 
quoted etc is quite difficult for me to do (the lack of nested attribution also makes 
e-mails much, much harder for me to read as well, for the same reasons). It takes 
a significant amount of work, to the extent that it makes me wonder sometimes if 
it's worth posting. But I'll do it when I need to because it's a rule on the list. I 
realise that requiring nested attribution might require some posters to do some 
extra work - but I don't think that's unreasonable - the current system requires me 
to do considerable extra work. You do what you need to do to comply with the 
rules of a voluntary association.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 21:25:50 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 08:25:50 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Ignored Posts and Reading Strategies (was: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback)
In-Reply-To: <bpo2pb+qod2@...>
References: <3FBF462E.7564.52888A@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FC06F0E.7143.3F576FC@localhost>

On 22 Nov 2003 at 16:27, abigailnus wrote:

> Full disclosure: I am a list elf, and have been one for about two months.  I've 
> also been a member of the Fantastic Posts writing group since June.  I'm 
> writing this letter in my own personal capacity as a member of HPfGU.
> 
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> wrote:
> > I think in an environment where posters feel 
> > their posts are ignored (and I'm afraid I think HPFGU may be getting that 
> > reputation) 
> 
> Sorry to snip so much, but this particular comment seems very important 
> to me.  Is this your own personal impression, Shaun, or is it something 
> you've noticed other people commenting about?  How about other people 
> here?  Do you feel that your posts are being ignored?

Mostly, I am going on what other people have said. As I've mentioned before I'm 
on a lot of e-mail lists and naturally enough, being on a mailing list with someone 
often indicates shared interests - I have recommended HPFGU to quite a few 
people at times, and quite a few of them have joined. And more than a few of 
them have voiced the complaint that HPFGU seems cliquish and that they gave 
up posting because they felt their posts were being ignored. These are people 
who've been on a lot of mailing lists over the years - they do know how they work, 
they do know that not every post gets a reply - but they still have the impression 
that the level of 'ignored posts' on HPFGU is unusually high.

Personally speaking, I can point to one thing that makes me wonder if my posts to 
the main list are getting read. I know some of them are, but there's been one 
incident that makes me wonder how many posts are being ignored. On both the 
main list and HPFGU-OTChatter I've been involved in discussions at times about 
the nature of the role of prefects in schools.

Recently I came into possession of a document that outlines in a reasonable 
amount of detail, how the prefect system works in a number of highly-British-style 
schools in Australia. Thinking this might be of interest to some people, I offered to 
send it to anyone on the main list, and anyone on the OTChatter list who might 
like to see it.

>From OTChatter (which is a list I am confident that most posts are read on) I 
received about twenty requests for the document. From the main list (which 
nominally has about 8 times as many members) I received *one* request.

To me, the most likely reason (not necessarily the only reason) for that type of 
discrepancy is that far fewer people read the post on the main list.

I've also been involved in other threads where, as part of a discussion, someone 
has asked a question which within 10 posts or so has been answered by two or 
three people - the conversation continues and 100 posts later, there are obviously 
people who haven't read those answers - but have clearly read posts before and 
after them, from what they are replying to. It seems to me pretty clear that many 
posts are just skipped even by people participating in particular threads.
 
Now - in and of itself, this is pretty much inevitable on a large list. But I think it 
probably is putting some people off, and I know people who when they see this 
happening, and then saw posts around OotP time discussing 'reading strategies' 
did simply give up on the list. So whether it's true or not, the perception is having 
an impact.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 22:30:01 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:30:01 -0000
Subject: How many Elves would be too many?
Message-ID: <bpoo19+40rt@...>

In talking about the surge of new members expected after the POA 
movie, and then when the next book is released, several people 
mentioned adding Elves to handle the inreased volume. I'm just 
wondering, from an Elf perspective--can it reach a point where there 
are too many Elves to make decisions by consensus? That's my 
understanding of the process now, group decision-making by 
consensus, which seems like a great way to do things.

>From Abigail's post, she mentioned 7000 members prior to OOTP and 
now we have 11,000+, so 4000 new members. If there are 2000-4000 new 
members joining after POA, then again with the next book (assuming 
it's released before the next movie!), that could be a group in the 
range of 15-20,000 people. How many elves (estimate) would be needed 
for a group that size? Or does it depend more on the number of posts 
per day rather than actual group size? Just curious.

Jen, thinking this Feedback list is a really good idea!







From przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 20:27:49 2003
From: przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:27:49 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Attribution problems
In-Reply-To: <bpodqh+tqho@...>
References: <bpodqh+tqho@...>
Message-ID: <3FBFC6C5.4090809@...>

Dicentra spectabilis wrote:
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Przemyslaw Plaskowicki" <przepla at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: przepla at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <przepla at ...>

> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...>
> wrote:
> > On 21 Nov 2003 at 1:40, Hebby Elf wrote:
>
> > > If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
> >
> [...]
>
> Shaun is describing "nested attribution," which is indeed a very old,
> established way of doing things online.
>
This illustrates another problem with nesting. See below for further 
discussion.

[...]

> Generally speaking, in business it's
> considered good form to leave the quotage intact because you don't
> have to look at it unless you want to.  It also leaves a record of the
> conversation so that people can backtrack through it without having to
> search their in-boxes for all of the messages in a thread.

I was sure, that happens because some people would not read the response 
thinking that someone had in mistake sent them back their original message.

[...]

> KathyK:
>
> > [I]n the last couple days there's been an
> > increase in the number of posters using the "Now Me" approach in
> > their responses rather than using their name.  This could be a cause
> > for some of the improper attributions going on lately. 
>
> Ah, the infamous "now me".  Ironically, it's the unintended
> consequence of a crackdown on bad attribution.  Because so many e-mail
> apps don't add the brackets, it can be difficult to tell where the
> quotage ends and the original material begins.  Someone started using
> "now me" to clarify things, and other newbies followed suit.  Despite
> many ADMINS begging list members to cease and desist, the habit
> persists.  It's the down side of using other messages as an example.
>
> KathyK is right: it messes up attribution because the identity of "now
> me" changes as soon as someone replies.
>
>
As evidenced at the top of this message nested quoting have a 
disadvantage of doing things like:

Ron wrote:
 >Harry wrote:
 >>Malfoy wrote:
 >>>Hermione wrote:
 >>>>Dumbledore wrote:

Which creates additional chaos in proper attributing. When people 
attributes by

Malfoy:
 >What actually Malfoy wrote

this header nonsense with multiple names at the beginning can be simply 
omitted.

> Any suggestions on how to rid list members of this bad habit?


Perhaps by agreeing to use one way of attributing,  and using it on all 
messages. Also if Elfs would like to correct attributing to agreed 
format other listees should follow.

Best solution would be adding 'Pshemekan's response'/'Pshemekan thinks' 
or similar at the beginning of _own_ response (as this takes of problem 
of attributing from responder's shoulders). Naturally that won't work 
when responding in quote-then-relevant-response format (as in this mail) 
--  such responses are, however, rather rare.

>
> Susan:
>
> [...]

> > I finally just gave up and decided to
> > not post anymore. 
>
> If it's any comfort at all, I got *seven* messages bounced back to me
> before I got off moderated status, each for a different infraction.
> IOW, I feel your pain.  As for Elves giving you contradictory
> instructions, would you mind writing me offlist and sending me those
> messages?  I'd like to see what happened.
>
Well, I must confess that none of my posts was bounced back to me, when 
I was in a moderated status -- spring this year. I'm sure that is 
because I use mailing lists and Usenet since 1998.  It takes literally 
years (well, it took me that time) to instinctively use proper way of 
Internet posting, so don't worry.

-- 
Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki
It is the duty of every citizen according to his best capacities to give validity to his convictions in political affairs. (Albert Einstein, 'Treasury for the Free World,' 1946)







From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 23:44:28 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:44:28 -0800
Subject: Stuffs from everyone replied to-
References: <bpo68c+ot8a@...>
Message-ID: <005d01c3b152$92660520$32381c40@...>

Laura:

< just because a post doesn't get a response doesn't
mean no one read it.  Sometimes the post just says it all and the
only possible response is "Yeah-what s/he said!">

Completly.  That's one of the reasons I rarely write on the main list...I can't
think of anything more to add to the topic so I just silently agree with
everyone.  Though I know it seems as if posts go into the great abyss when not
replied to.  Of course I've gotten used to that as rarely do my posts get
acknowledge (on the rare occasion that I post) but that's for a number of
reasons.

Shaun wrote:

<Because an increasing number of people are now using e-mail
programs that don't have a plain text setting (a lot of aol users, for example,
are in
this situation now) or where the plain text setting is difficult to set (way too
difficult
for the average casual user?).>

Yes but as a Yahoo!Group we can change the group settings so that HTML is
stripped out and just text is left.  I have my own personal settings that way on
every list I belong to and every list I own (not HPfGU as I don't 'own' it),
mostly because my computer freaks out at HTML emails.

I'm not saying HPfGU will suddenly change this setting (if we haven't already,
woudln't know about that) but I'm saying it's an option of HTML is the only way
people can post and lots of list members are complaining about colours and or
whatever.

<If they are allowed, I think you will lose a lot of members.>

I don't really see people losing the right to use pretty colours as a reason to
jump ship...unless your already annoyed with us and are looking for any excuse.
As I stated above, this can be changed for the whole list, which means no matter
how someone posts, it all shows up uniform.  Concidering our demographic...I
think a lot of people would be happy with the whole non squinting factor.

Jen wrote:

< I'm just
wondering, from an Elf perspective--can it reach a point where there
are too many Elves to make decisions by consensus?>

You mean we aren't there yet?  No, seriously...er, I would say we're close to
too many elves considering how many days it takes to write an admin or make a
decision (I'm more of a snap decision girl, my elf time has taught me
patience...or at least how to appear patient).  Unless we lost a mass amount of
elves right before PoA was released, I don't think we would really need to bring
on too many/any.  It takes quite a while to train an elf and make sure they have
the swing of things, and bringing them on for a huge surge is more of a sink or
swim type thing that I wouldn't want to put them through.

<Or does it depend more on the number of posts
per day rather than actual group size? Just curious.>

How many posts, size, how many elves stage a rebellion and start throwing
eclairs around....many things factor into it.  The main factor would be a great
call from the elves of HELP.  That usually gets a response. :)


Saitaina
Who is obviously a List Elf and Listee...I can also cook!
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a tree
because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a better
day than I am today."




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 22 23:47:19 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 15:47:19 -0800
Subject: Welcome Questionare
References: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <006001c3b152$f8604840$32381c40@...>

Wasn't actually going to reply to this but oh well:

If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

Bring back the enforced signature rule.  I liked it a great deal.  Also more
snipping, lots more snipping lessons for listees.

Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

No because then those who have been here for ages but only have about 20-50
posts to their name feel left out as do the newbs.

If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new
posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal
with it?

Run for the hill screaming...I mean prepare for the surge by finishing training
our new elves, getting pendings whipped into shape and making sure that we keep
a sharp eye on the list for post quality.

Again, we welcome you here, we're looking forward to hearing what
you have to say, and we hope we'll all benefit from the discussions
that take place here.

Trust me, no one wants to hear what I have to say, I'm just here for the free
snacks.

Saitaina
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a tree
because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a better
day than I am today."




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 00:02:29 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:02:29 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Stuffs from everyone replied to-
In-Reply-To: <005d01c3b152$92660520$32381c40@...>
Message-ID: <3FC093C5.19759.484E770@localhost>

On 22 Nov 2003 at 15:44, Saitaina wrote:

> Shaun wrote:
> 
> <Because an increasing number of people are now using e-mail
> programs that don't have a plain text setting (a lot of aol users, for example,
> are in
> this situation now) or where the plain text setting is difficult to set (way too
> difficult
> for the average casual user?).>
> 
> Yes but as a Yahoo!Group we can change the group settings so that HTML is
> stripped out and just text is left.  I have my own personal settings that way on
> every list I belong to and every list I own (not HPfGU as I don't 'own' it),
> mostly because my computer freaks out at HTML emails.

No you can't. Not unless yahoogroups has seriously changed the way it operates 
over the last few months.

You can set a list to *BLOCK* all html posts simply by telling it to exclude 
attachments. There is no mechanism at yahoogroups to strip out html. I have 
friends who code for them - this is a commonly requested feature but one which 
(of of mid-October) YG had no intention of implementing because it would cost 
them advertising revenue.

You can tinker with a setting at YG which many people think strips HTML - but it 
doesn't. What it does is ensures that *as a default* you are sent messages as 
plain text. Any message sent to a list you are on in plain text will be distributed to  
you as plain text. Any message however that is sent in html will be distributed in 
html (unless totally blocked because the list doesn't allow attachments).

If you don't set that setting to plain text, YG will *convert* any plain text message 
to html (and they get paid more for distributing html ads) - so you can choose to 
have html added to plain text messages - but YG does not have the facility to 
have html stripped out of html messages converting them to plain text.

Now it's possible that's changed in the last few weeks - but it's something I've had 
to look at before myself, so I do know how its functioned for a few years. I've even 
set up test groups at times to try and find funky ways of getting around this 
limitation.
 
> I'm not saying HPfGU will suddenly change this setting (if we haven't already,
> woudln't know about that) but I'm saying it's an option of HTML is the only way
> people can post and lots of list members are complaining about colours and or
> whatever.

As far as I know, it *isn't* an option. I'm going to do some tests on my tests lists in 
a fewq minutes just to check that hasn't changed.
 
> <If they are allowed, I think you will lose a lot of members.>
> 
> I don't really see people losing the right to use pretty colours as a reason to
> jump ship...unless your already annoyed with us and are looking for any excuse.
> As I stated above, this can be changed for the whole list, which means no matter
> how someone posts, it all shows up uniform.  Concidering our demographic...I
> think a lot of people would be happy with the whole non squinting factor.

Other way around - I don't think the people who want to receive html will jump 
ship. I think people who only want to receive plain text will - because a lot of 
people still use e-mail programs that can't handle anything but plain text, and 
there are still people who have to pay volume charges and for whom html e-mail 
costs extra money.

Basically I think HPFGU is going to have to make a choice - allow HTML e-mail  
or limit the list to plain text only. The former will exclude those whose e-mail 
systems give them no choice but to post in html (primarily AOL users using up to 
date software at the moment). The latter will lead to unsubscriptions by those who 
cannot handle html or who object to it.

YG currently does *not* have a facility to strip html from messages - it only has a 
facility to block it completely - I'm going to check that in a few minutes and I'll 
report back if I'm right or wrong on that. So a choice is going to have to be made.

In my view, that choice should be to exclude html - because plain text *is* the 
internet standard for e-mail (resisting the urge to post RFC numbers...) - just as 
nested attribution is - personally I think e-mail lists should generally expect people 
to adhere to the basic e-mail standards - even if that makes it difficult for some 
people, and even if some people wind up falling victim to companies and software 
that ignore those standards.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From pengolodh_sc at ...  Sun Nov 23 00:12:10 2003
From: pengolodh_sc at ... (=?iso-8859-1?q?Christian=20Stub=F8?=)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:12:10 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Stuffs from everyone replied to-
In-Reply-To: <3FC093C5.19759.484E770@localhost>
Message-ID: <20031123001210.54841.qmail@...>

 --- Shaun Hately skrev: 
[snip]
> Basically I think HPFGU is going to have to make a choice - allow HTML e-mail  
> or limit the list to plain text only. The former will exclude those whose e-mail 
> systems give them no choice but to post in html (primarily AOL users using up to 
> date software at the moment). The latter will lead to unsubscriptions by those who 
> cannot handle html or who object to it.
[snip]

Presumably the other way around?

=====
Best regards
Christian Stub
------------------------
It has come to the attention of the management that you exist. Please cease and desist. Thank you.



From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 00:11:46 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:11:46 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Stuffs from everyone replied to-
In-Reply-To: <20031123001210.54841.qmail@...>
References: <3FC093C5.19759.484E770@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FC095F2.7968.48D67B0@localhost>

On 23 Nov 2003 at 1:12, Christian Stub? wrote:

>  --- Shaun Hately skrev: 
> [snip]
> > Basically I think HPFGU is going to have to make a choice - allow HTML e-mail  
> > or limit the list to plain text only. The former will exclude those whose e-mail 
> > systems give them no choice but to post in html (primarily AOL users using up to 
> > date software at the moment). The latter will lead to unsubscriptions by those who 
> > cannot handle html or who object to it.
> [snip]
> 
> Presumably the other way around?

Correct - eek!

Trying to access my test groups, draw a map of Diagon Alley and write e-mail at 
the same time. Not wise!


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 00:15:17 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 16:15:17 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Stuffs from everyone replied to-
References: <3FC093C5.19759.484E770@localhost>
Message-ID: <009401c3b156$e07e8e40$32381c40@...>

Shaun wrote:

<No you can't. Not unless yahoogroups has seriously changed the way it operates
over the last few months>

Your right, YahooGroups can't, SmartGroups can.  I've spent the past few days
transferring my lists so I got then confused.  Well see, there's an option, we
can move the list.  (okay so not a realistic option but otherwise I'm blank).

Saitaina
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a tree
because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a better
day than I am today."




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 00:18:13 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 11:18:13 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Stuffs from everyone replied to-
In-Reply-To: <009401c3b156$e07e8e40$32381c40@...>
Message-ID: <3FC09775.16810.4934F84@localhost>

On 22 Nov 2003 at 16:15, Saitaina wrote:

> Shaun wrote:
> 
> <No you can't. Not unless yahoogroups has seriously changed the way it operates
> over the last few months>
> 
> Your right, YahooGroups can't, SmartGroups can.  I've spent the past few days
> transferring my lists so I got then confused.  Well see, there's an option, we
> can move the list.  (okay so not a realistic option but otherwise I'm blank).

OK - cool. I guess I don't need to check then... though I may wind up moving 
some of my groups to smartgroups in that case (none of which have 11,000 
members (-8 ).

Who knows - moving HPFGU might be an option, though I wouldn't want to do it.

I guess my overriding point is that list administration nearly always involves 
having to make decisions about whether or not to enforce particular standards - 
and the proliferation of different e-mail programs adds a new dimension to that 
because they don't always impose the standards. My view is that when there is a 
conflict between accepted standards, and the limitation imposed on some people 
by their software, I'd still come down in favour of the accepted standards. The list 
elves need to make their own decision on that.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 01:12:49 2003
From: whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid (whizbang)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 01:12:49 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpmeet+l381@...>
Message-ID: <bpp1ih+cdvq@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Potterfanme" <fc26det at a...> 
wrote:
> Susan:
> I have only been a member since earlier this year.  I have to say 
> that I was quite frustrated when I was posting on the main list as 
>I would read every post and try to emulate the older posters in the 
>way that I posted.  Unfortunately no matter how I posted, it seemed 
>I did it wrong.  
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "whizbang" <whizbang121 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: whizbang121 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <whizbang121 at ...>

Sadly, this has also been my experience.  As I find the message 
board style itselfextremely frustrating in other ways as well, (I'm 
more comfortable in a forum style where threads are seperated from 
each other instead of all mixed up,) I gave up and became an 
occasional lurker.  Lots of great ideas on these boards.





From pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 01:52:16 2003
From: pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid (Risti)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 17:52:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Two True Confessions, Too Big for Our Britches, and To be Continued...
Message-ID: <20031123015216.12989.qmail@...>

Hi there!
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: Risti <pretty_feet51 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: pretty_feet51 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <pretty_feet51 at ...>

When I joined, I wasn't sure how much I was actually
going to participate, and how much I was going to
lurk, but I decided to send this out tonight, and get
a few ideas out rather then just sitting here waiting
for someone else to suggest them. As I sat down, as
has happened in the past when I sit down to right down
a 'simple' structure outline for a community, ideas
I'd never thought of before suddenly come to mind, and
before you know it, I have something that resembles
more of a report then a friendly email.  Well, let me
just say that I intend it as the latter, and feel free
to completely shoot down any ideas I present, not
matter how long I ramble on about them.



Two True Confessions.  

First of all, I haven't posted to any HP4GU lists
since August.  I honestly have barely looked at them. 
Not because I didn't like OotP(which I did) or because
I don't have any theories(which I do) but because this
fall I went back to university, and the only place
that I've let out HP thought is on my LJ and to my
friends in chats. I do have several posts half written
however, and Christmas break is in just over a
week...(I should mention that since someone tipped me
off to them, I have scanned through some of the recent
Chatter posts to get an idea of what's going on.)

Secondly, I have to admit this, since I've been
feeling guilty ever since I realized what I did, I
never read the list rules until after I'd posted more
then once to the list.  The over-eager(and familiar
with yahoo!groups) newbie I was last august, I clicked
on the 'post' link before I even checked my email for
what I figured would be the standard 'Welcome to
HP4GU' message.  I did eventually read it though. 
More then once in fact.

Too Big for Our Britches?

When I first came to HP4GU, coming from a background
where serious book discussion was done on websites and
community/role playing was done through email, I
wondered why on earth this discussion was taking place
through an email group which noticably produced huge
amounts of daily emails, rather then on a web board of
some type.  However, I shrugged, checked 'special
announcements only' as suggested, and began reading
through messages, trying to find the original starting
posts of some ideas, and of course, sending out my
own.

As I was on the list for awhile, I began to realize
why 'the list' was indeed a list.  First of all, it
had a history, and having been involved as a member
and moderator several other lists that took the
journey that was Yahoo Taking Over
Everything(onelist-egroup-yahoogroup, and also a few
yahoo!clubs) I understood that it was really just
easiest to go with the flow.  It hadn't started out a
huge list, it started with a relatively small group of
adults who liked Harry Potter.

I also began to see the element which I believe is
both the best point and worst point of the list.  In
order to read what you were really interested in, you
had to usually at least skim through what everyone
else was interested in as well.  This is HP4GU's best
point because it forces readers to broaden their
horizons, and become passionate about issues that they
never thought they'd be interested in.  It is the
worst point because 'what everyone else wants to talk
about' is often what you've already heard a million
times, and the system of the list and yahoomort as he
is can make it almost impossible to find what you are
looking for.

The point of restating what most of you probably
already know?  I think it's time to consider the idea
of moving to a messageboard/web forum type of
structure. (Should mention that whizbang also
suggested this this afternoon) Perhaps I'm just making
stuff up, but I thought I'd found some corner on some
page around the group that suggested that a long while
back, this idea has been brought up.  It seems like
the kind of idea that would be brought up every once
and awhile(and perhaps more often to that, in helpful
'suggestions' to the admin team that the majority of
list members don't see when they send their own
'original' idea to you).  

While I'll admit, I don't know the typical size for a
yahoo group, from my experience they are usually
measured in terms of hundreds of members rather than
thousands.(At least in groups that focus on whole
group discussion rather than just an information/news
group)  With the growth after OotP, and expected surge
again after the PoA movie, we are now measuring in
terms of ten thousands(ok, perhaps a slight
exageration, but after the movie...)  It just seems to
me that it's no wonder that people get lost on the
list, when you compare the structure to the size.

I know, however, that there are several advantages to
the current structure.  First of all, alot of people
like email, myself included.  In fact, had my home
email server not been so unstable over the last year,
I probably would have switched over to individual
emails at some point.  Email comes to you, rather than
you having to go to it, and can make it technically
easier to reply for those who do it from their email
account. (For those, like myself, who do it primarily
through the post button, it's not any easier, in fact,
can be harder.)

Secondly, from a technical standpoint, it's easier to
run.  Correct me if I'm wrong, as the list I moderated
was set up slightly different from this one, but the
only 'technical' duties of the admin team in terms of
normal usage is approving moderated posts, taking
members off moderated status(or back on when needed),
deleting innappropriate posts, and the setting up and
interaction between list elves and newbies. (Please
don't get me wrong.  I'm not trying to suggest that
all you lovely people on the admin team sit around and
do nothing.)  A messageboard, while I've never been
involved in administrating one, I can only imagine
takes more effort,(or maybe it doesn't, correct me if
I'm wrong).  Even as I first thought of this idea, I
could see people like Heidi and others involved in
various aspects of FAP and other boards running around
and calling me mad for even suggesting this idea.

Thirdly, it's free.  No money involved.  Definately a
major perk.

Finally, as mentioned before, there is the fact that
unlike a messageboard, where topics may be
seperated(although they don't need to be...), and in
any case people only see one link rather then a page
full pointing to the same discussion, you are forced
to at least skim through ideas that you may not have
looked at otherwise.

So those are the pros of the email system.  The pros
of the messageboard system?  Many of those features of
the email system can be worked into messageboards, at
least to my limited knowledge, correct me if I am
wrong.

Email notification for every new post/reply can be set
as default on some boards, and possibly even email
posting, although that may be more complicated.

I believe through modern scripting technologies that I
admittedly know very little of, some
messageboards/forum set ups don't require much every
day technical work, at least not beyond what list
elves already do. Like I said though, I know very
little about this, so feel free to laugh in my face.

There are free messageboards/servers out there, but
they all have bandwidth regulations which would
quickly be a problem for a group this size. Costs
could be split between a group this size to be quite
small, but those types of assumptions never seem to
really work out.

A Board could be set up so that all discussion threads
are in one forum, although as said before, that would
still only be one link to skim over rather than seeing
many links to individual replies to topics like the
canon behind R/Hr or Latin Grammer in the Wizarding
World.

Beyond that, I also believe that some messageboard
systems have the option of keeping posters on
moderated status, where their posts need to be
approved before seen.

The biggest advantage I see a forum system having
is the organization of posts.  Particularily if the
board adopted the parent/child system(I think that's
what it's referred to-like I said, techno-plebe) where
you have the option of either replying to the thread
in general, or to a reply(to drift from the original
topic slightly).  

As I've been writing this(which has taken awhile) I've
noticed the discussion about replies and posts being
ignored completely.  I know I've felt this in the
past.  I think this type of set up would make it
easier for at least replies to current threads to be
seen.  It would also help with the discussion of
attribution problems.

The search engines available in newer MB's from what
I've seen would run alot smoother then the yahoo one. 
It would also be nice to have the feature to look up
all posts by a particular person, as we all have the
habit of saying 'as I've explained many times before
in my theory on ____..."  We all tend to repeat
ourselves because of how hard it is to look up old
discussions.

I could go on and on about various arguments, but
since I'm really just arguing in a circle, I think
I'll try to conclude this, since I have another idea
I'd like to send out. (I'm going to send that out in a
seperate email though)  Again, I'd like to say that
despite the length of this, and all the arguments I
gave, this is only a suggestion.  Feel free to pick it
apart and discard it.  I'll readily admit that I don't
know enough about what goes on behind the scenes to
know if this would make things easier or harder in the
long run.  However, we are getting big, and we have to
realize that that is probably only going to continue. 
I don't see this group getting smaller unless it self
destructs(which is scary, but always possible) or the
series is finished.  So I'm curious, what does
everyone think of this idea?

~Risti

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/




From alician at alician002.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 02:44:04 2003
From: alician at alician002.yahoo.invalid (Alicia)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 02:44:04 -0000
Subject: Attribution problems
In-Reply-To: <bpodqh+tqho@...>
Message-ID: <bpp6tk+kadb@...>

A suggestion to eliminate the 'now me' phenomenon:
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Alicia" <alician at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: alician at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <alician at ...>

I teach Internet skills to community groups and I've met more than a 
few of those TechnoSquibs. Most of them want to get online and want 
to do the right thing, but lack the experience and confidence to do 
it. They will learn eventually from watching others, but that does 
risk picking up bad habits like 'now me'. One thing I've found 
helpful in the small board I run for teaching purposes is to have an 
admin message containing a sample post showing the acceptable way to 
do things (accurate subject line, attribution, etc). This gets posted 
every few months. It shows new students what to do and jogs the 
memories of the older ones. Admittedly, most of my students are very 
new to the Internet (and even to computers) and so need a lot of hand-
holding, but a variation of that idea might work.

Alicia,
a lurker who misses the long signatures that everyone used to have.





From whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:07:58 2003
From: whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid (whizbang)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:07:58 -0000
Subject: Well to be perfectly honest
Message-ID: <bpp8ae+6hic@...>

If bringing the group into the 21st century and inviting younger 
members means moving the group and allowing html, then I think it 
should be seriously considered.  This is intended constructively, so 
please don't take it badly, but currently, the group is arhcaic and 
consequently chaotic and unfriendly to those who haven't been on the 
internet since Bill Gates was in diapers, but are still old enough 
to vote.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "whizbang" <whizbang121 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: whizbang121 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <whizbang121 at ...>

If the internet standard is "old fashioned" then the implication 
must be considered as well.  Evolution can be good.





From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:15:00 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:15:00 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Two True Confessions, Too Big for Our Britches, and To be Continued...
References: <20031123015216.12989.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <01ab01c3b16f$fbcfed60$32381c40@...>

Risti wrote:

<I think it's time to consider the idea
of moving to a messageboard/web forum type of
structure.>

One of the ideas I'm going to try to push among the Admin Team is a move to
SmartGroups which not only supports a lot of features we need, it has a threaded
form of listing messages that gives you the subject and tells you how many posts
are in that thread. Click on it and you have access to the messages only in that
thread.  It also of course does individual emails.

<of
normal usage is approving moderated posts, taking
members off moderated status(or back on when needed),
deleting innappropriate posts, and the setting up and
interaction between list elves and newbies.>

Approval and rejection of pending messages (with around 50-100 pendings total a
day), elfing every newbie that comes in, reading the list every day (every
message), interaction with list members for any giiven subject.

Not to mention the shee fact of keeping a list this size running by putting out
fires, dealing with tech stuff, dealing with list member issues, dealing with
howlering/elfing issues, making decisions for the future of the list...

<A messageboard, while I've never been
involved in administrating one, I can only imagine
takes more effort,(or maybe it doesn't, correct me if
I'm wrong).  >

Actually takes less effor after initial set up unless you have people deleting
threads randomly...

<Thirdly, it's free.  No money involved.  Definately a
major perk.>

Debatable knowing Yahoo!.

Saitaina
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a tree
because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a better
day than I am today."




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:29:54 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 22:29:54 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Well to be perfectly honest
Message-ID: <610D87D3.1915D0C1.4B073798@...>

whizbang said:
>If bringing the group into the 21st century and inviting >younger members means moving the group and allowing html, >then I think it should be seriously considered.  This is >intended constructively, so please don't take it badly, but >currently, the group is arhcaic and consequently chaotic and >unfriendly to those who haven't been on the internet since >Bill Gates was in diapers, but are still old enough to vote.

Oryomai:
In my opinion, the age limit doesn't actually keep anyone off the list.  When I joined, I was 16 (4/24/2002).  Teenagers will join because they don't want to be stuck in a little kid group where they argue about whether or not Hagrid was a Hufflepuff for two weeks (my little sister is on one of those lists...I'm trying to get her to dive into HP4GU).  I'm fairly certain that when I filled out the Yahoo thing the first time, I had to say I was born in '83 to join then.  (Or that could've been alanwenches...I don't remember...).  Ok, I rambled for a long time, but my point was this: Younger members *do* join.  It's not like we're not around.

Oryomai
Who's finally a grownup and also misses the long signatures...remember the 80's Moments taglines Darrin started?



From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:27:44 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:27:44 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Well to be perfectly honest
In-Reply-To: <bpp8ae+6hic@...>
Message-ID: <3FC0C3E0.22337.242F41@localhost>

On 23 Nov 2003 at 3:07, whizbang wrote:

> If bringing the group into the 21st century and inviting younger 
> members means moving the group and allowing html, then I think it 
> should be seriously considered.  This is intended constructively, so 
> please don't take it badly, but currently, the group is arhcaic and 
> consequently chaotic and unfriendly to those who haven't been on the 
> internet since Bill Gates was in diapers, but are still old enough 
> to vote.

Why is it archaic? Because it assumes people should use basic text, or do you 
have something else in mind.
 
> If the internet standard is "old fashioned" then the implication 
> must be considered as well.  Evolution can be good.

Yes, it can be - but the issue is, until there is a standard *every* e-mail program 
does html differently. Messages that are sent using Netscape may be totally 
unviewable on Outlook. Those sent by Incredimal may look like garbage on 
Pegasus.

Unless you can ensure everybody is using the same e-mail program, allowing 
HTML mail simply creates incompatibilities.

The e-mail standard will eventually be revised to ensure compatibility (or at least 
to give programmers something to aim at). Until it does, you really cannot run 
large mailing lists where html is standard use - unless you limit html to such an 
extent that people may as well be using plain text anyway.





Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:27:53 2003
From: whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid (whizbang)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:27:53 -0000
Subject: Risti says it well.
Message-ID: <bpp9fp+d3ir@...>

I wish I had said all that.  Carefully thought out and well 
explained.  
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "whizbang" <whizbang121 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: whizbang121 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <whizbang121 at ...>

I would like to add that the really good forums are not free, but a 
couple, and proboards.com comes to mind quickly, have been given 
high marks as free boards.  As in yahoo groups, there is advertising 
on the pages.  But perhaps it would be possible to try one hpfgu 
sister board in this type of forum as an experiment and see if it 
works out well.  We might discover that there's room for both types 
of board to function well.  As they will each attract those who are 
most comfotable in the format of the board they've chosen, there 
could be less frustration for all involved and more room to grow.

And who knows?  Perhaps a way will be found to move to a better if 
for $$$$ forum eventually.





From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:41:44 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:41:44 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Two True Confessions, Too Big for Our Britches, and To be Continued...
In-Reply-To: <20031123015216.12989.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <3FC0C728.11962.A5691@localhost>

On 22 Nov 2003 at 17:52, Risti wrote:

> The point of restating what most of you probably
> already know?  I think it's time to consider the idea
> of moving to a messageboard/web forum type of
> structure. (Should mention that whizbang also
> suggested this this afternoon) Perhaps I'm just making
> stuff up, but I thought I'd found some corner on some
> page around the group that suggested that a long while
> back, this idea has been brought up.  It seems like
> the kind of idea that would be brought up every once
> and awhile(and perhaps more often to that, in helpful
> 'suggestions' to the admin team that the majority of
> list members don't see when they send their own
> 'original' idea to you).  


Big NO! to that idea if my opinions are worth anything.

I use e-mail lists. I use message forums. I use usenet. I use each of them for 
different things.

For HPFGU, if it wasn't an e-mail list, I *would not* use it. It is that simple. I would 
have no involvement in it.

Webforums are fine, IMHO, for low traffic discussions - but personally speaking I 
prefer e-mail lists.

Now if someone wantt to set up a HPFGU webforum, I think that would be a great 
idea - but *please* do it as an alternative to the list. Do not move the list to that 
format - because frankly, except for people on high speed connections and unless 
someone is willing to go to the expense of setting up a dedicated always up 
server, I can't see that as a viable alternative to the volume of posting we get on 
HPFGU - where people can easily store their own past messages received and 
sent, and where they can get their messages in one batch, go offline and 
compose replies online and then come back and post those messages next time 
they are on.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:46:22 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 14:46:22 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Risti says it well.
In-Reply-To: <bpp9fp+d3ir@...>
Message-ID: <3FC0C83E.1066.E9442@localhost>

On 23 Nov 2003 at 3:27, whizbang wrote:

> I wish I had said all that.  Carefully thought out and well 
> explained.  
> 
> I would like to add that the really good forums are not free, but a 
> couple, and proboards.com comes to mind quickly, have been given 
> high marks as free boards.  As in yahoo groups, there is advertising 
> on the pages.  But perhaps it would be possible to try one hpfgu 
> sister board in this type of forum as an experiment and see if it 
> works out well.  We might discover that there's room for both types 
> of board to function well.  As they will each attract those who are 
> most comfotable in the format of the board they've chosen, there 
> could be less frustration for all involved and more room to grow.

Yep - this is pretty much how I see it. I think the idea of trying a webforum in 
parallel is a good one - because some people greatly prefer that format - but 
overall I think an e-mail list is far better for a high volume group, and if HPFGU 
moved away from it, it would certainly lose at least one member.







Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 03:52:18 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 19:52:18 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Risti says it well.
In-Reply-To: <bpp9fp+d3ir@...>
References: <bpp9fp+d3ir@...>
Message-ID: <1069559543.3C40249@...>


On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:31pm, whizbang wrote:
> I wish I had said all that.  Carefully thought out and well
> explained.
>
> I would like to add that the really good forums are not free, but a
> couple, and proboards.com comes to mind quickly, have been given
> high marks as free boards.  As in yahoo groups, there is advertising
> on the pages.  But perhaps it would be possible to try one hpfgu
> sister board in this type of forum as an experiment and see if it
> works out well.  We might discover that there's room for both types
> of board to function well.  As they will each attract those who are
> most comfotable in the format of the board they've chosen, there
> could be less frustration for all involved and more room to grow.
>
> And who knows?  Perhaps a way will be found to move to a better if
> for $$$$ forum eventually.
>

Just a little fyi: I am a mod for fictionalley.org and we have message 
boards for a wide range of discussion topics. It costs approximately 
400$/year for the discussion boards, including updates of our backend 
software and server costs. We solicit from our users year-round and are 
saving up for our own server right now. The format works well for 
discussions that are segmented by topic or theme but it is impossible to 
read everything, but that may be because we have approx 33,000 
registered users and about 6000 unique visitors in any given week to the 
discussions.



From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 04:34:15 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 04:34:15 -0000
Subject: HTML or Not & Attribution (Was:Re: Stuffs from everyone replied to-)
In-Reply-To: <3FC095F2.7968.48D67B0@localhost>
Message-ID: <bppdc7+ib54@...>

Shaun Hately: 
> > [snip]
> > > Basically I think HPFGU is going to have to make a choice -
allow HTML e-mail  
> > > or limit the list to plain text only. The former will exclude
those whose e-mail 
> > > systems give them no choice but to post in html (primarily AOL
users using up to 
> > > date software at the moment). The latter will lead to
unsubscriptions by those who 
> > > cannot handle html or who object to it.
> > [snip]

Christian Stubo:
> > Presumably the other way around?

Annemehr:
Sorry, Christian, I don't know how to make that "o" with a "/" through
it on my keyboard!

Shaun Hately, replying to Christian Stubo:
> Correct - eek!
> 
> Trying to access my test groups, draw a map of Diagon Alley and
write e-mail at 
> the same time. Not wise!

Annemehr:
If an AOL user got a (free) yahoo e-mail account just for use on yahoo
groups, would that work?

And I think this method of attribution I use here, with a name before
each and every section of material including my own, is pretty clear
whether the ">" thingies are there or not.  It also makes it very easy
for someone to respond to individual sections.  On the other hand, I
agree that having all the attributions nested at the top is very
confusing, especially on a thread that develops a lot of
back-and-forth arguments.  What do you all think?

Annemehr
who still signs at the bottom even though her name's right up there,
and liked these little sigs too but had gotten out of the habit...




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 04:52:27 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 15:52:27 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] HTML or Not & Attribution (Was:Re: Stuffs from everyone replied to-)
In-Reply-To: <bppdc7+ib54@...>
References: <3FC095F2.7968.48D67B0@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FC0D7BB.13232.4B15FA@localhost>

On 23 Nov 2003 at 4:34, annemehr wrote:

> Shaun Hately, replying to Christian Stubo:
> > Correct - eek!
> > 
> > Trying to access my test groups, draw a map of Diagon Alley and
> write e-mail at 
> > the same time. Not wise!
> 
> Annemehr:
> If an AOL user got a (free) yahoo e-mail account just for use on yahoo
> groups, would that work?

I think so yes - but I wonder how many free e-mail services can handle HPFGU 
level traffic (it's been a while since I have used any so the answer may well be 'A 
lot' - just something to be considered.

Annemehr: 
> And I think this method of attribution I use here, with a name before
> each and every section of material including my own, is pretty clear
> whether the ">" thingies are there or not.  It also makes it very easy
> for someone to respond to individual sections.  On the other hand, I
> agree that having all the attributions nested at the top is very
> confusing, especially on a thread that develops a lot of
> back-and-forth arguments.  What do you all think?

Without the >, it isn't at all clear to me when people are quoting someone else 
*unless* all quotes are kept to less than a paragraph. When you're only talking 
about a paragraph of text at a time, it works - but often that isn't the case.

Adding your own name before a paragraph, IMHO, could confuse people because 
to me that looks like you are quoting yourself (reposting something you said 
earlier) rather than saying something new.

I really do find it hard to understand why HPFGU needs a totally unique posting 
style as opposed to just following developed standards. I think it's bad practice 
personally.

I can understand not having any standards (though I think it's a bad idea) and 
following standard 'net practices. But I'm still not clear why HPFGU expects it's 
own unique style to be followed (even if it's not that strictly enforced) - the only 
other lists I have been on that have imposed list-specific styles have done so for 
legal or academic reasons. The thing is I'm not even sure what style, if any, 
HPFGU expects people to follow:

"In replying, be clear about whom you're quoting. Please put quoted material 
*before* your own comments, and identify the author at the beginning of the 
quote. And to be kind to those who have limited mailbox capacity, please snip 
(edit down) all quoted material, leaving only the minimum necessary for others to 
understand what you're replying to. If you've quoted more than a paragraph 
without inserting a comment of your own, or if the quoted material is longer than 
your own remarks, you probably haven't snipped enough."

That's from the Humungous Bigfile.

That text doesn't say "Put an attribution before every paragraph"- just "at the 
beginning of the quote". Yet, I've had list elves e-mail me telling me to put a name 
in front of every paragraph.




Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 05:02:57 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 05:02:57 -0000
Subject: How many Elves would be too many?
In-Reply-To: <bpoo19+40rt@...>
Message-ID: <bppf21+103tn@...>

Jen Reese wrote:
> In talking about the surge of new members expected after the POA 
> movie, and then when the next book is released, several people 
> mentioned adding Elves to handle the inreased volume. I'm just 
> wondering, from an Elf perspective--can it reach a point where there 
> are too many Elves to make decisions by consensus? That's my 
> understanding of the process now, group decision-making by 
> consensus, which seems like a great way to do things.
<snip>

Annemehr:
I was just thinking about the same thing (an example of great minds
thinking alike, obviously).

I'm wondering if there's any feasible way of adding "Temp Elves"
during a really big surge like the one we had at the OoP release. 
They could be kept on only until post volume drops back to a "normal"
level, and could be trained and used in only one certain aspect of
list management, if that's possible.  For instance, they could each be
assigned a block of time (e.g. midnight to noon on Mondays) to read
every message on the list and send "gentle reminders" to those who
stray too far from posting guidlines.  These Temp Elves would not be
true elves and would not be involved in any other aspect of running
the list (e.g. answering e-mails to the Admin. team or discussing policy).

I guess this is slightly reminiscent of the old Mod/Elf/Geist system,
where you had tiers in the admin. team, and IIRC the Geists were
always free to send the "list policy" reminders when needed.

It's just that, since the surges are so temporary, maybe you only need
a temporary solution to the unique problems they cause.

Annemehr




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 05:07:24 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:07:24 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: How many Elves would be too many?
References: <bppf21+103tn@...>
Message-ID: <034f01c3b17f$af44f200$32381c40@...>

annemehr wrote:

< For instance, they could each be
assigned a block of time (e.g. midnight to noon on Mondays) to read
every message on the list and send "gentle reminders" to those who
stray too far from posting guidelines>

Yes, they could do this, except this is a normal job of the admin team.  Plus,
it takes a long time to train any elf, even a temp elf as there's the many
rules, regulations of HPfGU.

Saitaina
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all this and plow face-first into a tree
because I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll still be having a better
day than I am today."




From whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 05:12:43 2003
From: whizbang121 at whizbang121.yahoo.invalid (whizbang)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 05:12:43 -0000
Subject: But if size is an issue ...
Message-ID: <bppfkb+jnk8@...>

...and it is for me, then all the more reason to consider a forum 
style message board.  I can't all read all the messages every day.  
There are only so many hours in the day.  Refining my interests can 
help me to focus.  I know it's unusual, but I belong to a thriving 
forum of well over 10,000 members and growing.  It works beautifully 
even with this large membership.  And the only emails I get mailed 
to me are from threads to which I have subscribed, so I do have to 
scan for new threads often.  That way I can keep up with the new 
material.  
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "whizbang" <whizbang121 at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: whizbang121 at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <whizbang121 at ...>





From pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 05:29:21 2003
From: pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid (Risti)
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 21:29:21 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Spotlight Newsletter(My Second Crazy Idea)
Message-ID: <20031123052921.32545.qmail@...>

Ok, the second idea.  This first came to mind as a way
to continue having emails that show members everything
that's being discussed if a messageboard were to be
set up.  However, I realized that even if a
messageboard wasn't set up, this idea might still help
to solve some of the 'problems' the list has right
now.

The idea that came to me, late last night while
writing the last post, is to start up a weekly
spotlight newsletter.  Written by a different person
every week(more on that later), it would give a quick
look at what went on in the HP4GU world that week.  It
would include:

A List of all new Threads begun that week.  Not every
new reply, but just any new discussions started.  New
threads that come out of an older discussion count.  I
saw it listing the
Thread Name
Thread Starter
Link to the thread beginning
and possibly
# of replies and/or
First paragraph of the first post of the thread

Purpose:This would allow everyone to have an easy
access to all the new discussions started, including
some that they might have missed.



While the first would be more automatic, and perhaps
the job of some dedicated listee to do on a regular
basis, this idea and those to follow would be more
subjective.  They should then be rotated somewhat
through members-and it would be important to include
newbies-so that the opinions don't become pigeonholed
and the expression of a small clique.  Just to put a
term on it, I'm calling the person who compiles this
the editor.

'My Current Favorites'

This would be a relatively short list, although the
exact number might vary from week to week, of the
active discussions that the editor feels are the most
interesting.  Like I said, this would be subjective,
but always coming from a different viewpoint.  They
would include,

The same information I listed in the last point
A short summary of what the discussion is about, and
why the editor feels it is
interesting/important/should be read.
A few short quotes from different participants, cited
of course.

Spotlight On a Post

This would be relatively simple.  The editor would
pick an entire post either from that week, or
important to major discussion that week, and it would
be quoted in full.  It would be a way to highlight
'good' posts, but would be done on a regular basis,
and could just as easily be filled by a newbie as an
oldbie. Also, as should be obvious, the types of posts
chosen by a newbie would probably be different then
those chosen by an oldbie.  Both could be interesting
to many of the listees, so another reason to rotate
the editor.

Alternatively, although I'm not so sure about this,
the editor could pick a member to spotlight.  In doing
this they would write a short blurb on a member that
they feel makes a big contribution to the list, with a
few links to some of their posts that the editor
particularily enjoys.  I don't know if this would
work, and maybe it should be something that is
included as well as rather then instead of the
previous idea, but I thought I'd throw it out.

Editorial

The editor would write a short article, opinion based
or maybe not, that perhaps focuses less on HP and more
on the fandom/forum.  Again, it would be a great place
to hear the impressions from a newbie(btw, I'm using
that term lightly, as it seems to have all sorts of
definitions and connotations within this list.)

Bio and Links

Finally, after putting in all this work, the editor
would write a brief blurb about who they are, how they
got into the fandom, how they got into the list, etc. 
They would also include three links that they feel
people on the list would like(with only one link
allowed to be something personal, ie. their own fan
fiction/fan site).  Other then that, the links could
be to fan fiction, fan sites, sites for another author
they think listees would like, links to a HP news
article, etc.

Finally, when necessary, forum news(announcements)
and/or major HP news could be shared.

Who Does What, and Why, How and When

New Messages-This is just compilation and formatting,
and IMHO, should be done by the same small group of
people who do the final formatting for the whole
newsletter. The tech end of the Newsletter team.

Forum/Fandom News: I see this being done by someone
from the Admin Team as needed.

The Editor.  

Before I go on, I should mention that one possibility
is that all the responsibilities I assigned to the
editor could be split amoung different people, but I
like the idea of every week coming from a different
person, and showing a full view of their opinions. 
Whoever does it, it would obviously not be up to the
minute when posted.  I was thinking that the week it
would cover would be Sunday-Saturday, and the
newsletter would go out the following Monday, leaving
Sunday, which seems to be a day that alot of people
have spare time, for the last details to be added,
everything formatted, and the whole thing approved by
someone on the admin team. Presumably, the editorial
and bio would be done ahead of time, the New Threads
and Favourites done as they appear, and the Spotlights
spotted as they come out, and decided upon at the end
of the week if nothing better comes.

Now, I realize that I've put alot of responsibility on
this person.  Everything I described takes alot of
time and energy, and has the potential to be done
badly.  Not just anyone should do it, because let's
face it, someone would just shrug, and say oh well,
didn't get it done, no big deal.  Some sort of
screening would need to be done.  This screening
process is what I see being the most difficult for the
admin team, and the thing that could turn out the
worst.  I have a couple of ideas, but I'll admit that
I have my doubts about all of them.

Originally, my thought was to have a different editor
every week, which would rotate in some order or
another through Newbies, Oldbies, and Admin(and
possibly a 4th 'General' grouping, as most of us on
the list feel that we're neither oldbie or newbies). 
I realized later that that would be asking alot of the
people on the admin team, since they are the smallest
of all those groups by far, and already have alot on
their plate.  So I then thought, forget the
categories, just have listees apply.

This brings up the question of how do they apply? 
Once they have applied, who decides who will be
chosen?  Will they even want to apply?  I don't really
know the answer to these questions.  

Originally(and originally was 2 am last night on
barely any sleep the night before) my thought was that
the Editorial also served as the application.  A
listie would send in an editorial they wrote, and a
subgroup of the admin team(or the whole admin team)
decided if they sounded like they could do it.  Once
selected, that person would be assigned their week at
least a few weeks in advance.

The other option is for a team of people to be formed
to do this on a regular basis.  Would this be more
stable?  Yes.  Would it be less work?  Yes.  Could
that group of people be seen as a biased clique? Yes. 
For this to work, the team would need to be made up of
a variety of different people with different
interests.  Perhaps it would be a term position that
listees would have, to rotate it through members. 
Another possibility, which is somewhat like my
original idea of having someone from the admin team,
and someone from the list, is that the team would do
it say 3 weeks out of the month, and on the 4th week a
'Readers Submission' would be featured.  Whatever the
situation, I personally feel that it is vital that as
many people as possible get a chance to share their
opinions.

So What's the Point?

Why am I suggesting all this extra work?  As I said in
the beginning, it could be one way for those who like
email to continue getting email.  I've seen in the
responses that have come out to that as I've written
this that it might not solve that issue.  

In any case, whether the posts are appearing through
email or a messageboard, it gives a summary of what's
going on.  Beyond that, it allows everyone to see the
list through someone elses eyes, and points them to
things they might not have looked at otherwise.  Yes,
we could just send out a weekly summary of all the new
posts.  It would be relatively easy to do, and some
might say serves the same purpose, and it would be
better than doing nothing.  However, it still won't
help people to broaden their horizons.

Secondly, it would help with archiving.  Due to the
subjective nature of it, it shouldn't be the only
method of archiving, but it would be a great place to
send someone who's new to the list to see what's been
discussed lately.

Thirdly, for someone like myself, who unfortunately
doesn't have the time right now to read through
everything, it's a way of keeping in touch with what's
going on, without getting swamped with trying to read
everything.  I tend to not even visit the site unless
I have alot of time because it's impossible to
'quickly' get the gist of what's going on in a
discussion.  While the featured discussions are
subjective, it at least gives a small view into what's
going on on the list.

Further, it allows posts(and possibly posters) to be
featured.  If the editor position is rotated well, it
will allow different people who are deserving in
different ways to have a bit of time in the spotlight.
 Not revered as the Best Ever.  Not made out to be a
HP4GU!deity.  Just someone who made a really good
point this week and should be recognized for it.  If a
poster is featured, it could be an oldbie who has been
a wise thinker for many years.  Or it could be a
newbie who has shaken the dust off of some old
assumptions and got people excited over the gleam in
Dumbledore's eye again.

Finally, I just want to stress again how important I
feel it is that if this idea is taken up, it not be
handled exclusively by a small group of people who
rarely change.  If that's the case, then all I've
given to the list is another way for people to feel
like they're being excluded, or not as worthy as other
people.

As per my last post, talk, discuss, rip to shreds.  I
might feel a little more protective of this idea then
the last, but I know it has problems.  The one that I
didn't mention is the fact that there may not be
enough people on the list who want to put time into
this to make it happen.  However, I think something is
necessary.  I love hearing what everyone has to say. 
However, membership is now the size of a small city,
and reading every single post is only going to become
more and more difficult.

~Risti, who will now try to stop stressing over this,
and start stressing on research papers due this week
as she should be.(and who also loves these type of signatures)

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/



From kirst_inn at kirstinipie.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 05:55:27 2003
From: kirst_inn at kirstinipie.yahoo.invalid (Kirstini)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 05:55:27 -0000
Subject: How many Elves would be too many?
In-Reply-To: <bppf21+103tn@...>
Message-ID: <bppi4f+6njt@...>

Annemehr:
>>I was just thinking about the same thing (an example of great minds
thinking alike, obviously).
I'm wondering if there's any feasible way of adding "Temp Elves"
during a really big surge like the one we had at the OoP release. 
 They could be kept on only until post volume drops back to a "normal"
level, and could be trained and used in only one certain aspect of
 list management, if that's possible.  For instance, they could each 
be assigned a block of time (e.g. midnight to noon on Mondays) to read
every message on the list and send "gentle reminders" to those who
stray too far from posting guidelines.>>

Speaking in my own capacity, although backed up with (two-month-old) 
Elfly knowledge:
We already do this. Every post on the list is read by the Elf 
on "reading duty" on the day it was posted. What this means is that 
we sign into the list on British time and have to read every post 
written in 24 GMT hours on our reading day. All problem posts are 
noted and flagged up on the Admin board, where a member of the Howler 
team casts a second eye over them and sends out stern admonishments 
to all de-moderated members whose posts contravene posting guidelines.
Every member of the Admin Team does reading duty, usually once a 
month.
I've recently become a Pendings Elf, and I've had a few responses 
back from frustrated new members saying things like "why on earth are 
you sending my post back to me when I saw a message on the list doing 
exactly the same thing?" Because so much of the Howlering goes on 
behind the scenes, I can see exactly why this might look unfair. I 
think it's important for all listees to know that we *do* put huge 
amounts of work in rooting out problem posts, and I'm fairly sure 
that Howlered posters very rarely re-offend. At least not in the same 
way <g>. Actually - for those of you expressing concern that no-one 
reads your posts - be assured that they have definitely been read by 
at least one List Elf...

I think Annemehr has made a very good point about the need for a pre-
PoA solution to flooding problems, and I wonder if we might be able 
to use the Temporary List Elf idea in some way. Much of the off-
topicity (it's my own term, and I like it a lot) will come from new 
members, though, and that's a job which can really only be handled by 
Moderators. Only Moderators are given the power to approve/reject 
pending messages from new members, and  Yahoo only allows 15 
moderators to a group (as was discovered when we new elves joined 
up). 

I do think it's important for borders to be created. Much of the post-
OoP frenzy was characterised by almost vigilante-like action on the 
part of "oldbie" non-elves (myself hugely and shamefully included) 
until that OTC Admin made us all re-examine our actions. We have to 
be prepared not only to deal with the huge amounts of OT posting that 
the PoA release will create, but also with the (even hugers) amounts 
of resentment which established members will feel at this perceived 
intrusion.

I'd like to conclude my ramblings by backing up something which 
Dicentra mentioned with a little story hewn from personal experience. 
Gather round, dearies. Are we sitting comfortably?
I'm in no way a member of the old crowd (or even The Old Crowd), and 
I don't even merit an Old Fart badge, but I'm very aware that since 
becoming a List Elf my own posting rate has dropped significantly. As 
a member, I'm still reading (just about) everything on the main list. 
I'm also thinking about the list (in general and specific posts) as 
an Admin rather than a member. I'm fairly sure that this is a mindset 
trick which I'll get out of eventually (women are supposed to be good 
at multi-tasking, right?)I may even see light at the end of the 
tunnel fairly soon - it's beginning to look that way.  But as 
Dicentra said, energy is definitely sapped. Or rather, after your 
energy has been redirected, it *feels* sapped. 

However, someone (Abigail?) on this list offered up an image of this 
group as an organic entity, and I think that that's spot on. The 
posters who can really brighten up my day now aren't the same as 
those who did when I first joined, and I think that's the sign of a 
healthy, non-elitist group. 

I don't know how it feels to be a particularly long-serving member, 
but I can empathise a little - it becomes a vicious circle. You don't 
post for a while, and the list moves on (relentlessly), and you begin 
to wonder how many people would know who you were if you *did* post. 
So you don't post some more. Or I didn't/don't, anyway.

I'm itching to get stuck into this latest TBay, though.
Kirstini. Not on behalf of or expressing the views of any Admin Team 
whatsoever. Teatowel not round waist, or any other part of body.      




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 06:04:42 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 17:04:42 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] But if size is an issue ...
In-Reply-To: <bppfkb+jnk8@...>
Message-ID: <3FC0E8AA.3778.30E9C7@localhost>

On 23 Nov 2003 at 5:12, whizbang wrote:

> ...and it is for me, then all the more reason to consider a forum 
> style message board.  I can't all read all the messages every day.  
> There are only so many hours in the day.  Refining my interests can 
> help me to focus.  I know it's unusual, but I belong to a thriving 
> forum of well over 10,000 members and growing.  It works beautifully 
> even with this large membership.  And the only emails I get mailed 
> to me are from threads to which I have subscribed, so I do have to 
> scan for new threads often.  That way I can keep up with the new 
> material.  

Is there a conflict here? You say you can't read every message every day? OK, I 
guess that's fair enough. However, generally speaking I *can* read every 
message every day - in fact, reading every message on HPFGU takes about 30 
minutes most days - and I can skim every message in less than 5 minutes - 
generally I don'd do that but I can.

The thing is - using the e-mail forum, this is practical for me - I do a mail download 
every morning and it takes about 5 minutes - 20 minutes if I haven't been online 
for 24 hours, but generally speaking I have been. I then have every message sent 
to the list - and I can peruse them at my leisure during the course of the day 
whenever I have a few minutes to spare.

On a webforum I wouldn't have this option - I would have to be logged in all day 
and I'd have to deal with any server downtime, any lag, etc, just to look at the 
messages. That is not practical for me - so moving to a web forum would render 
HPFGU fundamentally useless for me.

You can choose not to read messages after you've downloaded them - most e-
mail programs will sort by thread if you only want to read certain threads.

I *want* a forum where I get the message delivered to me so they are resident on 
*my* computer. I wouldn't have joined HPFGU if it wasn't that type of forum and I 
will almost certainly leave it if it changes.

You may see the size of HPFGU as a problem. I see it as a plus. I like the idea of 
a large and active forum.

And we have one. Maybe a web forum can do that as well, but I really would see 
that as moving from something that we *know* is working (at least to an extent - I 
think there can be improvements) to an unknown quantity. I think the suggestion 
of running a parallel web forum is a decent idea - give the idea a chance to prove 
itself. But don't change unless and until it has.

And to an extent, I think the status quo should be preserved - fact is we basically 
know that anyone active on HPFGU at the moment is at least willing to accept an 
e-mail forum, even if it's not their first preference - because they have accepted 
such a forum. Any change is, IMHO, almost inevitably going to lose members 
initially because whatever the change is some of the people who have accepted 
an e-mail list won't accept the new alternative. Long term you might get more 
people back - but personally speaking I'm not sure I'm happy about the idea of 
sacrificing some members wishes to get even more members is a good idea... if 
the forum was suffering from a *lack* of members, I could see the point of taking 
that type of risk.  But it's not.

There's always a conflict between what different users want on any forum. I'm 
pretty happy with what we have now. I just think everybody needs to bear in mind 
that just because *they* would prefer another way, doesn't by itself mean that's a 
better way.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 07:31:17 2003
From: risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid (Melissa McCarthy)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 03:31:17 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] HTML or Not, Attribution, and Web Forums
References: <bppdc7+ib54@...>
Message-ID: <007d01c3b193$c8749be0$6401a8c0@vaio>

Replies to a bunch of things in here....

First, attribution: There would be some sense to having a standard, as Shaun
suggested.  I think the easiest way would be to have both the nesting
attributions with the ">" marks and the other poster's name at the beginning
of each block of quoted text.  That way it's obvious where everything is
coming from, and putting the names in front of each block of text makes it
easier for those whose attention tends to wander (guilty...), particularly
in a long post with a lot of quotations from many different posters.

Next, HTML: I would very strongly prefer to have only plain-text email.
HTML email is just a pain in the neck, especially when people decide to
change the font size/colour or add backgrounds (especially moving
backgrounds... my eyes... my EYES...) or do other such clever things.
There's also the issue of how much space they take up in the inbox.  It is
possible, BTW, to be subscribed to HPFGU with a free account such as Hotmail
as long as the mail is in plain-text.  I used Hotmail a while ago and was
subscribed to so many lists that I was getting as much mail as HPFGU
generates every day, and I never had any problems as long as I was careful
about checking email every day.  Really, anyone on a list as productive as
this one has to check his/her email every day to have any hope of keeping up
with it all!

Aaand web forums: Frankly, I'd leave HPFGU (very sadly) if it switched to
being a web forum.  I find them inconvenient and I don't like the way
they're set up.  That's purely a personal preference, but IMO the list's
format isn't broken, so why try to fix it?

Melissa, who is up way past her bedtime





From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 07:47:25 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 07:47:25 -0000
Subject: How many Elves would be too many?
In-Reply-To: <bppi4f+6njt@...>
Message-ID: <bppomd+bmmt@...>

> Annemehr (before):
<snip>
> I'm wondering if there's any feasible way of adding "Temp Elves"
> during a really big surge like the one we had at the OoP release. 
>  They could be kept on only until post volume drops back to a "normal"
> level, and could be trained and used in only one certain aspect of
>  list management, if that's possible.  For instance, they could each 
> be assigned a block of time (e.g. midnight to noon on Mondays) to read
> every message on the list and send "gentle reminders" to those who
> stray too far from posting guidelines.>>

Kirstini:
> Speaking in my own capacity, although backed up with (two-month-old) 
> Elfly knowledge:
> We already do this. Every post on the list is read by the Elf 
> on "reading duty" on the day it was posted. What this means is that 
> we sign into the list on British time and have to read every post 
> written in 24 GMT hours on our reading day. All problem posts are 
> noted and flagged up on the Admin board, where a member of the Howler 
> team casts a second eye over them and sends out stern admonishments 
> to all de-moderated members whose posts contravene posting guidelines.
> Every member of the Admin Team does reading duty, usually once a 
> month.

Annemehr replies:
And Saitaina said pretty much the same thing, so I must not have been
clear in my original post. I *meant* for the "temporary elves" to take
over a task that the regular elves normally do, just to help them
through a major posting surge.

So you'd train the Temps to do this one task only -- and flagging the
problem posts of non-moderated members for the "real" elves to review
might be an option, and is very close to the example I came up with
before I knew exactly what you do.  I don't think it would take too
much training to do just this, either -- really, all that would be
needed is a very good understanding of the posting conventions of
HPfGU.  If the Temps do their job well, the Admin Team gets out of
reading duty during the crunch, but official Howlers are still sent by
the Howler team, and the Elves get a bit more time to concentrate on
moderating the posts of the newest group members and whatever else
they have on their plate.

Coming up with this idea, I was thinking about the discussion on OTC
back in August about the problems on the main list.  Many people
mentioned that there were a lot of posts that blatantly ignored list
rules, and the elves replied that these generally came from people off
moderated status and that the elves themselves were doing all they
could just to  take care of all the pendings.

So, any reason why "reading duty" couldn't be taken over by temporary
helpers during a posting surge to take part of the load off the
regular elves until the list calmed down again?

Annemehr





From abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 23 09:33:57 2003
From: abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid (abigailnus)
Date: Sun, 23 Nov 2003 09:33:57 -0000
Subject: Increased Posting Volume Due to PoA Release?
Message-ID: <bppuu5+sahp@...>

I've been thinking about this assumption, and it doesn't make a great deal 
of sense to me.  I joined the list shortly after the PS movie came out, so 
obviously I'm in no position to judge the list's condition during that period, 
but I don't remember anything out of the ordinary when CoS was released 
(actually, I tell a lie.  November 2002 saw some truly spectacular TBAY 
discussions, but I think that's just a coincidence).

Looking at list posting numbers by month (they're available at the bottom 
of the main list homepage) there was an increase in posting volume in 
November 2001 and 2002, but it's so small as to be almost negligible.  
>From 1600 posts in October '01 to 1900 in November of that year, and 
from 1200 posts in October '02 to 1500 posts in November.  The higher 
volume continues for several months, peaking in January (in fact, January 
2003 saw a posting surge of 2200 posts, but I wonder if that didn't have 
more to do with the renewed interest spurred by the OOP publication date 
announcement) and then goes back down to the level it was before.  

At the moment, HPfGU is generating about 1900 posts per month, maybe 
less now that the post-OOP frenzy has died down.  The list elves are, I 
believe, handling this kind of volume very well.  I'm not a pendings elf, but 
I don't believe that the increase caused by the PoA release will change that 
significantly.

One thing that might prove me wrong, however: both previous movies were 
released in the winter, when people are busy at school and work and don't 
have as much time to post.  PoA will be released in the summer, which is 
generally a high-volume period, and the confluence of the two events might 
cause higher posting volume then we might otherwise expect.

Abigail




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 01:02:58 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 01:02:58 -0000
Subject: Attribution conventions
Message-ID: <bprlc2+sgku@...>

Chipping in with a few comments and reminiscences of my own here...

Shaun and others have been debating what the best standard for 
attribution is for HPFGU (and Shaun pointed out that the HBfile 
isn't completely definitive).

I think one factor that makes this difficult to determine in the 
case of HPFGU is that, apparently, we have a relatively high 
proportion of members for whom this is their first real experience 
of internet discussion groups, whether mailing list, message board 
or other format.

It does seem that for many people the nested attribution style does 
represent a significant learning investment - IIRC, in the admin 
team about 18 months ago we had a debate along the lines 
of "Whaddaya mean you find all those carets hard to follow?  ARPAnet 
users have been using it since 1984" (or whenever it was); "Maybe, 
but just sticking quotes round the text and putting it in order with 
the name on top makes intuitive sense to me" and so on.

In the end it was recognised this is a cultural matter as much as 
anything, and what seems easy to use for one person is hard to 
follow (or even alien) for another.

Hence there are no easy answers, because following something that is 
an internet-wide standard is not necessarily motivating for many 
members.

Whether HPFGU is at the vanguard of changing standards, or a 
historical curiosity, remains to be seen.

David




From Erthena at werebearloony.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 05:18:17 2003
From: Erthena at werebearloony.yahoo.invalid (werebearloony)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 05:18:17 -0000
Subject: Increased Posting Volume Due to PoA Release?
In-Reply-To: <bppuu5+sahp@...>
Message-ID: <bps4ap+5s82@...>

abigail wrote:
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "werebearloony" <Erthena at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: Erthena at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <Erthena at ...>

> One thing that might prove me wrong, however: both previous movies 
were 
> released in the winter, when people are busy at school and work and 
don't 
> have as much time to post.  PoA will be released in the summer, 
which is 
> generally a high-volume period, and the confluence of the two 
events might 
> cause higher posting volume then we might otherwise expect.
> 
> Abigail

The fact that the release of PoA will during the summer is definitely 
a big difference.  Most people who are still in school will suddenly 
have more time around that point (I know my school lets out on June 
4, exactly the same day PoA comes out).  So a reasonable amount of 
increase is understandable.  Look at the past posting numbers for May 
and July -- 2001 May 1923, July 1634.  2002 May 903, July 1339.  2003 
May 2390, July 8234.  In most cases they go up and with the size of 
the group being much larger than previous, the number of posters who 
will have more time to post should be larger as well.  So I think 
that a group of Temp. Support Elves will have something to do 
regardless of whether or not the posting spikes because of PoA.

Just my two knuts

~~loony (posting here for the first time)






From cheshire_empress at aurigae_prime.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 08:34:08 2003
From: cheshire_empress at aurigae_prime.yahoo.invalid (aurigae_prime)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 08:34:08 -0000
Subject: An introduction from an extremely shy oldbie
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpsfq0+2t8b@...>

Hello all. I'm Rhiannon the RavenSlyth. I think I'm probably coming 
here with a pretty unique perspective; I've been a member since 
(IIRC) the spring of 2000 but have only made 10 posts to the main 
list and a couple more (probably less than 5) to OTC.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "aurigae_prime" <cheshire_empress at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: cheshire_empress at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <cheshire_empress at ...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> 
> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
>

Rhiannon the RavenSlyth:
Honestly? I actually really like this group of lists. I can't even 
think of a pet peeve, unless I went with Catlady's comment about 
deciding between HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU.  

Hebby Elf again:
> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
> 

Rhiannon the RavenSlyth:
Ah, now here I'm conflicted. Recognition of "good" posters just 
smacks of favouritism-- who's to say what constitutes "good"? On the 
other hand, how would recognition of "long-time" posters be 
interpreted? By membership dates? In that case, I would likely be 
recognised, which sounds quite nice, but hardly fair, as I'm sure 
there are new members who produce both more posts and more in-depth 
posts than I do. Since neither option seems terribly fair to me, I 
think I'll have to go with "no" for now, although if someone proposed 
a great idea, I'd likely change my mind.

Hebby Elf once more:
> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 
> 

Well, if training extra Elves is impractical, as seems to be the 
general consensus, then I would say carry on as we have been. 
However, if such things as different Elves giving moderated posters 
conflicting information are widespread problems, then perhaps a way 
could be found so that certain elves would be responsible for certain 
posters. I think I remember a system like this before; did the list 
get too big for practicality? Alas, I know next to nothing about the 
practicalities of the Elf/Mod/Geist system, and therefore really 
can't make any suggestions except to, if necessary, run the Special 
Announcement about the FAQs, the HBfile, and standard posting 
conventions frequently. Perhaps once a week or every two weeks until 
things die down?


Rhiannon the RavenSlyth, who made a New Years Resolution to post more 
often to her lists, but doesn't seem to have kept it very well. Then 
again, of the posts I've made, the majority have gotten an on-list 
reply. So perhaps I'm doing better than I think I am? ;-)





From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 15:18:50 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 09:18:50 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] An introduction from an extremely shy oldbie
In-Reply-To: <bpsfq0+2t8b@...>
Message-ID: <000001c3b29e$47a97290$53ef79a5@Einstein>

> Hello all. I'm Rhiannon the RavenSlyth. I think I'm probably coming
> here with a pretty unique perspective; I've been a member since
> (IIRC) the spring of 2000 but have only made 10 posts to the main
> list and a couple more (probably less than 5) to OTC.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "IggyMcSnurd" <coyoteschild at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: CoyotesChild at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <CoyotesChild at ...>

Iggy here:

WB Rhiannon, so to speak...  *grin*


>>"Hebby Elf"
>> 
>>
>> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
>>

Well, I've said this one in a number of direct e-mails when posts of
mine have been blocked because I'm still on moderated status...

If the standards for posting are strictly enforced (citing canon,
staying strictly on topic, etc) for those who are on moderated status,
it's unfair to not try to hold the un-moderated people to the same
standards.  

I have had my posts blocked for not citing canon, but the person I was
replying to didn't cite canon either.  I have had posts blocked for the
potential to go off topic, yet many of the other posts from
non-moderated posters *do* go off topic and nothing is said about it.
Items I have sent in have been rejected for a few different reasons,
none of which has been commented on by the admin in public.

While I know that these issues would normally be addressed in private
e-mails, I have also suggested that the admin officially re-state the
posting standards and policies on the main list, and include the request
that people try to do a little better in keeping with them.  If you also
state that it's unfair to hold the moderated members to standards that
the non-moderated ones are not.

The people who post on the lists lead by example.  The newbies learn the
standards, what's acceptable to post, and how to post it.  If the older
members don't hold to the set standards as set up by the admin, then it
will take a lot longer for the newer members to learn what's expected of
them when it comes to posting.

You will also lessen the frustration levels of the moderated people,
such as myself, who are working hard to get themselves off of mod
status.  I have almost been willing to quit from the main group, and I
don't post nearly as much anymore, because of this.  I'm probably not
the only one who gets annoyed at the fact that one can post something,
and have it take up to 12 hours or more to hit the list.  In the
meantime, other people have posted their replies covering the same
material (making what one posted totally useless and redundant),
disproving what they've said (making one look stupid or inattentive), or
simply making someone look particularly slow on the uptake.

Ultimately, it boils down to the fat that you need to hold to the same
standards for both types of posters.  Either ease up on some of the
rules for moderated people (If it's a sound post, and is in line with
the way other accepted posts are being done, pass them through...) or be
much stricter with the rules for the people who are not on moderated
status.


> Hebby Elf again:
> > Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
> >
> 
> Rhiannon the RavenSlyth:
> Ah, now here I'm conflicted. Recognition of "good" posters just
> smacks of favouritism-- who's to say what constitutes "good"? On the
> other hand, how would recognition of "long-time" posters be
> interpreted? By membership dates? In that case, I would likely be
> recognised, which sounds quite nice, but hardly fair, as I'm sure
> there are new members who produce both more posts and more in-depth
> posts than I do. Since neither option seems terribly fair to me, I
> think I'll have to go with "no" for now, although if someone proposed
> a great idea, I'd likely change my mind.

Iggy here:

I think I'd have to agree with Rhiannon here.  What would be the
recognition?  What constitutes a "good" poster?  (Your definition and
mine would probably not be the same.)  Unless a way was found to
designate someone as a "good" poster that didn't seem like the admin, or
even the more popular regular members, were playing favorites, then it's
not a good idea.

For one thing, it establishes a motivation for some that their only real
goal is to come up with "good" posts strictly for the recognition, not
because they want to post a quality letter.  Also, some people come up
with great ideas or questions that are very simple and aren't done in
the TBAY style or anything.  What's the standard of a "good" post?  (Is
it one that poses a good question or new idea?  Is it one that is a
prime example of following the set standards for posting?  Is it one
that's very creative and artistically oriented, a-la TBAY?)


> 
> Hebby Elf once more:
> > If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new
> > posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal
> > with it?
> >
> 

Iggy here:

IMHO, it's not the number of posters that's as much of a problem as how
things are dealt with regarding the members we have now.  Yes, we will
get an influx once the newest movie comes out, and when the next book
does, etc... but it can be easily coped with.  For one thing, I think
the main concern would be the hours needed in dealing with the moderated
newbies.  Well, for one thing, if you release some of the more able
posters from the moderated status, that's fewer people you have to deal
with in reviewing for moderated posts.  Other than that type of problem,
I don't see anything that would be a problem when the next surge of
people joins the list.


Iggy McSnurd








From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 12:17:57 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 12:17:57 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpjqes+medp@...>
Message-ID: <bpsstl+bjpi@...>

Grumble, grumble...
What do you *mean*, 59 messages ? *Already* !?
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Doriane" <delwynmarch at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: delwynmarch at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <delwynmarch at ...>

Okay. Intro first, right ?

I'm a false oldie. I joined somewhere around July 2000, posted a bit, 
and then RL got me : I met The Love Of My Life, who was living on 
another planet (or so it seemed), so we spent all our free time 
chatting on the Net. And, well, chatting with him seemed somehow more 
important than posting on the list <g>. Then we got married, had a 
baby, and life got a bit easier, so I went to check back on my 
favourite list. What a shock ! Different lists for different topics, 
Elves and other what-nots, and about 10 000 members !! Waow...
As for the controversy about Admin matters, I learned about it here. 
I'm not on HPFGU-OT (I just don't have time for it), so that proposal 
about discussing policies came out of the blue as far as I was 
concerned, but it seemed interesting so I jumped, even though I don't 
have any particular griefs or concerns.

"Hebby Elf" asked :

> If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

I'd love to see the rules enforced. Well, some of them anyway :-) 
Like for example : I positively get fed up when I see 100 posts all 
named exactly the same way, even though they don't touch that subject 
anymore and there might be 3 widely different sub-threads discussed 
at the same time. I try to change the heading each time I answer a 
post, in order to keep it exactly on subject, but few people do that, 
and it annoys me, I must admit.

> Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

What for ?

> If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal 
> with it? 

Take a big gulp of air, and wait for it to subside ?

I have to run now, so I'm afraid I'll have to answer the other 
interesting ideas I glimpsed in later posts tomorrow. Would you all 
mind not posting until then ;-) ?

Del





From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Tue Nov 25 00:50:55 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 16:50:55 -0800
Subject: enforcing standards
References: <000001c3b29e$47a97290$53ef79a5@Einstein>
Message-ID: <003001c3b2ee$39212560$a6706751@kathryn>

I've been having some yahell probs (ie getting replies *hours* before the
original message gets through etc) so forgive me if I repeat something
someone else has said - it probably means I haven't *got* that post yet.
*grumble*
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Kathryn Cawte" <kcawte at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: kcawte at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <kcawte at ...>

Iggy here:

Well, I've said this one in a number of direct e-mails when posts of
mine have been blocked because I'm still on moderated status...

If the standards for posting are strictly enforced (citing canon,
staying strictly on topic, etc) for those who are on moderated status,
it's unfair to not try to hold the un-moderated people to the same
standards.


K

Oh I agree. Not that I'm on moderated status (although when I first joined I
posted so rarely it too *ages* to get off it). Subject headings aren't
changed, quotes aren't attributed at all (and I don't care *how* they're
attributed as long as they are at some point), etc And more importantly than
all the technical stuff some of the posters on the main board become plain
offensive when you say something they disagree with (or worse disapprove
of). I know I've given up posting on certain threads when I've felt that I
can't face the level of rudeness that is happening on it and I know that
when I've posted on certain threads making my point and arguing back (I
admit I probably cross the line occasionally - and wouldn't object to being
called on it as long as everyone else did too, but I never have been) I've
had offlist replied from people who were too scared to stand up on list and
agree because they don't want to deal with the hassle. The main list has
become a lot less friendly recently - I don't know whether it's the sudden
influx of members post-OoP (I don't think that's entirely responsible for it
personally) or a lack of howlers being sent out but the atmosphere is
certainly changing.

You know it occurs to me that the one rule that isn't slipping is that posts
are all in decent English (ie no netspeak), I wonder why posters all feel
the need to stick to that when they ignore some of the others?


Iggy

While I know that these issues would normally be addressed in private
e-mails, I have also suggested that the admin officially re-state the
posting standards and policies on the main list, and include the request
that people try to do a little better in keeping with them.  If you also
state that it's unfair to hold the moderated members to standards that
the non-moderated ones are not.

The people who post on the lists lead by example.  The newbies learn the
standards, what's acceptable to post, and how to post it.  If the older
members don't hold to the set standards as set up by the admin, then it
will take a lot longer for the newer members to learn what's expected of
them when it comes to posting.


K

I agree. It might be an idea to send out a Special Notice to all the lists
reminding people of the rules and saying that from now on they will be more
stringently enforced. I know this is probably more work for the mods but
there's not a lot of point *having* rules if no one pays any attention to
them.






>
> Hebby Elf once more:
> > If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new
> > posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we deal
> > with it?
> >
>


K

take a deep breath and just cope I'm afraid. The influx *will* happen no
doubt but there's not a lot that can be done to cope with that - just as
long as the rule about movie discussion being on the movie list is strongly
enforced. Frankly I think that if the rules can be more strictly enforced in
the 6 months or so leading up to it then everyone will be setting a good
example for the newbies and there won't be much of a problem with them.
After all new people and extra volume isn't a problem in itself if the posts
follow the rules (and are easily identified so that if people don't want to
discuss the ins and outs of the Shrieking Shack incident for the nth time
they can skip them)

K





From ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 17:31:10 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 17:31:10 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback/Attribution conventions
In-Reply-To: <bprlc2+sgku@...>
Message-ID: <bptf8u+avi3@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> <SNIP>
> 
> I think one factor that makes this difficult to determine in the 
> case of HPFGU is that, apparently, we have a relatively high 
> proportion of members for whom this is their first real experience 
> of internet discussion groups, whether mailing list, message board 
> or other format.
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "ameliagoldfeesh"
 <ameliagoldfeesh at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: ameliagoldfeesh at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <ameliagoldfeesh at ...>

A. Goldfeesh:
HPFGU was my first discussion group and I joined back on Friday, 16 
Nov 2001 (I kept my elf welcome email *s*).  To tell the truth, 
until now, when Shaun Hately brought it up, I didn't know the carets 
and nesting were a particular and formal way of posting.  Being 
about the only other mailing lists I'm on are sister lists of HPfGUs 
or a few even more *informal!* lists- I didn't know there was a 
traditional internet posting style from way back when.  And I'm sure 
many others don't know this as well.  I've heard complaints that 
HPfGUs is too strict as it is (and no- I don't believe this for a 
minute).

I do believe it would be helpful to go back in the archives and find 
a few or more posts that are close to the ideal of what we want for 
posting style, etiquette, and form and provide links to them for new 
and older posters to see.  Perhaps add it to the HB , pointing out 
the best parts of the examples to follow.  In addition, send it, the 
HB, and the Admin message reminding people to snip and to sign the 
bottom of the posts out to the list once every two weeks or so.  I 
haven't seen a reminder for awhile.  


  "Hebby Elf" <hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
>If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?

A Goldfeesh:
The search engine, unfortunately.  The Yahoo search engine used to 
be somewhat more reliable it seemed a few years ago when there was 
less to search through.  In fact, I was going to link to a couple of 
posts that I saw as rather ideal- however, couldn't find them or get 
to them.  But, I'm not sure of a way to have a better search 
engine.  Perhaps someone could call up Google and ask them to lend a 
hand? After all, what is HPfGUs next to the whole internet? *L* 


>Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?

A. Goldfeesh:
I don't think so.  It is a hard judgment call, people would feel 
left out and would ultimately lead to some hurt feelings I believe.

A. Goldfeesh,  
who didn't think she'd write so much, considering how little she 
posts and who didn't believe the carets had as much purpose as they 
actually do...





From betsyfallon at betsyfallon.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 18:07:06 2003
From: betsyfallon at betsyfallon.yahoo.invalid (betsy fallon)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 18:07:06 -0000
Subject: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback
In-Reply-To: <bpli42+kh49@...>
Message-ID: <bpthca+p1aj@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "annemehr" <annemehr at y...> 
wrote:
> > It's nothing that we can deal with here.  I was wishing some of 
the
> long-time posters who've disappeared since before OoP would post 
once
> in a while.  Maybe only once a month or so?  Maybe, as Tabouli says
> about herself (on OTC), they're burned out, on to other things.  I'm
> just disappointed that some people who were around even when I 
joined
> (Sept. '02), and then faded away, never returned to discuss OoP even
> after the list calmed down.
> 
Betsy:
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "betsy fallon" <betsyfallon at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: betsyfallon at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <betsyfallon at ...>

I have been a member for quite some time and have spent a majority of 
the time lurking. I have posted in the past, but I have only read OOP 
once and have not really wanted to get into discussions about the 
book because I feel I am so far behind the other posters. I promise 
that as soon as I re-read OOP, I will be more involved.

 >


 And, thanks to all you long-timers who still do!
> 
> > 
> > Should there be some formal recognition of good/long-time posters?
> 
> Hmm.  Well, that would mean another task for someone, wouldn't it?  
I
> don't know, I think such posters automatically earn recognition from
> the rest of the list.  The epitome might be when Elkins became "The
> Elkins" -- that was cool, spontaneous, and well earned.  I'm not 
sure
> it's good to pick out some people as "good" posters because it'd be
> too easy to hurt the feelings of some who are left out, but maybe
> "long-time" could be done.
> 
> > 
> > If past experience is any guide, we'll be getting a surge of new 
> > posters next June when the PoA movie premieres. How should we 
deal 
> > with it? 
> 
> Though on OTC I once agreed with trying a "no-post, enforced lurker"
> status for new listies, I've changed my mind.  I think the best 
thing
> is to make sure there are enough trained elves to handle the surge
> (and the PoA movie surge ought to be much smaller than the OoP book
> surge, I'd think), and also for experienced posters to be as good
> examples as possible.  Maybe, just *before* a new book or movie is
> released, a special notice could be sent out to current members
> suggesting we review the HBFile just to reinforce our memories as 
far
> as what good posting practices are.
> 
> Anyway, I'm feeling pretty good about the state of the main list 
these
> days -- it's recovered quite nicely, and many of the newest members
> are now some of the best posters.  TBAY, I'll admit, is still pretty
> devastated, but hey, that was some hurricane!  (And yes, I'm reading
> Evil!Bill/BB GUN and expect to wander out of the Safe House with
> something to say!)  ;-)
> 
> 
> Finally, even thought I've joined this group, it's not because I
> actually have any gripes!  I even think the main list will fare 
better
> when book 6 comes out because of experience earned after the OoP
> release.  I also think the current method of choosing new elves is
> better than having general elections, because the current elves 
have a
> much better idea of who would be good than the list at large.
> 
> Maybe, if you want to try electing some elves, some of these ideas
> might help:
> 
> -Don't replace the whole team with elected elves.  Instead, elect a
> few to replace retiring members or increase elf numbers if needed.  
If
> you want to have regular elections, don't replace more than a 
quarter
> of the team at once.  And I wouldn't be against having some
> "permanent" team members, either (i.e. not subject to elections).
> 
> -Even if we are electing some elves, maybe the Admin. team should
> still be able to invite people to join the team if they think they
> would be valuable members?
> 
> -Maybe there should be something like a "voting age," meaning 
perhaps
> only people who have been members for, I don't know, six months or
> something should be able to vote.  I don't actually have any idea 
how
> long the time period should be, but it should be long enough to get 
a
> good feel for the list.
> 
> -I don't think a yahoo group is necessarily a democracy.  If you do
> decide to try elections, and they end up hurting the list, you need 
to
> be able to put a stop to them.
> 
> -I'm certainly not the sharpest knife in the drawer, and some of my
> suggestions might be baloney.  I just think they're worth 
discussing.
>  I don't see what goes on behind the scenes, but the lists I'm on
> (main and OTC) actually seem to be pretty healthy and to be able to
> weather a storm -- and I'd hate to see anything jeopardise that!
> 
> Annemehr
> having gone on *way* longer than she expected...





From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 19:44:31 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 19:44:31 -0000
Subject: Changing The Subject Line (Re: Welcome to HPFGU-Feedback)
In-Reply-To: <bpsstl+bjpi@...>
Message-ID: <bptn2v+6f81@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
 
> I'd love to see the rules enforced. Well, some of them anyway :-) 
> Like for example : I positively get fed up when I see 100 posts 
all 
> named exactly the same way, even though they don't touch that 
subject 
> anymore and there might be 3 widely different sub-threads 
discussed 
> at the same time. I try to change the heading each time I answer a 
> post, in order to keep it exactly on subject, but few people do 
that, 
> and it annoys me, I must admit.


This rule is a dilemma for me. I started out by changing my subject 
line frequently, only to notice that the thread often went on 
without me, and the new subject died off. I do the same thing as a 
reader--I'm following a thread, see the subject line, and start 
reading the thread. I don't want to start on another thread that 
divides my attention between two very similar issues, and may end up 
being a repeat, so I stick with the original thread. Or read both, 
but respond to the original thread.

So then I stopped changing my subject lines unless veering widely 
off from the original idea, and have found I'm getting more 
responses. Now, you could argue my posts are getting more attention 
as they get better over time (at least I hope <g>) and maybe name 
recognition does play a big role in what people read, but IMO 
changing the subject line risks your thoughts being lost in the flow 
of a thread.

Jen Reese





From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 21:31:14 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 21:31:14 -0000
Subject: SmartGroups/OT crimes/embedded quotes
Message-ID: <bpttb2+ft7e@...>

A series of questions and responses, based on some posts so far:

1. Pros & cons of SmartGroups and messageboards

I posted a long suggestion here about trying to bring order to the 
enormous backlist of posts, to enable people to search for things 
more efficiently (see post 11). I don't know very much about the 
technical side of hosting, so the alternatives being discussed here 
for HPfGU don't mean much to me. I wonder if someone could explain 
whether any one of these options would, in one fell swoop, improve 
the searching of back posts, and therefore make redundant the lengthy 
process which I suggested ? Or, if the list transferred to a new 
format, whether you would be simply left with all previous messages 
in the old style, and would still have to sort them out ?

I must say the current posting format really suits me - I read 
everything on line in plain text, accept no download emails, and more 
or less manage to keep up. I skim read most things, and just pay 
attention to those that catch my interest. I would hate to have to 
choose threads to follow - its so difficult to anticipate when 
someone will come up with a new idea that transforms a previously 
dull and predictable discussion. Also, as the series lengthens, and 
the themes become more complex, its inevitable that many posts will 
range back and forwards over the whole canon when dealing with a 
particular point. You could so easily miss the next great Theory of 
Everything !

2. Off-topic crimes

The only howlers I have ever received have been for this; one, 
amazingly, accusing me of enticing others to go off-topic, even 
though I had not myself !

I think this is the most confusing area of all the list rules. I see 
repeated examples of people going on and on about scenery, railway 
timetables, food, customs, boarding school rules, mythology, 
religion, political administration, you name it.. and its often quite 
interesting background stuff. I really don't know where the line in 
the sand is supposed to be. 

What makes me quite cross is being told to go to OT with a thread, 
because most of your fellow thread-followers are not reading the OT 
list and won't pick up what you want to say, short of you making an 
announcement on the main list .. which is OT in itself !

3. Embedded quotes

My reaction when I see << anywhere in a post is mentally to skim over 
the text and treat it all as a quote from a previous post, because of 
the similarity of << marks to inverted commas in normal written text. 
Personally, I would find it tiresome and annoying to try and follow 
through when there was one, two or three such marks to indicate 
different layers of embedding. I would much prefer simple named 
attribution as and when required.

It is also true I am not a huge user of message boards and discussion 
groups, so the net etiquette of this style is new to me, so apologies 
there. However, with the HPfGU insistence on good standards of 
written English, I think it is a mistake to try and mix the two types 
of style. I would stick to ordinary grammar and punctuation rules for 
quotations, which are hard enough for most people to remember as it 
is, and especially as many posters are working in English as a second 
language.

Carolyn





From glovvgirl at glovvgirl.yahoo.invalid  Mon Nov 24 23:46:49 2003
From: glovvgirl at glovvgirl.yahoo.invalid (glovvgirl)
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2003 23:46:49 -0000
Subject: In defense of lurkers
Message-ID: <bpu599+7fl8@...>

Hello there!
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "glovvgirl" <glovvgirl at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: glovvgirl at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <glovvgirl at ...>

There have been a few comments on this new board on the subject of 
lurkers: trying to limit their numbers, possibly removing them from 
the list, and/or forcing members to opt-in again if they haven't 
posted for a while.

Christian had a very fine response to this issue, but I want to 
underscore it some more, and hopefully put another nail in this 
particular coffin.

To the extent that this list has problems, they do not come from 
lurkers.  On the contrary--most the complaints I have read are about 
people who post and what they do or do not do.  Lurkers, on the other 
hand, cause no extra work for the list administration, and they never 
violate posting guidelines.

Imagine if everyone on HPfGU posted even just once a month--that 
would increase the traffic on this list 5-fold, seriously stressing 
the Yahoo-imposed limit of 15 moderators and all around making the 
list unmanageable.

Furthermore, presumably lurkers are lurking because they don't have 
anything to say.  Do you really want to force them to post so that 
they can say, well, nothing of value?

Make posters jump through hoops if you must, but leave us lurkers 
alone. :)

-jenea 





From glovvgirl at glovvgirl.yahoo.invalid  Tue Nov 25 00:12:12 2003
From: glovvgirl at glovvgirl.yahoo.invalid (glovvgirl)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:12:12 -0000
Subject: Different technology
Message-ID: <bpu6os+4ks2@...>

I want to stress up front that I am not putting forth an opinion as 
to whether I think HPfGU should move away from Yahoo! Groups to a 
different sort of system.  
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "glovvgirl" <glovvgirl at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: glovvgirl at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <glovvgirl at ...>

However, should the administration decide to consider other options, 
I hope they will consider using the Slashdot software.  This is a 
bulletin-board style system that can support *hundreds* of thousands 
of members while maintaining high-quality posts and a remarkable 
degree of customization for the individual reader. 

The chief benefit of this style of software, in my opinion, is that 
it solves the volume problem by allowing members in good standing to 
give anonymous ratings of postings.  Each posting then has a score 
and a descriptive title (e.g. "4 - informative" or "5 - funny" or "1 -
 off topic").  Rather than trying to regulate what people post--which 
is what HPfGU is doing now at great cost in time and bickering--
readers can regulate what they read by setting a threshold.  If you 
set your threshold high, you will tend to read the highest quality 
posts.  If you set your threshold low, you will read more of the 
posts, but you'll see more low-quality posts.

You can choose to see discussions displayed "flat" (ie, not 
threaded), "threaded" (original post with links to followup posts), 
or "nested" (original post with sections of followup posts nested 
beneath them).

The system also does smart things in terms of moderation, division of 
labor among the administration staff etc.  Also, it's free!

The biggest cons of using this approach are that the group would have 
to fund the hosting of the web site and the software somewhere, and 
someone would have to know how to set it up and maintain it.  It 
can't be that hard, though ... look at the huge variety of 
sites/organizations that use it! http://slashcode.com/sites.pl

(On the subject of funds, I hope that the list administration will 
not hesitate to throw money at the problem *if* the decision is made 
that it will help.  Consider, if only 10% of the list gives only $1 
per year, that's more than $1,100 right there!)

Here's some information for those of you who would like to know 
more.  If you're curious at all about a system that very clever folks 
developed organically over time to handle huge volume in a system 
like this, it may be a good read for you, even if you think HPfGU 
should stay right where it is.  

Here's the generic FAQ about Slashdot: http://slashdot.org/faq/

The portion of the FAQ that is most likely to be of interest to this 
group is the portion on Comments and Moderation (notice that Slashdot 
uses the word "Comment" the way HPfGU uses the word "Post"): 
http://slashdot.org/faq/com-mod.shtml

Take note of the Slashdot concept of "karma," which helps ensure high 
quality moderation even though it's distributed across the membership.

-jenea






From fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid  Tue Nov 25 00:25:09 2003
From: fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid (Potterfanme)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:25:09 -0000
Subject: My two cents....again
Message-ID: <bpu7h5+tt0o@...>

Hi everyone, 
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-From: "Potterfanme" <fc26det at ...>
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-X-Sender: fc26det at ...
X-Original-Yahoo-Groups-Redacted-Return-Path: <fc26det at ...>

As I have been reading each of the posts, responses have been popping 
into my head.  Unfortunately if I had responded to each of them they 
would have been one liners.  So I have decided to respond to some of 
them here.  

1.  In regard to new posters and posting styles I must say that this 
is the first group I have belonged to.  I am not totally computer 
illiterate but I am also not a computer genius.  Part of my confusion 
has been the techno talk on what is expected when posting.  Can we 
use plain english?  Or maybe step by step instructions somewhere that 
a new user could go to to *see* exactly what you mean?  I agree that 
a set standard if possible would be the easiest for newbies to 
learn.  Plus when we get howlers it would be easier to take if it was 
blatantly obvious that we didn't follow the set standard.  Getting 
all members to comply may not be so easy.

2.  AOL and HTML.  Now, I don't know what the difference is between 
HTML and plain text, however, I have AOL 9.0 Broadband and I have the 
option of HTML or plain text for sending and receiving email.  I 
receive the digests rather than individual emails as I don't want to 
block important notices but I ususally just delete the digests and go 
to the Yahoo Group and read the messages I want to read.  I post and 
reply from there too.  I have not had any problems with missing 
messages or having my messages get lost.

3.  Extra Elves.  I don't know why some of the long ago elves have 
retired but I was wondering if any of you would want to lend a hand 
if the posting volume rose out of hand after the movie release as 
some fear it will.  There would be no training involved and from what 
I understand with the numbers quoted by others it would only be for a 
month or two.  Please don't throw anything at me if this is a really 
bad idea....(ducking just in case)

4.  Membership.  Is there a way to determine if a member is still 
actively using the list?  Some are concerned with the large 
membership.  Could an email be sent to a member who has not lurked or 
posted for a year asking them if they wished to remain a member.  I 
am wondering how many members just haven't unsubscribed.

5.  This format or messageboard.  My personal opinion is that I like 
this type of group better than a messageboard.  I have tried to 
follow a messageboard and it is difficult to keep up with.

6.  Subject lines and yahoo search.  My take on the search problem 
when I have tried to search for topics is the fact that the subject 
line doesn't change even though the context of the message has.  This 
is extremely aggrivating but I cannot fathom how to improve this.  
Once a thread is started and it is on a roll, so to speak, you really 
don't want to send it off track by changing the subject line.  
However, this in turn messes up the search features.  I also remember 
posting to only one part of a thread and forgetting to change the 
subject line.

7.  Iggy's Post #60.  I agree with everything he said.

Susan






From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Tue Nov 25 00:49:46 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 00:49:46 -0000
Subject: In defense of lurkers
In-Reply-To: <bpu599+7fl8@...>
Message-ID: <bpu8va+d225@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "glovvgirl" <glovvgirl at y...> 
wrote:
> There have been a few comments on this new board on the subject of 
> lurkers: trying to limit their numbers, possibly removing them 
from 
> the list, and/or forcing members to opt-in again if they haven't 
> posted for a while.
>
> To the extent that this list has problems, they do not come from 
> lurkers.  On the contrary--most the complaints I have read are 
about 
> people who post and what they do or do not do.  Lurkers, on the 
other 
> hand, cause no extra work for the list administration, and they 
never 
> violate posting guidelines.
> Furthermore, presumably lurkers are lurking because they don't 
have 
> anything to say.  Do you really want to force them to post so that 
> they can say, well, nothing of value?
> 
> Make posters jump through hoops if you must, but leave us lurkers 
> alone. :)


I'm the one who made those proposals, and so far no one has agreed 
with me that I've seen <g>. So I don't think those suggestions will 
go any farther than that.

My original thoughts were brainstorming, throwing out things I've 
wondered about in the past. This is my first internet group of any 
kind, and I didn't understand exactly who lurkers are in a group 
like this. In my mind, as I scrolled through the member list, I 
imagined that many of the names I'd never seen were people who 
forgot they signed on to this list, or weren't really interested 
anymore but didn't bother to unsubscribe. Now I know better. 

I've also found out that the *number* of members is not the problem, 
which was my inital thought. 

So, this forum is proving to be a good place to learn more about the 
process!

Jen Reese




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Tue Nov 25 10:16:22 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2003 10:16:22 -0000
Subject: The Canon Rule
In-Reply-To: <bplca6+djn8@...>
Message-ID: <bpva5m+p9q6@...>

"Jen Reese" said, in post 3 :

> My one pet peeve is posting etiquette: enormous amount of posts on 
> the main list that aren't canon-based or where people don't read 
> the entire thread and state something that another poster already 
> said.
> 
> I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
> from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
> that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). There are quite 
> a few posts every day with incorrect quotes, 'guesses' at what the 
> canon said b/c the books aren't handy, or even making comments on 
> another person's misquote. (Not correcting the mistake, just 
> writing about something using the wrong information!)

Er... I post mainly from work (shhhh !), and I can't imagine how I 
could possibly have the books here with me. Okay, I *could* have them 
in e-book form, but that's nowhere as handy as far as I'm concerned. 
So what am I supposed to do ? I try to remember things as correctly 
as possible, and when I'm not sure of my facts, I force myself to 
wait until I can check at home. But if I had to quote canon each and 
every time, I'd pretty much have to stop posting entirely.

Del




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 28 17:30:10 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:30:10 -0000
Subject: The Canon Rule
In-Reply-To: <bpva5m+p9q6@...>
Message-ID: <bq80n2+31kq@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> wrote:
> "Jen Reese" said, in post 3 :

> > I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
> > from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
> > that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). There are quite 
> > a few posts every day with incorrect quotes, 'guesses' at what the 
> > canon said b/c the books aren't handy, or even making comments on 
> > another person's misquote. (Not correcting the mistake, just 
> > writing about something using the wrong information!)
> 
> Er... I post mainly from work (shhhh!), and I can't imagine how I 
> could possibly have the books here with me. Okay, I *could* have them 
> in e-book form, but that's nowhere as handy as far as I'm concerned. 

Being "canon based" means that the theory or argument is based on
known facts as established in canon (books, interviews) rather than on
the movies, fanfic, or other material.  

It is not necessary to provide the exact quote to be canon based.  It
is also not necessary that the theory or argument be particularly
plausible (though "plausible" is a subjective term), just that it
start with canon and go from there.

However, if someone "misremembers" what the books said and makes a
factual error, it's a good idea for someone to *gently* correct the
factual error so that it's not propagated down-thread -- or worse,
throughout fandom.  Several well-known "facts" that people base on JKR
interviews are in fact false: she never said such a thing.  For
example, shortly before the OoP release, someone (Amy Z?) discovered
that JKR never said that the OoP death would be "a fan of Harry's." 
(Watch this: what I just said will turn out to be a rumor, too. :D)

As far as having the books handy, I keep my hardbacks at home and my
paperbacks at work, but not everyone can afford a double set of books,
and not every workplace would be cool with its employees keeping HP
books around for research purposes.

I'll caution here that the e-books are illegal copies of the HP series
and break copyright laws.  We can't forbid you from using them, but we
will delete any links to them.  

--Dicentra, speaking in her own, unofficial capacity




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 28 17:41:05 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:41:05 -0000
Subject: HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <bpk6jt+t3r1@...>
Message-ID: <bq81bh+50f5@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"
<joym999 at a...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
> <hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> > If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
> 
> The fact we can't seem to decide whether we are HPfGU, HPFGU, or 
> HP4GU.

This bugs me, too, but there's nothing we can do about it.  Once
you've created a list, you're stuck with the name.  AFAIK, we can't go
back and change the name the way you can change a file name.

Me, I'd vote for HPfGU if it were up to me.  Just a matter of taste.

--Dicentra, speaking unofficially, as usual






From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Fri Nov 28 17:44:02 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 17:44:02 -0000
Subject: HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <bq81bh+50f5@...>
Message-ID: <bq81h2+57lf@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis"
<dicentra at x> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "joywitch_m_curmudgeon"
> <joym999 at a...> wrote:
> > --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Hebby Elf" 
> > <hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> > > If you could change one thing about HPfGU, what would it be?
> > 
> > The fact we can't seem to decide whether we are HPfGU, HPFGU, or 
> > HP4GU.
> 
> This bugs me, too, but there's nothing we can do about it.  Once
> you've created a list, you're stuck with the name.  AFAIK, we can't go
> back and change the name the way you can change a file name.

I take it back: we *can* change the name.  I just checked the
management function.

SHOULD we standardize on a particular spelling?  I'd like to, but
that's the fussbudget in me.  Not that we don't have an inordinate
number of fussbudgets here anyway. :D

--Dicentra





From risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 29 00:46:00 2003
From: risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid (Melissa McCarthy)
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:46:00 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU
References: <bq81h2+57lf@...>
Message-ID: <00b701c3b612$29ea66c0$6401a8c0@vaio>

Dicentra:
> SHOULD we standardize on a particular spelling?  I'd like to, but
> that's the fussbudget in me.  Not that we don't have an inordinate
> number of fussbudgets here anyway. :D

Well, the fussbudget in *me* is hopping up and down shaking her pompoms and
shouting, "Standardize! standardize! yes yes yes!"  So, I guess that's my
vote.

Melissa, who has no idea where her inner fussbudget got the pompoms





From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 29 04:39:38 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 04:39:38 -0000
Subject: HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <00b701c3b612$29ea66c0$6401a8c0@vaio>
Message-ID: <bq97ua+b8aq@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Melissa McCarthy 
> Well, the fussbudget in *me* is hopping up and down shaking her 
pompoms and
> shouting, "Standardize! standardize! yes yes yes!"  So, I guess 
that's my
> vote.
> 
> Melissa, who has no idea where her inner fussbudget got the pompoms

I agree with Melissa.  Although the lack of standardization doesn't 
bother me to the point of pompoms ;-D, it's rather annoying.  The 
only *real* problem is when I'm talking onlist and I want to say 
Harry Potter for Grownups (i.e. "Here at Harry Potter for 
Grownups"), I'm not sure which one to use.

Oryomai
--*My* personal vote if for HP4GU, but that might be because I like 
the netspeak-esque qualities that it has.




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sat Nov 29 04:45:25 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 2003 15:45:25 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: HPFGU, HPfGU, and HP4GU
In-Reply-To: <bq97ua+b8aq@...>
References: <00b701c3b612$29ea66c0$6401a8c0@vaio>
Message-ID: <3FC8BF15.19274.69C5C23@localhost>

On 29 Nov 2003 at 4:39, Blair wrote:
 
> I agree with Melissa.  Although the lack of standardization doesn't 
> bother me to the point of pompoms ;-D, it's rather annoying.  The 
> only *real* problem is when I'm talking onlist and I want to say 
> Harry Potter for Grownups (i.e. "Here at Harry Potter for 
> Grownups"), I'm not sure which one to use.

One note - I've no problem with a change, I think it makes sense, but it might be 
wise to warn people a few days in advance.

I'll have to change my mail filters - which is minor, but I'd prefer to know in 
advance - but I'm mostly worried that some people who view the groups on the 
web might find they 'vanish' from where they expect them to be.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 30 19:50:07 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 14:50:07 -0500
Subject: Not reading all posts in a thread
Message-ID: <3ECECBCF.4B3A9E44.4B073798@...>

Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did, obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet peeve of mine though.

Oryomai



From strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 30 19:34:15 2003
From: strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid (strom5150)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 19:34:15 -0000
Subject: The Lurker Thing
In-Reply-To: <bplca6+djn8@...>
Message-ID: <bqdgnn+jsqs@...>

Very heavy snippage.
Jen said:
> 
> 3) I've always wondered about the many members who never post. How 
> about offering a limited time to lurk (say 3-6 months) and if a 
> person doesn't post they are taken off the list? This might turn 
into
> an administrative nightmare, though.
> 
Danielle replies:

I've been a professional lurker here since June of this year, and 
read as many threads as possible nearly every day. I feel a twinge of 
guilt now, however, so I have to ask (and perhaps a List Elf should 
answer):

Do lurkers affect the list administration in any demonstrable way? I 
only get Admin messages in my mailbox, and these are rare. So I fail 
to see how my lurking affects the list, as far as adding to 
administrative duties. I don't know anything about administering a 
discussion list, especially not one of this size. So I hope I don't 
sound mad - I'm just asking to be educated.

Even though I haven't participated yet, kicking me off the list will 
take away one bright spot of each day for me, so I have to protest. 
(No, I'm not daily-bright-spot-challenged or anything, I would just 
miss it a lot!)

Now, why don't I post? I noticed that this has been discussed on 
other threads in this list already, but the simple truth is that I'm 
terrified to say anything, because I don't think that the list 
welcomes newbies very openly. And I don't think that people who lurk 
for a long time are even newbies anymore, but since the listies will 
not recognize our names in the posts... 

Well, that's my own hang-up, I realize. But, there are obviously 
others who feel the same way. As was also mentioned in another 
thread, the majority of the 11,000+ members must be lurkers, because 
there sure aren't that many people actively posting.

Danielle
(Thanking the audience for letting her have her say, and wondering if 
posting on this list will make her brave enough to try the main list. 
In the meantime, back to Lurker's Hill! (as I saw it called on OT 
Chatter))





From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 30 21:51:59 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 13:51:59 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: The Lurker Thing
References: <bqdgnn+jsqs@...>
Message-ID: <009b01c3b78c$2f11b560$b1331c40@...>

Danielle wrote:

<Do lurkers affect the list administration in
any demonstrable way? I
only get Admin messages in my mailbox, and
these are rare.>

I see now way that lurkers affect the list
administration, nor the list in any way
beyond our first Welcoming Message.

Some of the list admin even lurks.

Saitaina
****
Ron: Aw, Fuji. Why is it always monkeys? Why
can't I ever be attacked by crazed
supermodels?

http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 30 23:44:00 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:44:00 -0000
Subject: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <3ECECBCF.4B3A9E44.4B073798@...>
Message-ID: <bqdvc0+56hu@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote:

>>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a
few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
peeve of mine though.<<<


The List Elves *could* prevent this from happening if they did the
following:

? Put everyone on permanent moderated status.

? Check every pending message to make sure it doesn't re-introduce a
topic that has been recently introduced. 

? Formulate a policy to determine what "recently introduced" means
(after weeks of haggling backstage).

? When a post re-introduces a topic too soon, send it back with a note
saying "read the @#%& list before posting," though not in those exact
words.

? Cope with the influx of grovelling apologies/nasty retorts to above
message.


So you see, it *would* be possible, but only if we Elves were equipped
with Time Turners and copious amounts of antacids.  The MoM isn't
likely to supply the former, and we already overdose on the latter as
it is.

I don't think you're the only one who is bugged by it, Oryomai.  This
kind of thing has been happening ever since the list's inception, and
people complain about it from time to time (List Elves included). 
It's especially infuriating when you post something you think is
devastatingly clever or interesting, no one responds, then two weeks
later someone else brings up the same point and it starts huge thread.  

It's just one of those things that happens on a discussion list.  You
can yell and shake your fists at the screen when it happens to you,
but beyond that, there's nothing else you can do.

A gentle reminder from ADMIN wouldn't hurt.  Trouble is, the people
who don't read the list before posting don't read ADMINs, either. :D

--Dicentra, speaking unofficially




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Sun Nov 30 23:56:07 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:56:07 -0000
Subject: The Lurker Thing
In-Reply-To: <009b01c3b78c$2f11b560$b1331c40@...>
Message-ID: <bqe02n+vn42@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Saitaina" <saitaina at w...> wrote:

> Danielle wrote:
> 
> <Do lurkers affect the list administration in
> any demonstrable way? I
> only get Admin messages in my mailbox, and
> these are rare.>
> 
> I see no way that lurkers affect the list
> administration, nor the list in any way
> beyond our first Welcoming Message.

I think lurkers are wonderful, myself.  They cause the Elves much
*less* trouble than the posters, in fact, because they never post
anything inappropriate that needs to be Howlered or rejected.

Like Saitana said, we send a Welcoming message to all new members, but
beyond that, we don't fuss with people unless they post incorrectly.
Having a ton of people on the membership list doesn't seem to slow
things down at all.  (My inner fussbudget wants to clean out all those
who don't want to lurk *or* participate anymore so that we can get an
accurate idea of how many people are *really* on the list, but because
the extra folks aren't a problem, there's really no reason to do so.) 

Don't feel guilty if you're a lurker.  Lurking is perfectly OK. 
Lurking is *encouraged*.  Not everyone likes to post their ideas, nor
should they have to.  I wish some of our *posters* would learn the
fine art of Just Lurking.  What if *JKR* lurked on HPfGU occasionally?
 We certainly wouldn't want to kick *her* off, would we?

Hats off to Lurkers, the body and soul of HPfGU!

--Dicentra






From silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 00:18:12 2003
From: silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid (silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 10:18:12 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
References: <bqdvc0+56hu@...>
Message-ID: <003001c3b7a0$9be82ac0$6b984cca@Monteith>

SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote

>>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a
few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
peeve of mine though.<<<



Also, sometimes you can log on and get the original message and write a response off-line like many of us with dial-up connections. With the time differences around the world, there may not have *been* a response as you compose yours and it goes to your outbox ready to be sent later. When you log on again, however, there could have been a number of responses in the meantime, perhaps saying saying the same thing your message just did. There isn't really a way around that, and to say too much may discourage some people from posting at all. 

It's happened to me a number of times, and I think we just have to put up with it.

Just thinking out loud...

Nox




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 02:34:59 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 20:34:59 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <bqdvc0+56hu@...>
Message-ID: <000101c3b7b3$bb109140$1feb79a5@Einstein>

> >>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
> a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
> today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a
> few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
> obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
> peeve of mine though.<<<
> 

Iggy here:

I would also like to point out that, if the other person posted is on
moderated status, they may have actually written their post before you
wrote yours... But theirs hit the list after yours did because they had
to wait for List Elf approval.

This was one of my biggest annoyances before I finally made it off of
moderated status.  It ended up making people think I was doing the same
thing you are complaining about.

One of the best things we can do is not put the extra pressure on the
List Elves, but just keep in mind that some of us have to wait for their
posts to hit the list, while others don't.  In doing this, and hopefully
in also remembering what it was like when we were on moderated status,
we can have more understanding and tolerance for these situations when
they arise.


Just my two centaurs worth

Iggy McSnurd







From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 03:18:08 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 03:18:08 -0000
Subject: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <bqdvc0+56hu@...>
Message-ID: <bqebtg+pr3l@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Dicentra spectabilis" 
<dicentra at x> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote:
> 
> >>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder 
once
> a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
> today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then 
a
> few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
> obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
> peeve of mine though.<<<
> 
> 
> The List Elves *could* prevent this from happening 
> A gentle reminder from ADMIN wouldn't hurt.  Trouble is, the people
> who don't read the list before posting don't read ADMINs, 
either. :D
> 
> --Dicentra, speaking unofficially

Duplicate comments in a thread can occur even when all current posts 
in that thread have been read.  There is a delay in posting 
messages, sometimes a significant delay when Yahoo!Mort is acting 
up, and posts on the same point could cross in cyberspace.  This is 
even more likely to occur to a listee in moderated status.  I had 
encountered delays of over 24 hours before some of my messages were 
posted.  By the time my messages were posted, they were at best 
irrelevant.  Even if the point wasn't duplicated, the discussion had 
moved on to other things, and the original post might as well never 
have been written.  

Haggridd




From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 04:12:54 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 04:12:54 -0000
Subject: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <003001c3b7a0$9be82ac0$6b984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <bqef46+ijf5@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, <silverdragon at e...> wrote:
> SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote
> 
> >>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
> a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
> today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a
> few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
> obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
> peeve of mine though.<<<
> 
> 
> 
> Also, sometimes you can log on and get the original message and
write a response off-line like many of us with dial-up connections.
With the time differences around the world, there may not have *been*
a response as you compose yours and it goes to your outbox ready to be
sent later. When you log on again, however, there could have been a
number of responses in the meantime, perhaps saying saying the same
thing your message just did. There isn't really a way around that, and
to say too much may discourage some people from posting at all. 
> 
> It's happened to me a number of times, and I think we just have to
put up with it.
> 
> Just thinking out loud...
> 
> Nox

This just happened to me when writing a response *online.*  When I
read the question someone posted about why in SS it said "there were
only three people left to be sorted..." and then *four* people were
sorted, it was the very last post there was.  By the time I'd written
and posted my response, on webview, someone else had already posted one.

Also, sometimes I have gotten caught by the fact that some responses
aren't threaded.  I always read the list on webview.  If I came across
a post I wanted to respond to, but still had, say, 30 more posts left
to read, I used to just check the end of that post for replies, read
those, and then post if no one had said what I wanted to.  Then as I
read along, I'd find other replies that weren't on the threading
function -- either they were from people apparently replying to Daily
Digests, or they were part of a combined batch of replies (such as
Rita aka "Catlady" does), and sometimes they'd already said what I'd
just posted.  So now I try to read *all* the posts before replying to
any.  Still, that can be difficult, and I can see how someone might be
constrained by time to try to follow individual threads only.

Annemehr
taking a break from Friday's posts this Sunday, so obviously won't be
posting on the main list for a while...




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 04:18:26 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:18:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
Message-ID: <0B8EE1C3.7236BBF1.4B073798@...>

And now I feel like the biggest bitch in the world for bringing it up.  Thanks guys lol.  I understand about moderated status but I've also seen people post days later.  Yahoo is rather evil, and I have had posts not show up at all on the mainlist, even after I was off moderated status.  As a random question, how many people work on moderating posts?  I've always kinda wondered about the List Elf system dealing with that.  If it's in the bigfile, just tell me.  I read it every once in a while, but it's like Crime & Punishment.  I read it fast and enough to get along, but after that, nada!  :-).

Oryomai



From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 04:50:27 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda Geist)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:50:27 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
References: <bqdvc0+56hu@...> <003001c3b7a0$9be82ac0$6b984cca@Monteith>
Message-ID: <001001c3b7c6$a5285f80$4059aacf@...>

> SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote
>
> >>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
> a month or something?  I only mention this because it just happened
> today with the "Wizard to Ghost" thread.  I quoted a page and then a
> few posts later a different person quoted the same thing I did,
> obviously not having read what I wrote.  This could just be a pet
> peeve of mine though.<<<

If it's any consolation--and I doubt it is--this is not new. This has been
happening forever on the list. It has less to do with size, and more to do
with human, internet, and geographic nature.

Human nature? People "read down" their inbox and respond as they go; if they
have a great thought, they post it; then they go further down and realize
someone else had the same great thought. Theirs is already gone. It happens.
It happened to me, as a participant in threads *and* the offending sender,
more times than I can count. Also, it is often irresistible to be "on
record" with something, even *if* someone else has said it. And thirdly,
since "me, too" posts are discouraged, a restatement of what was already
said is employed as a way to second and confirm what someone has said.

Internet nature? Email delays, the questionable reliability of Yahoomort,
etc., can all conspire to delay responses. Often the first response arrives
after subsequent ones have been made. Not everyone receives or reads their
email or checks the site in the same real time, and honestly timely,
genuinely original responses, which say the exact same thing, can be posted
by different people in complete ignorance of the other messages.

Geographic nature? Feeds on the others; different time zones only add to the
other factors. We have a quite far-flung group, and in addition to not all
accessing messages in real time, we're not even all *awake* at the same
times.

I doubt it is something we can change. I have had to get used to it, in the
same way that I have gotten used to seeing the same subjects and threads
appear many times. I either read them, or I don't. I either comment, or I
don't.  When I read them, I have sometimes found differences of "take" even
on the same quote or aspect. So there are compensations. But in many ways,
the list is lots of people shouting in the same room; there's some
inevitable repetition.

~Amanda, for herself, just me, no official opinion




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 07:50:22 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2003 23:50:22 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
References: <bqdvc0+56hu@...>
Message-ID: <000001c3b81f$99d29e80$a6706751@kathryn>

Not to mention of course that I've done it dozens of times when YaHell is
being it's usuall irritating self and I haven't *got* the message I'm
basically repeating when I've posted even though it was sent much earlier.
How would the mods possibly tell when someone isn't reading stuff and when
they're just being made to look stupid by the joint efforts of Yahoo and
their mail providers?

K
"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."




From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 13:57:36 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 07:57:36 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <bqef46+ijf5@...>
Message-ID: <000001c3b813$1482c630$7b95aec7@Einstein>


> Annemehr
> So now I try to read *all* the posts before replying to
> any.  Still, that can be difficult, and I can see how someone might be
> constrained by time to try to follow individual threads only.
> 

Iggy here:

Actually, I do something similar to what you do.  Since I use Microsoft
Outlook, I read all the threads I'm interested in, and flag anything I
might want to reply to as I go along.  After I'm done with reading all
the letters, I go back and work on replies to what I've flagged.

Also, since I have my mail program set to check my mail every five
minutes when I'm on line, I can see if a new reply has come in while
I've been typing mine. I've found that this helps in preventing
duplicating someone else's post.  (Of course, on a list like this, no
technique is 100% effective...)


Iggy McSnurd







From tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 09:18:48 2003
From: tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid (Tim Regan)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 09:18:48 -0000
Subject: The Lurker Thing
In-Reply-To: <bqe02n+vn42@...>
Message-ID: <bqf11o+q7q2@...>

Hi All,

Even researchers who study online social spaces don't see eye-to-eye 
on the value of lurkers. For example, Jenny Preece 
(http://www.ifsm.umbc.edu/~preece/) sees value in it (check out her 
2001 paper with Nonnecke called "Why Lurkers Lurk" 
http://snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca/~nonnecke/research/whylurk.pdf or 
http://tinyurl.com/e5gp) while Marc Smith 
(http://research.microsoft.com/~masmith/) doesn't.

I think lurking is a good thing. I also post on a Philip Pullman 
discussion list http://www.darkmaterials.net/forum/ where posting 
large volumes is encouraged. The result is loads of annoying posts 
like "me too", "yeah, I loved that bit", or even the mind bogglingly 
uninteresting ":-)"!

I like to compare it to theatre going in the time of Shakespeare. In 
Shakespeare's day there were four classes of people involved in a 
theatre production: the stage crew, the actors, the groundlings, and 
the gallery. I see lurkers as the gallery, posters as the 
groundlings, JKR and her fictional cast as the actors, and the list-
elves as the stage hands. It's not a perfect analogy, but it does 
show how many different approaches to an online community help make 
the place richer.

Cheers,

Dumbledad.





From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 23:30:39 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2003 23:30:39 -0000
Subject: not reading all posts in a thread
Message-ID: <bqgiuv+nqrg@...>

This discussion reminded me of a very funny post I saw way back, 
77115 from Wiley Willowsborough, who I am sure won't mind me re-
posting in its entirety here, as I think it has a 'found on the 
internet' status. It is all too, too true about what happens on the 
HPfGU list !
Carolyn



How many forum members does it take to change a lightbulb?

1 to change the light bulb and 1 to post that the light bulb has
beenchanged

14 to share similar experiences of changing light bulbs and how the
light
bulb could have been changed differently

7 to caution about the dangers of changing light bulbs

27 to point out spelling/grammar errors in posts about changing light
bulbs

53 to flame the spell checkers

41 to correct spelling/grammar flames

6 to argue over whether it's "lightbulb" or "light bulb"

... another 6 to condemn those 6 as anal-retentive

2 industry professionals to inform the group that the proper term is
"lamp"

15 know-it-alls who claim they were in the industry, and that
"light bulb"is perfectly correct

156 to email the participant's ISPs complaining that they are in
violation of their "acceptable use policy"

109 to post that this forum is not about light bulbs and to please
take this discussion to a lightbulb forum

203 to demand that cross posting to hardware forum, off-topic forum,
and lightbulb forum about changing light bulbs be stopped

111 to defend the posting to this forum saying that we all use
light bulbs and therefore the posts are relevant to this forum

306 to debate which method of changing light bulbs is superior, where
to buy the best light bulbs, what brand of light bulbs work best for
this technique and what brands are faulty

27 to post URL's where one can see examples of different light bulbs

14 to post that the URL's were posted incorrectly and then post the
corrected URL's

3 to post about links they found from the URL's that are relevant
to this group which makes light bulbs relevant to this group

33 to link all posts to date, quote them in their entirety including
all headers and signatures, and add "Me too"

12 to post to the group that they will no longer post because they
cannot handle the light bulb controversy

19 to quote the "Me too's" to say "Me three"

4 to suggest that posters request the light bulb FAQ

44 to ask what is a "FAQ"

4 to say "didn't we go through this already a short time ago?"

143 to say "do a Google search on light bulbs before posting questions
about light bulbs"

1 new forum member to respond to the original post 6 months from now
and start it all over again





From tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  1 23:39:48 2003
From: tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid (tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 18:39:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: The Lurker Thing
Message-ID: <90.3fc85130.2cfd2b44@...>

<Hi All,

<Even researchers who study online social spaces don't see eye-to-eye 
<on the value of lurkers. For example, Jenny Preece 
<(http://www.ifsm.umbc.edu/~preece/) sees value in it (check out her 
<2001 paper with Nonnecke called "Why Lurkers Lurk" 
<http://snowhite.cis.uoguelph.ca/~nonnecke/research/whylurk.pdf or 
<http://tinyurl.com/e5gp) while Marc Smith 
<(http://research.microsoft.com/~masmith/) doesn't.


Hi, I am a long time lurker, and I am proud of it! j/k but many lurkers have 
justifiable reasons for lurking. Here is my situation. My sister read the 
fifth book first. I had to wait for her to finish before I could even start, and I 
vowed to myself that I would not read any spoilers on the list, because I did 
not want to ruin anything for myself. That being said, I am now literally 
20,000 posts behind. I would like to continue reading in order, because i love to 
read everyone's take on a subject, and I hate just randomly picking a thread 
because I will probably have no clue what is going on. 

I haven't had alot of spare time to read the posts, but I love doing so. I 
love the fact that there are intelligent people willing to talk about something 
as incredible as these books. I have been so busy sending out college 
applications, working at my localgrocery store, doing regular homework, stage crew for 
my school, and I am also on my school's golf team. When I get a free moment 
to enjoy the list, it makes me so happy. It would be horrible if you guys would 
get rid of the lurkers. Plus if I posted from a thread from about six months 
ago, no one would even remember saying what they did back in June. And 
finally, I do not want to insult anyone's intelligence by coming up with a profound 
discovery that everyone else has figured out. I hate reading those, because by 
now everyone should know basic characters and plots, and it annoys me when 
people say redundant things. (which I probably just did)

Maybe in this group I will not lurk as much
Thanks
Katie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From akhillin at anita_hillin.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 00:34:04 2003
From: akhillin at anita_hillin.yahoo.invalid (Anita Hillin)
Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2003 18:34:04 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Not reading all posts in a thread
In-Reply-To: <001001c3b7c6$a5285f80$4059aacf@...>
Message-ID: <NDBBLANNOLGPILEHCPJLGEIKCPAA.akhillin@...>

> SnapesSlytherin at a... wrote
>
> >>> Is there any way that this can be stopped?  Like, a reminder once
> a month or something?  <<<

To which Amanda replied:

If it's any consolation--and I doubt it is--this is not new. This has been
happening forever on the list. It has less to do with size, and more to do
with human, internet, and geographic nature.

[Anita Hillin] : I'm  kind of amused by the two pertinent issues (lurkers
and reading all posts), because for me, trying to avoid the problem of
repetition results in becoming a lurker far more often than I would have
supposed.  Because I have limited access to Yahoo during the day (unless I
can cleverly disguise reading these e-mails as work), I end up with a large
number of e-mails to read in the evening.  A post will inspire a brilliant
idea, then I'll discover six e-mails down that someone else has been
brilliant first, so my post would be redundant.

The other problem is business travel. After five days on the road, I have
hundreds of e-mails by the time I get back from my trip.  I have to decide
to delete a goodly number of posts, just to keep my account open, so I'm
going to miss some wisdom.  I suspect I'm not entirely alone in this.

akh




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





From thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 02:23:28 2003
From: thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid (Tom Wall)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 02:23:28 -0000
Subject: The Canon Rule
In-Reply-To: <bq80n2+31kq@...>
Message-ID: <bqgt30+vfis@...>

Jen Reese:
I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). 

Dicentra Spectabilis:
Being "canon based" means that the theory or argument is based on
known facts as established in canon (books, interviews) rather than 
on the movies, fanfic, or other material.  

It is not necessary to provide the exact quote to be canon based.  It
is also not necessary that the theory or argument be particularly
plausible (though "plausible" is a subjective term), just that it
start with canon and go from there. /END QUOTE

Tom, in his first post to Feedback:
Hey all! I've been following along here since Day One, but haven't 
yet been able to post my concerns due to time constraints and, uh, 
the fact that everyone else is very on top of the ball in their 
observations and suggestions. It's quite easy to feel rather 
redundant once one actually gets through everything that everyone 
else has to say.

IMHO, that is a Very Good Thing. ;-)

However, I figured that I'd briefly chime in here on this canon 
discussion. 

When I first joined HPfGU in January 2003, I read through the HBfile 
and was struck by the extensive explanations concerning canon: what 
it is, when to use it, how to use it, and so forth. From my *first* 
impression, canon was a Big Deal, and it was important to cite it 
correctly and copiously. 

Therefore, in order to not look like a buffoon in front of so many 
prolific members, I made a concerted effort to buff up my own 
knowledge of the books; I also took to carrying them around with me 
so that I'd be able to cite the canon properly.

When the HBfile was revised a little while ago, I noticed that - in 
contrast to the old file - the new document gave canon almost no 
attention. I mean, 'canon' was mentioned as a word, and it was used 
in explanations of the prefixes we use on the boards, but a full-out 
description of canon and its various attendant uses wasn't to be 
found anywhere in the new HBfile.

I wrote a letter to the Administrators at the time, but don't recall 
hearing anything back on the topic. And the HBfile hasn't since been 
revised to add more information about canon.

It stands to reason that the decrease in canon citations by new 
members, and the larger lack of attention to canon itself (not by 
all list members, to be sure, but by many) as of late might be the 
result of this teensy alteration to the HBfile. 

Since this document consists of - basically - the first major bit of 
information any newbie will process, I think that it would be 
beneficial for everyone if canon got more press in there. 

Would it be at all possible for the Admin Team to re-add that canon-
section from the old file? You know, not necessarily the whole 
thing, but something more than what is there now?

Anyways, thanks for some seriously illuminating reading, everyone: 
there are lots of great ideas zooming around here, and I hope to be 
able to participate more over the next few weeks!

-Tom





From abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 14:21:28 2003
From: abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid (abigailnus)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:21:28 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
Message-ID: <bqi758+687q@...>

Dear Everybody,
 
One of the reasons that we decided to establish -Feedback was to
allow us to find out about the group's needs and opinions, and
occasionally we'd like to ask for your thoughts about various subjects.
This is one of those times. Most of you have probably seen the TBAY
prefix attached to some posts on the main list. TBAY is a posting
format that has existed for about a year and a half, and it has a great
many fans among the older list members. We'd like to see newer
members get involved with the form, but we realize that the learning
curve for TBAY can be a little steep. To this end, members of the list
admin have been putting together a TBAY primer, which will answer
new members' questions about the format.
 
Trouble is, we're not entirely certain what those questions are.
 
We can guess some of them, and no doubt we can thing of a few that
a person with no familiarity with TBAY might never think to ask, but
there are surely questions that we would never consider. Which is why
it's great that we have you to do our work for us. :-)
 
So, if you could take the time to answer these questions, and maybe add
a few of your own, we'd really appreciate it, and we hope that in turn the
list will as well.
 
1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 
 
2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
TBAY format made you reluctant to post?
 
3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?
 
4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?
 
Thanks in advance for any input you can provide,
Abigail, aka Bookish Elf
For the list elves




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 17:37:47 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 17:37:47 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqiilb+hlp8@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> 
wrote:

> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if 
any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 
>  

I will readily admit to being mystified when I first encountered 
TBays, but then looked out for them with increasing amusement, and 
made a point of digging out the Humungous Bigfile notes to try and 
follow what was going on.

I really think that the best of them are very funny and extremely 
clever. They enable a dialogue between the various theories that 
brings the ideas alive and allows an entertaining point counter-point 
discussion which is so much more interesting than the paragraph-by-
paragraph argument & refutation that normally happens on the list.

That said, IMNVHO the worst of them are, well verbal, er..garbage. 
Some get very self-indulgent I think, and then I just skip to the end 
to see what, if any, conclusion they are coming to.


> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about 
the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

Yes, I read most of them, and no, I haven't dared to post in the 
style. It is partly because they are written in a form I haven't 
personally experimented with before, but more to the point, I would 
feel diffident putting up a dialogue that I had not discussed in some 
detail with the other characters first. Otherwise, you are putting 
words into their mouths which they might (violently !) disagree with -
 especially on long-standing theory positions. As I don't have the 
flame-retardant properties of Wendelin the Weird, this is kind of 
scary !

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts 
(such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY 
theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What 
can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

Aha.. I launch yet again onto my hobby horse - see my post no.11 on 
this board. No to all your points here - its very difficult to catch 
up with all the permutations of the theories, but if all the relevant 
posts were arranged nicely and tidily in one place, how much easier 
it would all be to find out how a theory was evolving ! Hypothetic 
Alley and Fantastic Posts are just not up to date enough..

Not sure what veteran TBay-ers could do to welcome people; its not a 
format which is reducible to simple rules, and the ferocity of the 
arguments is part of the fun. Maybe people could be encouraged to try 
a post out offlist with one of the veterans before going live ?

Another idea might be to create a fictional noticeboard, which non-
TBay posters could attach points to, which the more experienced 
characters in TBay could then have fun discussing and incorporating, 
or not as they wished.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to 
know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY 
style?

I'm not sure you should go overboard (no pun intended) to make it 
that much easier for newbies. I think there is a difference between 
making TBay more understandable (which is a good idea) and making it 
easier for everyone to post on. I would prefer to read only good 
stuff in TBay formats, not encourage loads of poor quality attempts !!

Cheers
Carolyn





From strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 18:14:52 2003
From: strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid (strom5150)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 18:14:52 -0000
Subject: Fantastic Posts Web Site
Message-ID: <bqikqs+s4ng@...>

Hi all,

There is a lot of discussion about how to make it easier for new list 
members to get used to the discussion topics and posting styles in 
this group. The tool to do this already exists - the Fantasitic Posts 
Web site. 

The problem with this, as has been briefly mentioned in other posts, 
is that the site is so rarely updated. I just checked, and the "last 
update" date at the bottom of the page is still 7/6/03. Which it has 
been since, well, 7/6/03.

Before I joined the main list in June 2003, I took the time to read 
the entire Fantastic Posts site, and found it an invaluable 
introduction to the list, the theories, TBAY, and the acronyms. Once 
I was a member of the list, I could use the links to the actual 
messages, as well. I can't stress enought how valuable this was to 
me, even before reading the HBfile, etc.

Even now, I continue to check back to the site for new compilations 
of information, character updates, etc., but have been disappointed 
for over six months.

So, instead of coming up with new methods and processes, why not use 
the one that already exists (and does such a wonderful job)? Why not 
update Fantastic Posts more frequently - anytime there is a new 
theory, or at least ones that garner enough attention to get an 
acronym? And continue to update the links to the actual relevant 
posts, as well.

I realize that there may not be enough elves for this, but everything 
being suggested here seems to point to the need for additional elves 
in one form or another. Currently, do the elves doing the daily list 
readings pull out things that could go onto Fantastic Posts? If so, 
then what happens?

Just a thought.

Danielle, lurker who cares deeply




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 20:20:36 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 20:20:36 -0000
Subject: The Canon Rule
In-Reply-To: <bqgt30+vfis@...>
Message-ID: <bqis6k+iqcl@...>

This is Amanda, (a) doing a drive-by from work and (b) speaking only 
for herself, not as any sort of duly designated representative.

> Tom, in his first post to Feedback:
> Hey all! I've been following along here since Day One, but haven't 
> yet been able to post my concerns due to time constraints and, uh, 
> the fact that everyone else is very on top of the ball in their 
> observations and suggestions. It's quite easy to feel rather 
> redundant once one actually gets through everything that everyone 
> else has to say.

Welcome! I was hoping you'd come over; I remember you made some 
superb points before, when you wrote the MEG team.

> When I first joined HPfGU in January 2003, I read through the 
HBfile 
> and was struck by the extensive explanations concerning canon: what 
> it is, when to use it, how to use it, and so forth. From my *first* 
> impression, canon was a Big Deal, and it was important to cite it 
> correctly and copiously. 

I'm not dissing or denigrating or diminishing the use of canon here. 
But I think one reason that its explanation was so prominent, is that 
the discussions of what was and wasn't were so extensive. Lots of 
discussion and debate went into trying to formulate some parameters.

If you read an earlier post I made here on list rules, you will have 
seen my "take," that they are in some cases an attempt to distill and 
codify something that longtime posters just got to where they 
intuitively knew, did by feel. I think the canon rule is probably the 
very best example of that.

(assumes sepulchral voice) In the Beginning, anything could be 
discussed on the main list. (coughs, goes back to normal voice) 
Seriously, I think it was only after list volume necessitated the 
splits into OTC, Movie, etc., that canon content became such a 
measure of appropriateness for the main list. And every time this has 
been discussed, there are new approaches to just how best to phrase 
something that is still very much something that people feel, know, 
intuit, about what makes one post canon-based and another not. Every 
permutation solves some problems and leaves room for other 
borderline "is it?" situations.

I don't know that there will ever be One Rule that makes it black and 
white. As I said in the earlier post, this list has also always been 
very self-correcting. The serious posters, new or not, learn through 
interaction what degree of canon is appropriate, what skates the 
line, etc. The nonserious posters, the ones who didn't understand the 
sort of group they were joining, are usually ignored, leave, or are 
filtered out in the moderating process.

> Therefore, in order to not look like a buffoon in front of so many 
> prolific members, I made a concerted effort to buff up my own 
> knowledge of the books; I also took to carrying them around with me 
> so that I'd be able to cite the canon properly.

You, my dear, sound like LOON material. Somebody remind me to write 
something up on list culture when I have time. Like, 2008. Too many 
people don't know what LOONs are. 

> When the HBfile was revised a little while ago, I noticed that - in 
> contrast to the old file - the new document gave canon almost no 
> attention. I mean, 'canon' was mentioned as a word, and it was used 
> in explanations of the prefixes we use on the boards, but a full-
out 
> description of canon and its various attendant uses wasn't to be 
> found anywhere in the new HBfile.
> 
> I wrote a letter to the Administrators at the time, but don't 
recall 
> hearing anything back on the topic. And the HBfile hasn't since 
been 
> revised to add more information about canon.

Actually, the HBfile is becoming quite the "living document." I know 
some sections have been re-inserted, as the need for them became 
clearer. In the effort to smooth it down to a size people would 
actually read, I think we may indeed have cut too much.

I believe the current version of the Bigfile used to be periodically 
sent out to everyone--am I remembering wrong? Does that still happen? 
It might be good to make sure everyone has a current edition, on a 
regular basis.

Anyway, I'm not terribly involved with the updating of the HBfile, 
but whenever a lack is pointed out it is checked for a possible need 
to update.

> Would it be at all possible for the Admin Team to re-add that canon-
> section from the old file? You know, not necessarily the whole 
> thing, but something more than what is there now?

I think they're looking at it. If you have the number of the old 
section, it'd be helpful, because as I recall, it was in there a 
couple places. (wonders if she kept all her old Bigfile versions)
 
~Amanda, really wanting to go home because of an upset stomach and 
swearing to get the other editor for out-sicking her and not coming 
in at all




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 21:15:00 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 21:15:00 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqivck+g96h@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" 
<abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
>TBAY message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, 
>if any, is the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU 
>theory? 

I personally love the TBAY messages.  They're sort of a role playing 
way to tell a theory.  TBAY theories, to me, are theories that have 
boats  (Big Bang Destroyer, etc.).  The only difference between a 
TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory is that the author of the 
theory chose to format their theory in a different way.

> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
>If you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
>respond to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? 
>What about the TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I always read the TBAY messages.  I've posted a few TBAY messages, 
being the Captian of SILK SHIRTS and all.  I just wanted to try 
TBAY, so I posted one that was rather lack luster, but it got the 
job done.  The format makes it hard to post if you don't know the 
people, because then you feel like you're putting words in their 
mouth.  And you don't want to have them supporting theories and 
ideas that the poster wouldn't on-list.

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
>discussions of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY 
>more or less accessible then discussions of older theories in 
>regular posts (such as Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of 
>several major TBAY theories) and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY 
>posts more accessible? What can veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies 
>feel more welcome?

TBAY is pretty hard.  It's confusing when you have alot of people on 
one topic, and I'm afraid of the terrible "not reading all posts in 
a thread".  To this day I do not understand MAGIC DISHWASHER (and I 
have been on the list since 4-24-2002.  Hypothetic Alley helps to 
know what the theories mean, but I don't think it makes the format 
any easier.  The only thing I can think of to help newbies is to 
maybe have them read old TBAYs and maybe e-mail vets to ask them if 
they're doing it right.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to 
>know before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a 
>TBAY style?


TBAY is confusing because people don't know what everyone stands 
for.  It would be alot easier if people knew who was on what boat, 
who started certain theories, and who believes/defends/opposes 
different theories.  My TBAYs usually end in me talking to myself 
like a madwoman because I don't want to put words in a listee's 
mouth that wouldn't be there.

Oryomai




From przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 21:38:17 2003
From: przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 22:38:17 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
References: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <3FCD0649.9090605@...>

abigailnus wrote:

> 
>1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
>TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
>message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
>the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?  
>  
>
For me, TBAY messages are too complicated to comprehend. The discussion 
between characters obscure the point of the post beyond understanding. 
The same idea that can be said in three sentences is being said in three 
long paragraphs. Names used are like in Martian language and I can't 
keep with who's point of view is who's. Consequently all TBAY posts are 
automagically marked as already read by my mail client, and I try to 
avoid those messages whenever possible. In fact I ignore them totally.


-- 
Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki
The English have no respect for their language, and will not teach their children to speak it. (George Bernard Shaw)





From constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 22:30:24 2003
From: constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid (Constance Vigilance)
Date: Tue, 2 Dec 2003 14:30:24 -0800 (PST)
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <20031202223024.2334.qmail@...>

Ah. TBAY. The VERY best of this list. when I first joined the group, nearly two years ago now (do I qualify as an OLD FART yet?), TBAY was just coalescing out of the Shipping Wars. I have not posted in this format yet, although I will as soon as my SHIP gets out of dry dock.
 
For beginners as well as OLD FARTs, I'd like to have a "The Story Thus Far" summary with post numbers. I'd like a TBAY Lexicon that identifies the SHIPs, Denizens and structures of the Bay. In fact, I'd be delighted to volunteer to do just that, if you would like.
 
But back to your questions.
 
Admin: 
1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 
 
CV: 
TBAY is theorizing which puts on skin and comes to life. The TBAY poster must have a dedication to a theory that enables them to create an avatar and be prepared to defend it. For this reason, TBAY postings tend to be more well thought out than simple theory posts.
 
Admin:
2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
TBAY format made you reluctant to post?
 
CV:
I *CRAVE* TBAY posts. I search for them and FILKs several times a day. I haven't posted in TBAY because they are, well, sort of intimidating, given the talent that we have on our list.
 
Admin:
3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?
 
CV: 
Actually, our list has become so unweildy that recovering older theories AT ALL is difficult. I echo a previous respondent who demoans the loss of currency of the Fantastic Posts archive. Of course, in the bruhaha that created this Feedback list, we learned that the Fantastic Posts archive was one of the features that suffered in the crossfire. I hope that this is being addressed. I completely rely on INISH ALLEY and Hypothetic Alley to keep things straight. Plus, reading through the acronyms is a really entertaining way to waste some time. By the way, there were a couple of Really Long acronyms that never made it to INISH. They were great and deserve to be enshrined with the others.
 
Admin:
4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?
 
CV:
As I said, I'd like to see a TBAY Lexicon page. Can I do it? Please, can I?
 
Thanks for asking.
 
Constance Vigilance



---------------------------------
Do you Yahoo!?
Protect your identity with Yahoo! Mail AddressGuard

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  2 23:10:31 2003
From: pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid (Risti)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:10:31 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqj657+t2nt@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" 
<abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if 
any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

The best way I can think of describing tbay is a way that Eileen 
described it once when we were discussing it, and that is that it is 
an extended metaphor.  TBAY messages then are posts that use some 
type of metaphor to give them life.  A TBAY theory for me is one 
that has come to life on its own, to the point that the theory seems 
to be its own entity, with feelings and characteristics and 
everything like that that.  In essence, I suppose TBAY theories and 
regular HP4GU theories are the same-it really does come down to how 
the initiator(or supporters) of a theory feel about it.  I think the 
theories that end up in TBAY, though, are the ones that have become 
so real to whoever posts them that it seems as if they are a 
physical entity.


>  
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What 
about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I do read TBAY messages(well, I do when I follow the list, which I 
haven't had time to really do lately, but when I stick my head in, 
I'm most likely to click on a TBAY post).  I've posted about a dozen 
or so TBAY messages myself, putting me somewhere between an 
occasional visitor and a citizen of the Bay.  I don't know if I've 
ever not responded to a TBAY because of the format.  

I was first prompted to post to TBAY when a pet theory of mine was 
dragged in there.  At the time, I'd only been  member of the list 
for about 2 months, and while I was slightly nervous about going up 
against the big guns, I think it helped that there were other 'first-
timers' in that discussion.

I know there have been times when I've responded to a TBAY in non-
TBAY format because I don't have the time, energy, or inspiration to 
enter the bay for that reply.  The reason for that is that it *does* 
take alot of time, energy, and inspiration to write a decent TBAY.
(Most of the time, at least.  I've had one or two come out quick and 
easy.)
  
> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts 
(such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY 
theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What 
can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

For the most part, I find the TBAY format accessible, but I think 
I'm the exception to the rule in that regards. As I said earlier, 
it's all about metaphors, and my mind tends to think in metaphors.  
Now, after being around long enough to recognize some of the older 
theories, I find discussion of them almost easier on TBAY than in 
the main list, because it's easier to format it as a discussion 
about one smaller part of the theory.  However, until I had a decent 
grasp on the older theories, I tended to find discussion of them 
confusing no matter what the format.

Hypothetic Alley for me does help to decifier TBAY, Fantastic Posts 
not so much.  I think the site structure has changed since my first 
foray into tbay(over a year ago now), but at the time I found it 
very difficult to find. Veterans were posting a broken link in their 
signature to it, but other than that, I had to look through just 
about every file on the site before I finally found it-which wasn't 
until after I'd posted my first TBAY.  Once I did read it, I found 
it very helpful, but it's a long file to read, and is at the point 
where it needs updating, which would only make it longer.

My suggestion would be to update Hypothetic Alley with some of the 
newer more 'major' theories, and also include some of the 
terms/symbols that are commonly used in the Bay.  Beyond that, I 
would create a seperate, shorter file with Theory Bay FAQ's.  A few 
that I would like to see included:

1.  Who is George, and why does he keep flirting with me?(It took me 
quite a while to realize that George was not George Weasley.)

2.  What's with all of these different types of ships?
amd related to that

3.  I have a theory, how do I set up a ship for it?  Can I just make 
myself Captain, or do other people need to do that?(the answer to 
that, of course, is do what you want, and give yourself all the 
power you want, as long as no one already holds it.)

4.  I want to comment on a point in a TBAY post, but don't feel 
comfortable with the style.  Will the poster be offended if I 
comment in the normal style?

5.  I want to reply to a TBAY post in TBAY format.  Do I need the 
permission of the person I'm replying to to write them into my 
post?  How do I know what to make them say, I don't want to 
misrepresent them?  I would answer this one with:

If you want to venture into the Bay, go for it!  The original poster 
will be happy to see a new face in the Bay.  The easiest way to 
write words into someone's mouth is to use the ones they've already 
said.  Find a few quotes from their original post, and any replies 
they've made, and use those.  If you're not sure how they'll respond 
to your new idea, you don't need to write them agreeing or 
disagreeing.  Simply write them as listening, or prompting you to go 
on.  If you've observed habits of theirs in the Bay, feel free to 
write those in.  Don't worry if you do misrepresent them slightly.  
It's happened to everyone, and the real posters aren't half as mean 
as their alter-ego may seem to be.  Finally, if you're still really 
unsure about something, email the person in question off-list, and 
express your concerns to them.  I'm sure they'd be glad to help you 
out. 

6.  What is the Safe House, and how come it's a House and not a Ship 
like the rest of them?

7.  Help!  I've just been written into a Theory Bay post.  Am I 
expected to respond in the Bay, because I don't know how.
(the answer to this, of course, is no.)

8.  I don't understand an Acronym/Term/Theory that someone mentioned 
in a Theory Bay post.  Is there a place to go for an explanation?
(the answer to this would be to point in the direction of Hypothetic 
Alley and Inish Alley)


And so on and so forth.  I'm sure others who are more confused about 
TBAY could think of more questions.  Beyond that, I suggest that a 
note is made somewhere explaining the fact that for the majority of 
the alter-egos hanging around the Bay, their bark is worse then 
their bite.  In other words, just because they may not agree with 
your theory, and may start blowing it to bits with all sorts of 
weaponry, doesn't mean they don't respect and admire you for putting 
the time and effort into creating a Theory Bay post.  I also think 
that all regular TBAY members *should* link to TBAY info in their 
signatures, and also make a note inviting people to email them 
offlist if there was something about the structure that wasn't 
understood.  If I haven't been doing this...well, I should.

I would be willing to expand on some of the questions I mentioned, 
or generally give imput if some sort of TBAY primer were to be 
created.
  
~Risti, who is finally done school for Christmas, and will probably 
be making at least one appearance in the Bay soon because of that.  
She'd also like to note that these types of signatures are really 
only one step away from the concept of Theory Bay.




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 00:33:24 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 00:33:24 -0000
Subject: Fantastic Posts Web Site
In-Reply-To: <bqikqs+s4ng@...>
Message-ID: <bqjb0k+s8jq@...>

The usual caveats: this is just Amanda and Amanda's opinions, I am 
not speaking for anyone but me, I am not an authorized representative 
of anything, etc.

Danielle:

> There is a lot of discussion about how to make it easier for new 
list 
> members to get used to the discussion topics and posting styles in 
> this group. The tool to do this already exists - the Fantasitic 
Posts 
> Web site. 

<snip> 

> So, instead of coming up with new methods and processes, why not 
use 
> the one that already exists (and does such a wonderful job)? Why 
not 
> update Fantastic Posts more frequently - anytime there is a new 
> theory, or at least ones that garner enough attention to get an 
> acronym? And continue to update the links to the actual relevant 
> posts, as well.
> 
> I realize that there may not be enough elves for this, but 
everything 
> being suggested here seems to point to the need for additional 
elves 
> in one form or another. Currently, do the elves doing the daily 
list 
> readings pull out things that could go onto Fantastic Posts? If so, 
> then what happens?

What a *superb* idea. FPs are not actually an elf function per se; 
they are the product of a FAQ team who work on a FAQ list, which was 
created to avoid cluttering up the main list or Chatter with 
discussion and strategy for this specialized task. *But.* The elves 
who do the reading rota are *ideally* positioned to note likely FAQ-
worthy posts. (is excited)

As for updating regularly--it would work for some FPs, and not for 
others. To explain, some background. 

There are several reasons the FP site hasn't been updated. One, it 
really is a tremendous amount of work to distill a FP essay from a 
mass of posts. Before anything else can be done, the posts must be 
combed--good ones flagged somehow. The system the team had devised to 
select FP-worthy posts didn't work, and before a new method was 
settled on, there was some disruption on the FAQ list (more on that 
in a minute).

Anyway, that first step is compiling a selection of posts for 
inclusion or working into a FP. Then a FAQ-writer or team work on 
stitching them together by general area into a cohesive whole, then 
they post their draft and readers proof them, check all the links, 
etc. Only then are they uploaded to the site and launched. 

What you've proposed would take care of post-flagging from this 
minute onward, but there are several sets that the FAQ team didn't 
want to ignore, that can't be "hopped over"; one is a set of pre-OoP 
posts, that we wanted to include, which have to be gone through, and 
another is the massive amount of post-OoP posts, which cover a time 
of unprecedented list volume and will require some sort of plan to go 
through. Your from-now-forward suggestion is brilliant and I can 
relay it, but there's still the earlier blocks of posts to take into 
account.

Another difficulty has been that the FAQ team are listmembers 
themselves, and have themselves been caught up in the theorizing and 
discussion. It's only recently, now that the list volume has slowed a 
bit, that the FAQ team has tried to make serious efforts to turn to 
FAQ-producing. Further, it is really only now, some time after OoP, 
after the flurry is smoothing out, that noteworthy new theories or 
threads can be perceived as such, that they stand out.

Yet another difficulty is an unresolved issue--what to do with the 
FAQs as they stand? By that, I mean the ones currently up now--should 
they simply be updated, or should they be left alone as "pre-OoP 
takes" and new FPs generated? This has not been decided. As I said 
above, not all FPs are created equal. Some FPs are simply lists of 
post numbers grouped by subject, which *could* be updated piecemeal--
but others are standalone essays, the product of authors no longer on 
FAQ, who would have no input into their alteration. And some FAQs are 
so voluminous already, handling the theories of books 1-4, that 
adding to them could make them unwieldy or unreasonably long. Some of 
the FAQs are already broken into 1 and 2 as it is.

There are FAQs in the works that hadn't been completed (or hadn't 
been thought of) before OoP, and these won't have that problem. But 
many existing FPs need updating or new "volumes." It is the list 
volume that is such a stumbling block, I think--the great mass of 
backlog. And it is really only in the past month or so, after volume 
has eased off to a pre-OoP level, that it could be expected that FAQ 
work could really resume.

It is unfortunate, then, that it was in just this timeframe that 
there was a great deal of disruption and conflict on the FAQ list. I 
believe that the FAQ list suffered from the conflict there. Not so 
much attrition--only two FAQ members actually left due to the 
disturbance--but in that many of its most productive members began 
to "tune it out" so as not to be involved in some of the 
machinations. Although the conflict has been resolved, those 
productive members are still in "tune out" mode.

MEG is aware that the FAQ effort is essentially at a standstill; it 
is partly the function of this Feedback list to ascertain how much 
that is a concern, versus other list concerns. 

Anyway, some background on what goes into FAQs. And thank you so much 
for a great idea for how to flag the posts. I had been a developer of 
the idea that *didn't* work, and the thought of one that would cheers 
me greatly. It shall be relayed.

~Amanda





From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 02:50:54 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (Richard)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 02:50:54 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqjj2e+s9cc@...>

I've spent a huge proportion of the last three days working on a 
message with my ideas and replies to the original "questionnaire" 
which started this list, and it's growing all the time. I suspect it 
might never be posted... 

I'll take a break from that by commenting on this particular issue 
(which saves me from including these comments in my mega-post 
anyway...).

I must make a disclaimer, in that despite having been a HPFGU member 
for almost two years, I've been a very sporadic follower of the main 
list since mid-June. Apart from the ballooning of the number of 
posts, I was away for two sets of two months and simply haven't had 
the time, although I occasionally browse for new topics.

As such, my views aren't really on what's happening on the list 
*now*, and more particularly on what's happening in *TBAY* now. 

To be perfectly honest, I perceive TBAY as something of a mess. I 
joined HPFGU shortly after TBAY started and I simply couldn't 
understand (and continue not to understand) why some people would go 
to the time and trouble of writing ten or twenty paragraphs to put 
across a point that could have been (more?) successfully dealt with 
in three. I appreciate that TBAY authors derive a great deal of 
pleasure from writing in that style, but it simply doesn't appeal to 
me, neither as observer nor as potential participant. I recall once 
describing it as too "twee" for my taste, a comment which generated a 
few raised eyebrows (in good humour). I stand by that comment. 

Occasionally, if I have time, I have been known to browse through 
TBAY posts. In the past, I've even replied to a few (in "standard" 
format). The scary thing is that I've read enough TBAY posts to 
understand what's going on and to understand all (well, maybe not 
*all*, but most of) the metaphors, and even to recognise some of the 
voices.

However, one thing I noticed even before I stopped reading the main 
list in June is that many people attempt the format and end up 
saying, well, nothing. I don't mean to offend anyone, but I'd 
describe some TBAY posts I've seen as little more than verbal 
diarrhoea. And many more come very, very close. 

As I said, I know that TBAY authors enjoy the format and I have no 
intention or desire to limit their enjoyment. Nevertheless, I hope 
that TBAYers continue to accept that the format doesn't appeal to 
everyone, and some of us prefer the staightforward cut and thrust of 
debate-counterdebate rather than the incessant (sorry) "waffle" which 
may or may not hide a point worth debating. And that sometimes an 
idea put forward in a TBAY post will be responded to in the "standard"
format.

I would also like to remind people that regardless of the format of 
messages, the main list remains canon-based and AFAIK, TBAY posts 
have not been exempt from this requirment.




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 03:13:37 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 14:13:37 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <3FCDEF91.4813.E3082A@localhost>

On 2 Dec 2003 at 14:21, abigailnus wrote:

> Dear Everybody,
>  
> One of the reasons that we decided to establish -Feedback was to
> allow us to find out about the group's needs and opinions, and
> occasionally we'd like to ask for your thoughts about various subjects.
> This is one of those times. Most of you have probably seen the TBAY
> prefix attached to some posts on the main list. TBAY is a posting
> format that has existed for about a year and a half, and it has a great
> many fans among the older list members. We'd like to see newer
> members get involved with the form, but we realize that the learning
> curve for TBAY can be a little steep. To this end, members of the list
> admin have been putting together a TBAY primer, which will answer
> new members' questions about the format.
>  
> Trouble is, we're not entirely certain what those questions are.
>  
> We can guess some of them, and no doubt we can thing of a few that
> a person with no familiarity with TBAY might never think to ask, but
> there are surely questions that we would never consider. Which is why
> it's great that we have you to do our work for us. :-)
>  
> So, if you could take the time to answer these questions, and maybe add
> a few of your own, we'd really appreciate it, and we hope that in turn the
> list will as well.
>  
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

Please realise that nothing I am saying here should be interpreted as a 
suggestion TBAY shouldn't be on the list. I fully understand on a list with over 
10,000 members there will be posts I don't like, and I don't expect people to stop 
posting - however, I do wonder if a separate list for TBAY might be a good idea.

But basically I personally perceive TBAY as a waste of time and potentially quite 
divisive in terms of the list membership. My personal view is that TBAY post take 
on average at least twice as long to make its basic point as a non-TBAY post 
does *on average*.

On a high traffic list like HPFGU, I think that winds up impacting quite significantly 
on those who just want to get to the core of the information quickly.

I feel quite uncomfortable with the idea of posting a non TBAY reply to a TBAY 
post - but it seems to me that TBAY posters have little problem with the idea of 
taking a thread that is being discussed in a straightforward fashion and TBAYing 
it. I'm not saying there should be a problem with that - but I think it can risk 
'forking' the list and diminishing discussion.

Because as soon as somebody writes a TBAY post in a thread, I think the 
audience for that thread changes substantially.

Some posters who were participating in the thread will have no interest in reading 
TBAY posts - so they will abandon that part of the thread.

Whereas TBAY fans (at least some of them) seem to me to deliberately seek out 
TBAY posts - and are then likely to enter the thread.

I don't think it's particularly positive for the list for threads to be split in that way, 
and my perception is that it does happen (not universally - some people obviously 
like both types of thread).

Thinking about this, I really do think TBAY should have a list of its own. At the 
moment TBAY is basically handled by a prefix - well, frankly we could have a 
MOVIE prefix, we could have an OT: prefix - there's no reason they have to 
separate lists. But that approach has not been taken. Instead they've set up 
sublists. I think the fact that TBAY is allowed on the list under a prefix and 
MOVIES and OT are on separate lists, privileges TBAY posts.

I am *not* saying no element of TBAY belongs on the list - I think using the 
shorthand acronyms for particular theories is a good idea and I see plenty of 
posts where those are referenced without the rest of the post being particularly 
TBAY. But it's my personal view that TBAY posts which involve a lot of roleplaying 
and in jokes and references to old in jokes... well, I think they belong on their own 
list. 

If MOVIES was handled by a prefix. Or OT was handled by a prefix - then it'd be 
different. But I personally feel TBAY posts are every bit as disruptive to the main 
flow of the list as either MOVIE posts or OT posts.

It's not a huge deal for me - I'm not obsessively anti-TBAY - but seeing the topic 
has been raised, that's my two knuts.
  
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I read them quite often. I've never posted one because frankly I can't see much 
point. But, yes, I have wanted to respond to TBAY threads and chosen not to 
because of the format.

What about it made me do that? Basically I didn't want to interfere with the 
TBAYers fun. My post would not have been in a TBAY format and posting a non-
TBAY message into a TBAY thread seems to me to be rather... impolite, because 
it's disrupting the considerable work the TBAY people are putting into their 
threads.
  
> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

Basically I think there needs to be a complete and accessible reference page 
which outlines everything

I find TBAY discusssions generally to be *FAR LESS* accessible than non TBAY 
discussions - mainly because it's often very hard to work out what is an in-joke 
and what is intended as part of the actual theory. If that was more clearly 
delineated, the problem might not be as bad.
  
> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?

A separate TBAY list might make me more likely to post using a TBAY style. It's 
about the only thing that would. Doing it on the main list just doesn't seem right to 
me, personally - because I want that list to be accessible to as many people as 
possible, and I think TBAY just adds confusion there unless people know all the 
back history.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From Erthena at werebearloony.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 04:20:35 2003
From: Erthena at werebearloony.yahoo.invalid (Erthena at werebearloony.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 23:20:35 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
Message-ID: <0807A3B9.0222C8E6.00173D67@...>

In a message dated 12/2/2003 9:21:28 AM Eastern Standard Time, abigailnus at ... writes:

<snipped>
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

To me TBAY sems really fun, sorta crazy, and absolutely brilliant.  The messages are the same way.  The TBAY theories are the ones that have been given a personification: person, boat, article of clothing, ect.  The TBAY theories have more atttiude to me than normal theories and with the acronyms they are easier for me to remember.  TBAY also lets posters create a personality for themselves that is stronger than what comes through in a regular post.

> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I definately read TBAY messages, when I have the time to read messages at all.  I'd really like to write/respond in TBAY style, but I have to do a few things before I can write on (more below)

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

I like the TBAY style but I have some problems with it. one is that like Oryomai I don't know anyone on the list very well so even if I wrote a TBAY it would either be a monolouge or I'd bring in one one my non-HPFGU friends to respond to what I said(this is the current plan).  And I don't really know a lot of the older theories that's intimidatingas well. It's also frustrating when I have to have the Hypothetic and innish Alleys up to understand what's going on.  But the alleys do help me to understand.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in 
> a TBAY style?

I would really love to have a source besides yahoo!mort for finding old Tbays because I really do want to understand what's going on and what came before me.  I'm working on my pet theory in TBAY formaat but as I'm just swamped it'll either have to wait until christmas break, or a little after and/or until I figure out how to acess e-mail on the palm pilot my Dad never uses.

~~loony




From betsyfallon at betsyfallon.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 13:45:32 2003
From: betsyfallon at betsyfallon.yahoo.invalid (Betsy Fallon)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 13:45:32 +0000
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
Message-ID: <BAY2-F29s40SIqAbUaM00005653@...>

I have tried to get explanations about this type of post so that I might 
understand what is being said, but it has not been explained sufficiently. I 
am still at a loss as to these definitions and how to read and post TBAY and 
Magic Dishwasher messages.

Betsy



>From: "abigailnus" <abigailnus at ...>
>Reply-To: HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com
>To: HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com
>Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
>Date: Tue, 02 Dec 2003 14:21:28 -0000
>
>Dear Everybody,
>
>One of the reasons that we decided to establish -Feedback was to
>allow us to find out about the group's needs and opinions, and
>occasionally we'd like to ask for your thoughts about various subjects.
>This is one of those times. Most of you have probably seen the TBAY
>prefix attached to some posts on the main list. TBAY is a posting
>format that has existed for about a year and a half, and it has a great
>many fans among the older list members. We'd like to see newer
>members get involved with the form, but we realize that the learning
>curve for TBAY can be a little steep. To this end, members of the list
>admin have been putting together a TBAY primer, which will answer
>new members' questions about the format.
>
>Trouble is, we're not entirely certain what those questions are.
>
>We can guess some of them, and no doubt we can thing of a few that
>a person with no familiarity with TBAY might never think to ask, but
>there are surely questions that we would never consider. Which is why
>it's great that we have you to do our work for us. :-)
>
>So, if you could take the time to answer these questions, and maybe add
>a few of your own, we'd really appreciate it, and we hope that in turn the
>list will as well.
>
>1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
>TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
>message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
>the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?
>
>2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
>you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
>to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
>TBAY format made you reluctant to post?
>
>3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
>of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
>accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
>Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
>and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
>veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?
>
>4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
>before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?
>
>Thanks in advance for any input you can provide,
>Abigail, aka Bookish Elf
>For the list elves
>

_________________________________________________________________
Cell phone switch rules are taking effect  find out more here. 
http://special.msn.com/msnbc/consumeradvocate.armx




From erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 15:05:23 2003
From: erisedstraeh2002 at erisedstraeh2002.yahoo.invalid (Phyllis)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 15:05:23 -0000
Subject: Fantastic Posts Web Site
In-Reply-To: <bqikqs+s4ng@...>
Message-ID: <bqku3j+2fne@...>

Danielle asked:

> Currently, do the elves doing the daily list readings pull out 
> things that could go onto Fantastic Posts? If so, then what happens?

I'm a list elf as well as a member of the Fantastic Post Owls team 
(who is speaking as an individual here, not in any official 
capacity), and I do keep my eyes peeled for fantastic posts when it's 
my turn to do the list reading rota.  If I find a post I think is 
terrific, I forward it to: Fantastic_Posts at yahoogroups.com, which is 
an archive group that we've set up to compile potential posts for use 
in updating current fantastic posts and in creating new ones.

We've also asked the list membership to help us identify fantastic 
posts, and I'd like to take this opportunity to encourage people to 
do so.  IMO, the easiest thing to do is to forward the post to the 
Fantastic_Posts at yahoogroups.com address (we only ask that if you do 
this, to please include the message number in your forwarding text as 
the message number doesn't show up on forwarded messages). 

List members may also identify posts they'd like to see in a 
fantastic post essay by going to the to archive group's home page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Fantastic_Posts/?yguid=124264004
and posting a message that includes the url of the fantastic post or 
post's number, the author of the fantastic post, the topic of the 
fantastic post and the date of the fantastic post.

~Phyllis




From tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 15:13:16 2003
From: tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid (Tim Regan)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 15:13:16 -0000
Subject: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <Sea2-DAV17jkifTNRMO000014da@...>

Trudging laboriously through the cold, clawing mud on his way to the Three
Broomsticks, passers by could distinctly hear Snape muttering under his
breath.

"Why does he want to meet here?"

"What's wrong with my office?"

But he struggled on against the elements and eventually arrived to find
Professor Binns waiting for him with twos steaming mugs of butterbeer.

"Good evening Professor" barked Snape

"I hope you haven't bought me here just to share a cordial butterbeer?"

"Oh no, no Severus. I have some questions emailed to me by a list-elf from a
Yahoo group and I wanted to get your opinion. Please, please, do sit down."

Barely trying to hide the look of utter contempt on his face, Snape sat
down.

"Let us be quick then Professor, what are the questions from this . this ..
this elf?"

"Well, they are not really sure what they are asking, but it seems to boil
down to these four questions." Before continuing, Professor Binns took a
large swig of butterbeer and stopped to slowly wipe the froth from his lips.

"Yes, yes, pray continue quickly - I am starting to feel increasingly
annoyed by the amount of time you are wasting with this ludicrous flight of
fancy" said Snape, dangerously.

"oh, yes yes" said Professor Binns

"sorry if I have kept you from something important. The four questions were:

1. They'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe TBAY
messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY message?
What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is the
difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If you
have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond to a TBAY
thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the TBAY format
made you reluctant to post?

3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions of
older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less accessible
then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as Evil!Lupin)? Do
Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories) and Fantastic Posts
help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can veteran TBAY-ers do to
make newbies feel more welcome?

4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know before
posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?"

"I am incensed", spat Snape

"I deal with potions, an exacting subject where the attention to detail is
absolute. If a student of mine uses a drop more, or a drop less of an
ingredient than is absolutely necessary the potion is ruined. 

"Tell me Binns, why would a poster on this ludicrous group you mention want
to bury an interesting point of cannon in baroque and impenetrable
language?"

"Do you know what Severus, I think I agree with you" concluded Professor
Binns succinctly.

 

So do I.

 

Cheers,

 

Dumbledad.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 18:10:15 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 18:10:15 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bql8u7+7ga1@...>

Well, Eileen here. I was TBAYing before there was a TBAY. In fact, I
think I was the third person, after Elkins and Tabouli, to write about
myself wandering about the Bay. 

First of all, I think there should be a note in any welcome to new
HPFGU members. "You are not expected to understand MAGIC DISHWASHER.
No one understands MAGIC DISHWASHER." *ducks*

But seriously, I really would hate people to think they aren't getting
TBAY because they don't get MAGIC DISHWASHER. I don't get MAGIC
DISHWASHER myself, most of the time, whatever format it's being
discussed in. Not that I don't love *trying* to get it. 

On to the questions.
 
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

There's no such thing, really, as a TBAY theory. For example,
Sympathetic!Avery is a TBAY fixture, but he wasn't introduced in TBAY,
and has been discussed in and out of TBAY. Same with MAGIC DISHWASHER.
Hey, even George didn't start in the Bay! 
 
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

Obviously, I both read and write TBAY messages. I actually have never
had a problem with responding to a TBAY message in non-TBAY format,
and am surprised other people have. 

My first TBAY experience involved jumping up and down on a couch
screaming, "Bloody Ambush!" I thought that was very cool, not only
because I liked the idea of couch jumping, but because it said
something that couldn't be said in any other way. It suggested a
connection between reader and text that was closer, I think, to
reality than a cut-and-dry essay does. It gave Theorist!Eileen a
background, a background that went back a few thousand years. Why do I
want a bloody ambush? Well, because of the Njal Saga and Tolkien and
everything else. TBAY is really a place where we explore our affective
fallacies, those things that are supposed to not exist. You can only
go so far doing that in an ordinary exchange, but in TBAY... well, as
Risti quoted me, but I think I was quoting Elkins, it's an extended
metaphor. You can take an extended metaphor very far.

Or not so far. 

Which I'm thinking must be at the root of people saying that TBAY
posts make the same point in 30 lines than a regular post makes in one
line. 

Because, well, the best TBAY posts make points in one line that a
regular post couldn't make in thirty lines. 

I'm beginning to suspect that this isn't some new division here.
There, always will be those who live in symbols, and those who don't.
This just sounds like another version of those late-night arguments
between English Major Eileen and her Mathematics Major brother. 

My brother: "Well, so what if the River in Huckleberry Finn is a
symbol? I can believe that, but how does it enrich the story?"

Eileen: "How can you not see that?" 

Etcetera

Those who don't like TBAY will probably never see any reason to change
their minds, but I would suggest to them that the fact that they can't
see anything in it doesn't mean that there isn't anything in it for a
lot of other people. 

For TBAY, has a long and honoured history. Plato had some TBAY going
when he wrote all about Socrates. Boethius was definitely TBAYing when
he wrote the Consolation of Philosophy, especially that part where
Lady Philosophy chases the Muses out calling them hussies and tells
Boethius to stop sulking about and get a grip on himself. In the
Middle Ages... well, in the Middle Ages, practically every second book
written was TBAY. Dante's "Divine Comedy" has its TBAY aspects. "The
Romance of the Rose" is TBAY. 

(And, of course, JRR Tolkien's "Notion Papers" are definitely TBAY
material....)

Just one more thing. 

Shaun wrote:
>I think the fact that TBAY is allowed on the list under a prefix and
>MOVIES and OT are on separate lists, privileges TBAY posts.

*stares*

ummm... ok.

TBAY posts are posts about canon-based theories. MOVIES and OT have
*nothing* to do with canon-based theories. 

I really should hope that HPFGU priveliges TBAY posts and will
continue to do so. 

Eileen 





From tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 18:14:49 2003
From: tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid (Tiggersong)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 10:14:49 -0800 (PST)
Subject: TBAY questions
In-Reply-To: <1070402392.1166.33568.m12@yahoogroups.com>
Message-ID: <20031203181449.86532.qmail@...>

Dear Abigail,

>1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would
>you describe TBAY messages? What do you feel is the
>most important >aspect of a TBAY message? What does
>the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
>the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular
>HPfGU theory? 
 
I've always assumed that the TBAY theories are ones
which some poster cared enough about to phrase in TBAY
format.  

>2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a
>TBAY message? If you have, what prompted you to do
>so? Have you ever wanted to respond to a TBAY thread
>but chose not to because of the format? What about
the
>TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I don't tend to read TBAY messages.  The few I've read
are amusing, but I get a strong feeling that the whole
thing is an exercise in in-jokes and Old-School
camaraderie.  I have, therefore, never posted in any
TBAY thread; both the format and my lack of
understanding of the personality politics have made me
feel like it's impossible to get in.  
Ah, here's a better way of phrasing it:  TBAY feels to
me like it's performance theater; I'm watching
theorists act out their theories.  Sort of.

>3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you
>find discussions of older theories (such as MAGIC
>DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less accessible then
>discussions of older theories in regular posts (such
>as Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several
>major TBAY theories)and Fantastic Posts help to make
>TBAY posts more accessible? What can veteran TBAY-ers
>do to make newbies feel more welcome?

I find older theories completly impenetrable. 
However, since I don't have lots of time to read the
list, and I scramble just to keep up with the regular
postings/threads I'm trying to follow, I haven't spent
any time in Fantastic Posts or Hypothetic Alley trying
to get information.  AND, I didn't know to look there.
 (Yes, this is probably me being dumb and not reading
information clearly posted, and for that I apologise.)
 As for making TBAY more accessible and making newbies
more welcome, something like a roll call list with
names of TheoryShips and the Captains of same might be
a good start.  Apparently there are people in a
"Control Room" - it would be helpful to know who they
are also...  (I can feel it: now I'm rambling.)

>4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would
>you like to know before posting? What would make you
>more likely to post in a TBAY style?

Uhm.  I guess I don't find TBAY superconfusing
exactly.  More like it's an inclub and I'm too new
(and too much of a lurker) to be 'in'.  (I'm not
offended by my lack of 'in' status.  I don't work hard
enough at my posts and theories to earn 'in' status.) 
So, I'm probably never going to post in TBAY format. 
If I had a better understanding of what the theories
are and who believes what, I might *read* more of
them, though.

Deep breath.  I think this is the longest post I've
ever made to any HPfGU list.  I'm so proud of it. 
*pets post on the head*  I hope it's not going to
offend anyone.

Stasia

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 21:33:52 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 21:33:52 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqlks0+ihnh@...>

This is my first post on Feedback (thanks, ADMIN, for making it 
available, and for doing all the hard things that keep HPfGU going).

> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
> TBAY message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, 
> if any, is the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU 
> theory?

I like TBAY. TBAY messages are like puppet shows, little vignettes 
produced to illustrate ideas about HP in a whimsical format. Although 
it's somewhat campy and can be confusing, it's fun and adds freshness 
and creativity to the board (which has somewhat of a tendency to 
grind away in plodding, pedantic discussion now and then).

> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
> If you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
> respond to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? 
> What about the TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

Yes, I read TBAY messages. After several weeks on HPfGU, I went 
sailing into the Bay (on the AIRSHIP FANCY), chock full of nervous 
excitement. I later realized (partly due to an ADMIN reminder sent to 
the membership around that time; coincidence?) that I had been pretty 
cavalier about it (no canon, just hot air) and decided I wasn't 
really doing it justice, so I stopped (avoiding getting into trouble 
with ADMIN possibly as well). But nobody shot at me (or wrote to say 
I was embarrassing myself) and it was great fun. It was also (I hope) 
a non-confrontational way to address SAD DENIAL (which hurts (at 
least me) more than actually losing Sirius did).

I responded (in TBAY format) to one TBAY post and was more nervous 
about that than my independent effort. Hmmm...TBAY is only somewhat 
about "knowing the (ADMIN) rules"; it's very much about understanding 
the characters and scenarios, as well as the theories.

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
> discussions of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY 
> more or less accessible then discussions of older theories in 
> regular posts (such as Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of 
> several major TBAY theories) and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY 
> posts more accessible? What can veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies 
> feel more welcome?

{<[(Okay--very, very sorry, but this should say "more or less 
acceptable _than_," not "then". I see this in posts all time and just 
had to say something--here, finally.)]>}

The accessibility of ideas in the TBAY format varies with the 
theories and their proponents, just as it does in "regular" posts. I 
like both styles, and the mix of styles. (I really *don't* want to 
see TBAY become a "spin-off" like OT or Movies, and I don't think 
it's necessary or appropriate, either. TBAY is about the BOOKS every 
bit as much as the rest of the main board is, IMO.)

I read HA and FP. (Really I did. Along with the rest of the suggested 
reading material.) I pondered, feeling somewhat prepared, and then I 
got into the flow, reading and posting, and into the sur-reality of 
TBAY. And I found that somehow the knowledge just didn't transfer--
although yes, I'd read stuff about TBAY, once I "saw" it, I knew 
nothing. (I think a how-to is a great idea and will help very much.) 
Hey, maybe TBAY should have a VISITOR'S BUREAU!

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to 
> know before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a 
> TBAY style?

Maybe a *cast of characters* could be made available (along with the 
theories/ships they belong to, and their affiliations) somewhere. 
Hey, a TBAY telephone (email) directory! And/or how about a TBAY elf, 
an expert dedicated to answering questions (and not just from 
newbies)? Sort of a TBAY hotline, only via email.

All of this sounds like a LOT of work. But <wg> you *did* ask. Thanks 
again.

Sandy




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 21:53:03 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 08:53:03 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bql8u7+7ga1@...>
References: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <3FCEF5EF.21639.3FF6B2@localhost>

On 3 Dec 2003 at 18:10, lucky_kari wrote:

> Shaun wrote:
> >I think the fact that TBAY is allowed on the list under a prefix and
> >MOVIES and OT are on separate lists, privileges TBAY posts.
> 
> *stares*
> 
> ummm... ok.
> 
> TBAY posts are posts about canon-based theories. MOVIES and OT have
> *nothing* to do with canon-based theories. 

That's not my perception.

TBAY posts may and often do contain material about canon based theories. So 
do some MOVIES and some OT posts (certainly nowhere near as many as TBAY 
does, I grant you).

But, frankly. my perception is that a significant number of TBAY posts are 
primarily about people 'roleplaying' and whatever canon points are being made 
are secondary to that roleplaying, giggle giggle injoke purpose.

That's my perception, and it may be wrong - but I don't believe that the idea that 
TBAY posts are about canon-based theories is unassailable.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 22:14:35 2003
From: pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid (Risti)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 14:14:35 -0800 (PST)
Subject: TBAY:The Point is...(was:Re: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <Sea2-DAV17jkifTNRMO000014da@...>
Message-ID: <20031203221435.78180.qmail@...>

Risti was standing at the Hogsmeade Tourist Agency
looking through some pamphlets when she noticed a
sullen figure walk by her.  It couldn't actually be
Severus Snape, could it?  After meeting several Snape
theories over drinks she was anxious to meet the real
deal.  Abandonning her map of the town, she set out to
follow him.

"Why does he want to meet here?"

She heard him mutter under his breath.  Looking around
at the hustle and bustle of the crowd Risti wondered
what it was about this atmosphere that would make
someone want to meet Snape here.  Was it a former
student who didn't feel like going back to Hogwarts? 
Maybe someone with a crush on him who was hoping to
turn the meeting into a more social occasion.  Risti
wondered if the real Snape was as flirtatious as his
theories.

"What's wrong with my office?"

Well, when given that alternative, Risti rolled her
eyes.  Anywhere was better than an office-its
atmosphere was hardly one to foster open minded
discussion.  Besides, if Snape had stayed in his
office, she wouldn't be able to follow him.

Eventually Snape reached a pub and went in.  Still
following him, Risti saw him meet up with an ancient
looking ghost(if it's possible for ghosts to look
ancient.)  
 
"Good evening Professor" Risti heard Snape snap.  He
obviously wasn't in a good mood.  "I hope you haven't
brought me here just to share a cordial butterbeer?"

Upon hearing that it was Professor Binns, and not the
secret source of Severus's permanent frown that he was
missing, Risti decided she could afford to close half
her ear to the conversation for a moment and order her
own butterbeer.  After getting it from the
bartender(who hardly had half the charm of
George-really it was true that you don't appreciate
what you have at home until you travel), she sat down
at the table next to the Professors which was
conveniently open.  When she sat down, Binns was just
finishing reading through a list he held in his hands.
 
"I am incensed", spat Snape.  Risti was surprised
Binns monotone monologue inspired so much attention
from him.

"I deal with potions, an exacting subject where the
attention to detail is absolute. If a student of mine
uses a drop more, or a drop less of an ingredient than
is absolutely necessary the potion is ruined."

"How do you find out if they know how many drops to
use?" Risti interupted cheekily, swinging her chair
around to join the professors.  She was answered with
a blank look from Binns and a cold sneer from Snape.

"Who are you? I don't remember teaching you?"  If
Risti hadn't faced down people whose faces looked just
as mean, and who were also aiming weapons her way, she
might have been a little scared to answer.

"No, I wasn't a student at Hogwarts, otherwise I
wouldn't be questioning you on your teaching methods. 
Do you have the students prove their knowledge by
writing out lists of ingredients?  Do they get graded
on how accurately they copy down the instructions on
how to make a potion?"  Risti took another sip of her
butterbeer, and grabbed the list that Binn's had been
reading off of earlier to scan.

"Do you honestly think I'd let those half-witted fools
off that easily?  Didn't you hear what I said?  Potion
making is precise.  There's more to it then proper
notes-although those *are* necessary.  Those notes
need to become apart of them.  They need to prove to
me that they can act on them.  That they know their
implications!  If I can pound a potion-making into
their heads enough that it begins to define who they
are, then, and only then, can they say that they've
mastered the art of potions."

"So it becomes apart of them.  Got it.  But they do
need to know how to write out the instructions as
well."  The look Snape gave Risti reminded her of the
look her Kindergarten teacher used to give her when
she explained how hard it was to keep the M and W
straight.

"Yes, they do."  Snape turned away from her, obviously
hoping she'd take the hint and leave, and spoke to
Binns again.  "Tell me Binns, why would a poster on
this ludicrous group you mention want to bury an
interesting point of cannon in baroque and
impenetrable language?"
 
"Do you know what Severus, I think I agree with you." 
The ghost said, snatching his list back.

"You would," Risti said with a small snort.

"What is that supposed to mean young lady?"

"Hey, I may not have gone to Hogwarts, but legends of
your class have spread just as far as rumours of his,"
Risti motioned to Snape.  "You aren't exactly known
for outlining *interesting points* without alot of
mumbo-jumbo."

"I make all the necessary points needed, giving
students all the background information relevent, but
not any additional fluff they don't need."

"And at the end of the day, who has really absorbed
what you've said?  I heard even Hermione Granger
started knitting in class by her seventh year.  The
facts are great, but pages and pages-I mean hours and
hours of them?  Sometimes it all just needs to be
shaken up a bit, do you understand what I'm saying?"

"I understand that many people on this list tired of
reading pages and pages of funny little stories that
don't really make sense."

"So do I," a fourth voice chimed in.  Risti noticed a
man standing at the edge of their conversation.

"Dumbledad!" she greeted him like an old friend.  "How
convenient to find you here.  Take a seat and join
us." She stood up to grab another chair to add to the
small table which was beginning to look crowded when
Snape rose as well.

"Have my seat.  We're done here now."  Risti wasn't
sure if it was her imagination or not, but Snape
seemed to be already veering as far away from her as
possible.

"I'm Risti, and on behalf of the Theory Bay Welcome
Wagon, I'd like to thank you for stopping by our happy
home."  Risti pulled her bag in front of her, and
began taking things from it.  "I have some free drink
tickets for George's, Two for One coupons to the Canon
Museum, a couple of CRAB CUSTARDS, an invitation to
the next Barbeque over at the Safe House, and I threw
in a free sample sized package of SUNLIGHT ULTRA,
although I should tell you it really only works with a
MAGIC DISHWASHER."

Dumbledad was giving Risti a strange look as he sat
down.  "SUNLIGHT ULTRA? Welcome Wagon?  Wait a minute,
I'm not even *in* Theory Bay."

Risti grinned widely.  "Oh yes you are.  Geography
really doesn't matter for the bay, didn't you know
that?  Actually, that could be one of the reasons I
don't have a map to offer you, although I wish I did."

"But I didn't really intend to end up here..."

"Do you think any of us intend to be in Theory Bay? 
It's one of those things that just sort of catches
you, whether by a thought that won't go away, or an
over-eager Captain who drags you onto her ship for
interrogation."  Risti hesitated, "Don't worry though,
if you don't want to come back, you don't have to."

"So why me?  Why do I get this special treatment? 
People say people who live in Theory Bay are supposed
to be elitist snobs."

Risti sighed.  "Yes, they do say that unfortunately,
which is really sad, because it isn't true.  As much
as people may not believe it, this isn't special
treatment.  Sure, alot of this might typically happen
off-list, but only because we do try to stay on topic.
 Off list, we tend to jump all over anyone who peeks
there head into the Bay, and beg them not to leave."

"So are you saying the point of all of this,"
Dumbledad motioned to the crowded room, "was to
welcome me?"

"Well," Risti hesitated, "The point is... no, that
wasn't the point.

~Risti, who hopes her point was made.

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/



From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 22:35:19 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 22:35:19 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FCEF5EF.21639.3FF6B2@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqlof7+o34k@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...>
wrote:
> TBAY posts may and often do contain material about canon based
theories. So 
> do some MOVIES and some OT posts (certainly nowhere near as many as
TBAY 
> does, I grant you).
> 
> But, frankly. my perception is that a significant number of TBAY
posts are 
> primarily about people 'roleplaying' and whatever canon points are
being made 
> are secondary to that roleplaying, giggle giggle injoke purpose.

No! The role-playing and the in-jokes are *part* of the point being
made in a TBAY post! I'll give you an example that I used when the
topic came up more than a year ago. 

"Elkins' latest attack
on Cindy is a clever spin on her T.S. Eliot-Neville post. As an
English student, I enjoy this sort of cleverness, the moments when
one goes - "Oh, that's what the author's up to!" The worm who hopes
not to turn, but is forced to, a concept Elkins was discussing, is
here made concrete."

And well I must admit here that TBAY is... well, clever. And I'm
afraid some people don't like cleverness. They find it somehow less
than honest, less real.

But well, that's a matter of personal preference, isn't it? That's why
we have a TBAY header. 

> That's my perception, and it may be wrong - but I don't believe that
the idea that 
> TBAY posts are about canon-based theories is unassailable.

Well, I rather think it is. I mean, you can assail anything, but
there's really no doubt that the TBAY posts stand up to the HPFGU
rules for canon based discussion, while the Movie and OT posts don't.
At all. If you think that standard should be changed, that's really a
different matter. 

Eileen




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 06:38:57 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 22:38:57 -0800
Subject: TBAY:The Point is...(was:Re: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY)
References: <20031203221435.78180.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <00a201c3ba31$58e96340$a6706751@kathryn>

I snipped Risti's post but I wanted to mention that I really enjoyed it
before making my point.

The format of TBAY in itself doesn't bother me, I roleplay online and off
(well not so much off at the moment but that's beside the point) and I think
it can be quite good fun, and a good way to illustrate your point, but the
sheer mindboggling number of locations/SHIPS/theories means that frankly I
can never keep track of who thinks what or even who everyone is. Before I'd
TBAY I'd want to know who was likely to agree/disagree with what I said or
at least be interested in it etc and I have trouble putting words into the
mouths of people unless I know whether I'm going to do it 'right' so to
speak. For example say I am suddenly feeling the need to jump into a
discussion about Undercover!Percy, first I'd want to remind myself who
thinks Percy is evil, who thinks he's misuderstood, who just thinks he's a
berk and who frankly couldn't care less of JKR never wrote another word
about him ..... And I don't want to wade through back posts etc to work this
out (apart from anything else someone'd probably make the same point I was
aiming for before I got around to it). What I think a lot of people would
feel happier with (especially newbies, of which I'm not one admittedly) is a
short and to the point cribsheet of what theories tend to 'exist' in TBAY
and where the more regular TBAYers stand on the main issues. Goodness knows
if I had a one page document I could scan quickly to see who thought what I
might be more inclined to jump in.

K
"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."
.




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 22:47:27 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 09:47:27 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqlof7+o34k@...>
References: <3FCEF5EF.21639.3FF6B2@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FCF02AF.27264.71C553@localhost>

On 3 Dec 2003 at 22:35, lucky_kari wrote:

> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...>

> And well I must admit here that TBAY is... well, clever. And I'm
> afraid some people don't like cleverness. They find it somehow less
> than honest, less real.

I'm fine with cleverness - and I agree that most TBAY posts are very clever. I just 
also think they are potentially divisive and often very artificial. That's my opinion.

> But well, that's a matter of personal preference, isn't it? That's why
> we have a TBAY header. 

Yes, it is a matter of personal preference. And personally I think TBAY would be 
better off on it on its own list so those that prefer  not to have to receive messages 
that take forty lines to make a canon point that could have been made in five lines 
have that option.

A header goes some way to giving people that choice. My personal view is given 
that it is so easy to set up sublists at Yahoogroups, that it makes very little sense 
to me not to go all the way and have a separate list. Those who are interested in 
TBAY will still have just as much right to participate in it or read it. Those who 
don't, will be totally free from it.
 
> > That's my perception, and it may be wrong - but I don't believe that
> the idea that 
> > TBAY posts are about canon-based theories is unassailable.
> 
> Well, I rather think it is. I mean, you can assail anything, but
> there's really no doubt that the TBAY posts stand up to the HPFGU
> rules for canon based discussion, while the Movie and OT posts don't.
> At all. If you think that standard should be changed, that's really a
> different matter. 

I have written posts that are based on canon - including to the extent I have 
quoted passages, and given page numbers, etc. and then had list elves suggest 
to me those posts should be on OT-Chatter - even though they were canon-based 
discussion.

I think they easily stood up to the rules. Nonetheless, I was asked to move them.

It seems to me that the standard enforced is NOT just that posts should be canon 
based. If it was, I wouldn't have been asked to move posts that were canon 
based.

I was asked to move these posts because they were too long and some people 
don't like receiving long messages.

I've no real problem with that - provided it's applied consistently. And to me, if my 
posts were unacceptable on the main list because of the length of material I 
included to make my canon points, then TBAY posts should be treated in the 
same way as my posts were.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 23:10:31 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:31 -0000
Subject: Long posts, was Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FCF02AF.27264.71C553@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqlqh7+f728@...>

Shaun:

> I was asked to move these posts because they were too long and some 
people 
> don't like receiving long messages.

This was actually *said* to you? Really? Was it because your own 
material was too long, or because the quoted or "responded to" 
material was too long? Because I have *never* heard of this being 
given out as a reason. *Treatises* have appeared on the main list.

If I have time, I'll dig out my own take on TBAY from a long-ago 
discussion; I'm finding it interesting to hear many of the same takes 
and interpretations as the MEG discussions on TBAY had.

~Amanda

P.S.--Can you tell me what "Yours Without Wax" means? I wonder about 
it Every Single Time and I'm finally remembering to ask.




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 23:26:41 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:26:41 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FCEF5EF.21639.3FF6B2@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqlrfh+mcng@...>

Shaun:

> But, frankly. my perception is that a significant number of TBAY 
posts are 
> primarily about people 'roleplaying' and whatever canon points are 
being made 
> are secondary to that roleplaying, giggle giggle injoke purpose.
> 
> That's my perception, and it may be wrong - but I don't believe 
that the idea that 
> TBAY posts are about canon-based theories is unassailable.

I don't think it is either. TBAY is as prone as standard posts to 
having new people not "get it"; in fact, I bet it's more prone to it, 
because the canon points are often made allegorically. Some of the 
roleplaying is there for fun, sure. But the fact that it contains and 
uses allegory means that some canon debate is truly symbolic and 
takes the form of personified theories interacting.

The point is, the *intent* of TBAY is to provide an alternative means 
of exploring canon, whether new posters manage that or not. And that 
intent, I'd think, does mean it belongs on the list.

Believe me, the frustration many of you have expressed with people 
who post fluff, is just as sharp in frequenters of TBAY with people 
who post TBAY-style fluff. Fluff happens. 

The rationale for leaving TBAY on the main list has tended to be the 
avoidance of the need for double-posting. I, for one, totally suck at 
writing in the TBAY style, but I love reading them, and I have 
answered TBAY canon points in standard formats. I have also seen it 
happen vice versa. Removing them to another list, when the prefix 
makes sorting and/or ignoring easy, would keep "crossover" people 
from interacting in both styles in the same venue.

Wow, what a convoluted sentence. Hope that made sense.

~Amanda, speaking in her personal capacity and viewpoint, not 
official, etc., yada yada





From pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 23:43:46 2003
From: pretty_feet51 at risti_cb.yahoo.invalid (Risti)
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:43:46 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FCF02AF.27264.71C553@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqlsfi+nm2d@...>

In response to the points Shaun has made:

The idea of TBAY having a seperate list has crossed my mind, as 
well, to be honest.  Then I realized that to do so would be suicide 
to the Bay.  Let me try and explain.

You've said a couple of times now that you feel Theory Bay divides 
the list, and that the solution would be to create a subgroup for 
it.  I guess I just can't see how *dividing* the list further would 
make us more unified.

Theory Bay needs the main list.  If we were to go and seperate 
ourselves, it wouldn't be long until we died out completely.  It's 
actually quite rare that an entire TBAY discussion-at least one that 
lasts for more than a couple replies-will exist without some of the 
replies being out of the Bay.  As I've said before, anyone I've ever 
talked to in the Bay doesn't mind that.  You really expect it.  We 
might reply and find a way to put your comments back into the Bay, 
but we don't expect everyone to apparate into George's an order a 
drink before stating their opinion.  Some theories are born in the 
Bay, and later discussed in the 'regular way'.  Alot of theories are 
born out of perfectly 'normal' posts, that either the creator or a 
big fan wants to take a little further.

I suppose that in the end, the list doesn't *need* Theory Bay.  It 
could exist without us, which is one of the reasons why this topic 
is being discussed at all.  I think, however, and I know others 
agree with me, that Theory Bay adds something to the list, and it 
wouldn't be the same without it.  Theory Bay allows us to act out 
some of our inner silliness by showing just how crazy a certain 
theory has made us.  On a board with a younger membership, you might 
see alot of 'Well, as the President of the Draco is Cool Club, I'd 
like to say that I think this theory rox!  Wouldn't you agree Dracy-
poo?'  I may kick myself for using this analogy, but it's some of 
the same spirit to give yourself an active role in the defense of 
your favorite character that motivates people in Theory Bay.  You 
could cut out the Bay, but that enthusiasm would find another way to 
work its way into the list, and it may not be in intelligent, well 
thought out posts.

Finally, in the end, I think putting Theory Bay on a seperate list 
would just make things more confusing.  Imagine that a theory is 
suggested for just why Dumbledore likes candy.    It's discussed on 
the main list for awhile, when someone decides to give their 
impression of the theory in a Theory Bay post, on the seperate 
list.  So they mark it in reply to the original thread, and some 
discussion takes place in the Bay.  Meanwhile, discussion is still 
taking place on the main list, and the train of thought is 
completely divided.  A few people might try to cross reference the 
posts between the two lists.  A reference to the main list on the 
Theory Bay list probably wouldn't cause too many problems-most of 
that list is probably attempting to follow both discussions.  
However, what if someone comes up with the solution to the problem 
on the Theory Bay list, and writes a long, itricate post stating all 
the canon they have, and the reasoning for their theories.  If this 
was mentioned on the main list, everyone who didn't subscribe to 
both lists would be hopelessly lost.  The theory could be repeated 
in 'plain text' for the main list, but this ends up being twice as 
much work, and can get rather repetitive.  In the end, it would just 
be mass confusion.

Some people aren't going to understand some of the posts in Theory 
Bay.  Some people aren't going to understand some of the posts 
outside Theory Bay.  As I've said before, one of the best things 
about this list is that it gives you the opportunity to look at an 
outlook on the books you might not have considered on your own.  
Theory Bay is one of these outlooks.  To take it away from where it 
can be seen would defeat it's purpose.

There are Theory Bay posts out there that have gone off topic.  I 
won't deny you that.  Mainly because for the most part(although 
again, I was crazy enough to be an exception to this) people who 
post TBAY posts are off moderation.  This means that while the Elves 
may slap their wrists and send warnings and howlers off-list, they 
can't necessarily be stopped in the pending stage.  However, there 
are 'regular' posts that go off topic for the same reason.  As far 
as I'm aware, although I've never been sent a warning for going off 
topic, they are treated in the same way.  As they should be.

~Risti, who has just gone and seen that Amanda has posted many of 
these points, but is going to send this out anyhow for the value of 
what was not said, and an apology for repetition.




From akhillin at anita_hillin.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec  3 23:57:57 2003
From: akhillin at anita_hillin.yahoo.invalid (Anita Hillin)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 17:57:57 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <NDBBLANNOLGPILEHCPJLEEJDCPAA.akhillin@...>

abigailnus [mailto:abigailnus at ...]
1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?

[Anita Hillin] When I first joined the group (shortly before June, 2003), I
tended to avoid the TBAY posts, in part because of their tendency to be
longer than the typical post.  After the June 21 moratorium was lifted,
given the huge influx of posts, I avoided TBAY altogether.  However, once
the deluge subsided, I began to read TBAYs on topics of interest to me.  I
find them to be more thoroughly fleshed-out theories, in part because of the
format, which requires some of the same skills fiction writing employs.

2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

[Anita Hillin] I find that I'm more likely to read a TBAY message from an
established writer (Kirstini, for example), than a new one.  The quality of
the TBAYS varies widely.  I've not posted a TBAY message, in part because
I'm not so much interested in leaping on a theory bandwagon as viewing the
"parade," and in part because I am critical of others' TBAYs, so I'd avoid
posting any but my best writing.

3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

[Anita Hillin]  Being old and forgetful, I have to admit the acronyms'
definitions slip my mind, and once that happens, the TBAY has less meaning
for me (MAGIC DISHWASHER is a biggie in this arena.  Huh???)  I have looked
them all up, but it slows down the reading considerably when I have to go
back to the source regularly.  It's easier to skip them, frankly.

4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?

[Anita Hillin] The well-written TBAYS with enough references to remind me of
the acronyms' meanings are enjoyable and not at all confusing for me.  I
might be motivated to post a la TBAY if I had a pet theory and enough time
to construct it well.  At present, I'm lucky to write this without too many
typos. ;-)

akh



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 00:45:14 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (gulplum)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 00:45:14 -0000
Subject: Long posts, was Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqlqh7+f728@...>
Message-ID: <bqm02q+39lb@...>

I'm replying to this post rather than any other in this thread 
because it includes a peripheral question I'd like to take a stab at 
answering (with which I'll start this; I'll get back on topic fairly 
swiftly, I promise). :-) 

Amanda asked Shaun:
> P.S.--Can you tell me what "Yours Without Wax" means? I wonder 
> about it Every Single Time and I'm finally remembering to ask.

I used to use that phrase myself many years ago (when I was around 
Shaun's age, I think). ;-) 

A common game in philological and lexicographical circles is to 
invent plausible yet spurious etymologies. 

Whilst English "sincere" (or French "sinc?re") has a well-documented 
direct root in Latin "sincerus" (same meaning), a long-standing fake 
etymology posits that it comes from a Roman practice in the trading 
of sculptures and statues, of certifying that objects were "sine 
sera" ("without wax", i.e., that they weren't damaged or incorrect 
castings which had been filled in or corrected with wax). 
Metaphorically, therefore, the seller was being "sincere", hence the 
contraction's meaning.

Thus, "yours without wax" = "yours sincerely".

To my knowledge, no such certification was ever prevalent in Roman 
times, but to a certain class of people, it's an amusing piece of 
pseudo-science.

It's not even the origin of the Latin word "sincerus", which is 
generally accepted as coming from Indo-European roots: 

sin- in e.g. singuli ("single") + 
-cern in e.g. cernere ("to separate"; hence "discern")

i.e. "complete", "unblemished".

Anyway, back to the topic.

I think there's a basic misunderstanding between Shaun and Eileen. 
The issue was about how TBAY (and TBAY posts) are *perceived*. Shaun 
(and others, including myself) has explained his perception. It's 
ever so slightly incorrect for Eileen to state that his perception is 
wrong. 

For one thing, "perception" is not about facts, but their 
interpretation. Furthermore, several other people have said that 
their perception of TBAY is along the same lines, which means that 
whether or not Eileen agrees with it, several people's  *perception* 
of TBAY does not agree with hers. 

Of course, TBAYers' *intent* might have nothing to do with the way 
their efforts are perceived by some list members, and so whilst  
Eileen (and others) is free to defend her/their intentions, it is out 
of place to claim that the perception is incorrect.

A couple of active TBAYers have themselves admitted that some TBAY 
posts are high on "fluff" (thank you, Amanda - a much less 
confrontational word than "waffle", which I used in an earlier 
post) :-) and low on content; as far as I'm concerned, whilst I can 
appreciate the cleverness of TBAY and admire the effort which goes 
into creating those posts, I still consider the effort *I* have to 
put in to wading through the superfluous padding to get to the point 
that is being made is, frankly, generally not worth it, and thus I 
tend not to read TBAY posts. 

I fully appreciate that some people consider that the standard 
argument-counterargument format is too dry for their taste, but at 
the same time, there are those of us who consider TBAY too "fluffy".

Incidentally, and this is just an observation and I leave everyone to 
draw their own conclusions, but I find it... interesting... that all 
the comments on this issue over the last couple of days fall into two 
discrete camps: the ladies are pro-TBAY and we blokes are less 
favourably inclined...

I've just realised that in my previous post, I didn't deal with how I 
think TBAY should be dealt with, and how to get more members involved.

As I said before, I think the TBAY prefix works fine, and for those 
of us who wish to avoid this style of posting, it's sufficient. I 
also don't feel that TBAY should be given its own list. For one 
thing, the number of TBAY posts simply doesn't warrant it. For 
another, very frequently TBAY threads arise out of other "standard" 
conversations, and in some cases revert back to the usual format. 
Splitting TBAY off would therefore limit some people's opportunity to 
express themselves, and would potentially prevent non-TBAYers from 
seeing replies to their own posts.

It should, however, be underlined that TBAY posts should continue to 
be about canon points, and not just be an excuse for fanciful fluff. 

Which brings me on to what, if anything, should be done to explain 
TBAY to newcomers and enable them to use that format. I feel that 
this is going to be controversial (and some people are likely to be 
offended), but I'll say it anyway...

I don't think that TBAY should be "explained", FAQed or simplified in 
any way. As many people have said (or implied), TBAY is an HPFGU in-
joke. There is no escaping that. 

All communities have special characteristics or quirks which cannot 
be explained but can only be understood by participating. I therefore 
feel that until people comprehend the in-jokes and pick up on the 
subtleties, both of which can ONLY be achieved by reading other 
people's posts intelligently and perceptively over a period of time, 
they have absolutely no business attempting TBAY posts. Someone with 
the intelligence, wit and experience to understand those subtleties 
will probably "get" them pretty quickly. Someone who needs to have 
those subtleties explained to them in any detail probably doesn't 
have the experience or wit required to participate, and therefore 
quite simply should refrain from doing so. 

I suppose the short way of putting all of that is "if you have to ask 
questions about how TBAY works, you have no reason to be there. If 
the format appeals to you, you'll know when you're ready to 
participate".

I feel that opening the TBAY floodgates (argh! I'm going into TBAY 
language!) :-) will have the effect of cheapening the very concept of 
TBAY, and for it to degenerate into nothing but fluff, with nothing 
of canon interest being included.

Whilst it's true that the best TBAY posts can be entertaining, and 
the imaginative use of metaphor can make some points more vivid, I 
must say that in MY opinion (and perception, to return to where I 
started) these posts are VERY, VERY, VERY rare. The remainder could 
pesent their canon points far more succinctly (and legibly) in the 
standard format. 

Incidentally, and to end this on a lighter tone, something I've 
always wondered is why TBAY, given its marine setting, doesn't 
include Herrings (be they red, or any other colour). :-)




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 01:28:26 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 11:28:26 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Long posts, was Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqlqh7+f728@...>
References: <3FCF02AF.27264.71C553@localhost> <bqlqh7+f728@...>
Message-ID: <20031204012032.M96068@...>

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 23:10:31 -0000, Amanda wrote
> Shaun:
> 
> > I was asked to move these posts because they were too long and some 
> people 
> > don't like receiving long messages.
> 
> This was actually *said* to you? Really? Was it because your own 
> material was too long, or because the quoted or "responded to" 
> material was too long? Because I have *never* heard of this being 
> given out as a reason. *Treatises* have appeared on the main list.

Yes, this was said to me - or rather written to me. And it is extremely
unlikely that it was because the quoted material was too long because there
was no quoted material as far as I can recall.

It was a post about whether the astronomical conditions described in the
astronomy exam in Order of the Phoenix were possible or not. It was fairly
long, but I don't think ridiculously so.

But I was mailed by a list elf telling me (paraphrasing here - not at home,
and not sure if I even have the message anymore) that posts of that length
should be moved to OT-Chatter out of consideration to other users.
 
> If I have time, I'll dig out my own take on TBAY from a long-ago 
> discussion; I'm finding it interesting to hear many of the same 
> takes and interpretations as the MEG discussions on TBAY had.
> 
> ~Amanda
> 
> P.S.--Can you tell me what "Yours Without Wax" means? I wonder about 
> it Every Single Time and I'm finally remembering to ask.

I see this has been answered by someone else (-8

Basically I had to do Latin at school and used to spend about half of every
class bored out of my brain - so I read my Latin text book. Occasionally it
had little side notes and one of them was about the origin of sincere - it
stuck with me.





From tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 01:50:11 2003
From: tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid (tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 20:50:11 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Long posts, was Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains...
Message-ID: <158.28f3e52f.2cffecd3@...>

<In a message dated 12/3/2003 7:48:32 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
hp at ... <writes:
<Incidentally, and this is just an observation and I leave everyone to 
<draw their own conclusions, but I find it... interesting... that all 
<the comments on this issue over the last couple of days fall into two 
<discrete camps: the ladies are pro-TBAY and we blokes are less 
<favourably inclined...
Hey, I'm a lady and I can hardly stand them :) but any way, 

<I suppose the short way of putting all of that is "if you have to ask 
<questions about how TBAY works, you have no reason to be there. If 
<the format appeals to you, you'll know when you're ready to 
<participate".


I totally agree with this conclusion. If you do not understand it, just do 
not bother wasting your time, because someone will probably say the exact same 
thing in another, shorter post.
 I also agree that it should not be given its own list because some of the 
theories are valid, and assuming that you like to read (since you've probably 
read the thousands of pages of HP), they should be at least skimmed. Something 
worthwhile is bound to show up eventually.
I guess they just really get on my nerves because I actually know people who 
act like this in real life, and I just picture their faces saying it, and it 
annoys me to no end.

Thanks, 
Katie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 04:30:02 2003
From: carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid (snazzzybird)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 04:30:02 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqmd8a+493n@...>

--- <abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> <snip>
> So, if you could take the time to answer these questions, and maybe 
add
> a few of your own, we'd really appreciate it, and we hope that in 
turn the
> list will as well.
>  
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if 
any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 

TBAY messages are theories personified and acted out, usually 
involving the interaction of two or more characters or theory 
proponents.  The most important aspect is the point made by this 
interaction.  My impression of the difference between a TBAY theory 
and a regular theory is that it has been completely analyzed and 
backed up with canon, and is (or soon will be) familiar enough to 
most TBAY participants that it is recognizable by its acronym.

  
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about 
the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I do read TBAY messages and enjoy them very much.  I like the 
creativity that goes into them.  I posted one myself, and I chose 
that format because my observation was "piggybacked" on a TBAY 
theory.  The interaction between myself and the proponent seemed like 
the most direct way to make my point.  I've never been reluctant to 
reply to a TBAY thread.

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts 
(such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY 
theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What 
can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

I find the TBAY format quite accessible.  To me, the older theories 
are equally accessible in the TBAY and regular formats; it's simply a 
difference in style.  Hypothetic Alley and Fantastic Posts were a 
great help to me when I first joined the list.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to 
know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY 
style?

I don't find TBAY confusing.  What makes me more likely to post in 
that style is the nature of the theory I'm presenting.  If it is 
related to, or refutes, a theory that is already in the TBAY format, 
I'll post my two cents' worth in that format.

--snazzzybird, who singed her tailfeathers with the BIC LIGHTER 






From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 05:02:10 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 05:02:10 -0000
Subject: TBAY:The Point is...(was:Re: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <20031203221435.78180.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <bqmf4i+u6r3@...>

First, cheers to Risti and Dumbledad for making me laugh tonight; 
It's a shame you don't like TBAY, Dumbledad, because you're 
certainly good at it!

I don't always 'get' TBAY, even after reading Hypothetic Alley and 
taking a spin in the bay myself, but I'd hate to see it become a 
separate list. Sometimes I pass TBAY by if it's a theory I'm just 
not interested in (or if it's too long, truthfully)and it would help 
to have a primer that included some basics as well as answering 
questions for getting started. 

Here are the questions I had as a beginner, not very long ago, when 
I faced a blank page trying to write my one and only TBAY. (I know 
most of these answers now, but didn't when I started and had to ask 
my list elf):

1) Can anyone participate? (I wondered this because most of the 
people doing TBAY were mods at the time I started)

2) How do you include other listees in the TBAY--do you have to ask 
permission?

3) Can you put words in their mouth, ones you think they might say, 
or do you have to quote directly from their posts?

4) Does the canon have to be interspersed within the TBAY format, or 
can you write all the TBAY part first, then have a separate canon 
discussion at the end?

5) Do I need to put post #'s in if I use someone's exact ideas 
without getting permission, so people know where to refer back to 
(and to give credit to the original theorizer)?

*****Now an important question I don't know the answer to and would 
like to******

6) What if you and several other people are on a thread on-list and 
the issue seems to be heading toward a possible theory. Each of you 
have contributed thoughts, but one person decides to make it into a 
TBAY unilaterally. Is that pretty much accepted practice? 

So, I'm all for keeping TBAY part of the main list, having a guide 
of some sort, not only for the actual theories but "Getting Started 
in TBAY" information for the post etiquette as well. 

Jen Reese






From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 05:55:07 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2003 21:55:07 -0800
Subject: TBAY *grunts* (and a comment on "Long Posts")
References: <bqmd8a+493n@...>
Message-ID: <00b501c3ba2b$2ca6e100$503d1c40@...>

1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY.
How would you describe
TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most
important aspect of a TBAY
message? What does the term 'TBAY theory'
mean to you? What, if any, is
the difference between a TBAY theory and a
regular HPfGU theory?

My basic perceptions on TBAY messages are
something to skip rather then read.  They're
too close to role-play/fanfiction (both of
which I AM involved in offlist) for me to be
intrested.  I'm on HPfGU for posts that I can
actually make sense of (as in find the point
beyond all the inner actions).

2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever
posted a TBAY message? If
you have, what prompted you to do so? Have
you ever wanted to respond
to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of
the format? What about the
TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

No I do not read TBAY messages usually, I
have posted ONCE in a TBAY thread but only
essay style, and I was prompted to do so
because of the subject matter.  I have wanted
to respond many times to TBAY posts but find
it too diffrent from the style of posting I
prefer to enjoy.

3. How accessible do you find the TBAY
format? Do you find discussions
of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER)
on TBAY more or less
accessible then discussions of older theories
in regular posts (such as
Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of
several major TBAY theories)
and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts
more accessible? What can
veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more
welcome?

What the hell is MAGIC DISHWASHER?  It's
things like this that annoy me about TBAY,
but yes, I also think that the older
discussions on TBAY are harder to "jump into"
then older discussions done in regular posts.

4. What do you find confusing about TBAY?
What would you like to know
before posting? What would make you more
likely to post in a TBAY style?

Nothing would make me more likely to post in
TBAY style, I detest the form and wish it
would go away but I'm over ruled in more then
one case so I shut up and just grunt every
time I see one.  Also, as an Admin (more
specifically, a Pending Elf) I find TBAY's
hard to understand for those purposes (have
yet to find the cannon point in them right
away) so that just makes them all the more
worse to me.  So it's sort of a List
Member/Admin Member problem for me...but
anyway.

Another problem I have with TBAY is the 'old
crowd' feel of the thread.  I know, that's
not what anyone MEANS but when you have a
group of oldbies posting around using each
other's names, it makes newbies feel VERY
reluctant to try to break into such a 'close
knit' group.  You feel odd using other
'characters' in your posts for fear of
getting their words wrong and your left with
a post that you don't think can compare to
the others.

And while some TBAYers are willing to post in
either style for those who prefer a diffrent
one, there's always a chance of a TBAYer who
won't changing the setting/talk and then the
essayer's are left all confused and leave the
thread.  It happened to me and I was quite
put out as I wasn't finished talking.

I would support the idea of a separate TBAY
list (as I have said many times before) just
to satisfy both parties, those who like TBAY
and those, like me, who are lost, confused,
or just plain annoyed with the style (or any
variation there of).

My basic stand is: if you want to role-play,
go somewhere and role-play, it's not what I
joined HPfGU for and I REALLY don't thing it
belongs there.  And yes that includes TBAY.

Shaun wrote:

<I was asked to move these posts because they
were too long and some people
don't like receiving long messages.>

I don't know why this happened but I don't
belive it should have.  If a post makes a
cannon point it belongs on the Main List
regardless of length...no, wait, I take that
back.  Short posts are not allowed
(one-liners).  We actually prefer longer
posts...  This is a problem I have that I
really should bring up to the Admin Team and
not here but we seem to have a mis
communication about what is acceptable on the
main list.  *dashes over to the Admins*  The
only thing that should be "Too Long" is
"Quoted Material" which is material you quote
from other people.  The general rule I go by
when scanning pending messages is if the
Quoted Material is VISUALLY longer then the
actual message, meaning I just generally
eyeball it and if it's longer I ask the
poster to snip it down so that readers don't
wonder when the poster will get to the point.

Saitaina
*grabbing her flame shield from her
fanfiction desk to stand behind* Fire away.




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 08:57:31 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:57:31 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqlks0+ihnh@...>
References: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <3FCF91AB.12491.ABAF25@localhost>

On 3 Dec 2003 at 21:33, msbeadsley wrote:

> I like TBAY. TBAY messages are like puppet shows, little vignettes 
> produced to illustrate ideas about HP in a whimsical format. Although 
> it's somewhat campy and can be confusing, it's fun and adds freshness 
> and creativity to the board (which has somewhat of a tendency to 
> grind away in plodding, pedantic discussion now and then).

Yes - but what I think may be being missed is that some people actually *enjoy* 
that 'plodding, pedantic, discussion', as you describe it. Some of us don't think 
there'd be anything particularly wrong with a list where people just discussed 
matters in a straightforward fashion and don't feel any great need for flights of 
whimsy.

I think that's why there's a discussion going on here (-8

I also think 'organised' whimsy is less whimsical than whimsy that just happens (-8


 



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 09:11:04 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 20:11:04 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqlsfi+nm2d@...>
References: <3FCF02AF.27264.71C553@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FCF94D8.2790.B819BC@localhost>

On 3 Dec 2003 at 23:43, Risti wrote:

> In response to the points Shaun has made:
> 
> The idea of TBAY having a seperate list has crossed my mind, as 
> well, to be honest.  Then I realized that to do so would be suicide 
> to the Bay.  Let me try and explain.
> 
> You've said a couple of times now that you feel Theory Bay divides 
> the list, and that the solution would be to create a subgroup for 
> it.  I guess I just can't see how *dividing* the list further would 
> make us more unified.

Because it would, IMHO, ensure that only people who were genuinely interested 
in TBAY would be involved in TBAY. They wouldn't have to deal with people who 
find it annoying.
 
> Theory Bay needs the main list.  If we were to go and seperate 
> ourselves, it wouldn't be long until we died out completely.  It's 
> actually quite rare that an entire TBAY discussion-at least one that 
> lasts for more than a couple replies-will exist without some of the 
> replies being out of the Bay.  As I've said before, anyone I've ever 
> talked to in the Bay doesn't mind that.  You really expect it.  We 
> might reply and find a way to put your comments back into the Bay, 
> but we don't expect everyone to apparate into George's an order a 
> drink before stating their opinion.  Some theories are born in the 
> Bay, and later discussed in the 'regular way'.  Alot of theories are 
> born out of perfectly 'normal' posts, that either the creator or a 
> big fan wants to take a little further.
> 
> I suppose that in the end, the list doesn't *need* Theory Bay.  It 
> could exist without us, which is one of the reasons why this topic 
> is being discussed at all.  I think, however, and I know others 
> agree with me, that Theory Bay adds something to the list, and it 
> wouldn't be the same without it.  Theory Bay allows us to act out 
> some of our inner silliness by showing just how crazy a certain 
> theory has made us.  On a board with a younger membership, you might 
> see alot of 'Well, as the President of the Draco is Cool Club, I'd 
> like to say that I think this theory rox!  Wouldn't you agree Dracy-
> poo?'  I may kick myself for using this analogy, but it's some of 
> the same spirit to give yourself an active role in the defense of 
> your favorite character that motivates people in Theory Bay.  You 
> could cut out the Bay, but that enthusiasm would find another way to 
> work its way into the list, and it may not be in intelligent, well 
> thought out posts.

My view is that if TBAY needs the list to survive, as you believe, and the list 
doesn't need TBAY to survive, then TBAY is being specially privileged by being 
on the list. If TBAY can't stand on its own two feet, why is the entire list expected 
to 'subsidise' it?

Now, personally, I think TBAY should be able to survive quite well on its own list - 
in fact I think it would do better on its own list.

And I don't think TBAY should necessarily be kicked off - frankly I am personally 
quite happy to continue getting TBAY posts.

But I'm on over 100 e-mail list and I get about 1000 e-mails a day (-8 so I am used 
to getting a high level of messages that simply do not interest me - so ignoring 
TBAY (and I actually don't totally ignore it) isn't a major concern for me.

For somebody who is only on HPFGU and is already feeling overwhelmed by the 
number of posts - and I think there are people in that situation - I'm not sure TBAY 
is a help.

It's real saving grace IMHO, is it is fairly infrequent so it doesn't interfere much for 
other people - but at the same time that's a pity because there are so many 
people who enjoy it.

Frankly, I'd be worried it already is dying - and being overwhelmed by the growing 
list.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 10:26:51 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 10:26:51 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
Message-ID: <bqn25b+3d3e@...>

I'd be so sad if Tbay posts were moved to a separate list. They are 
easy to spot and ignore if you hate them, but if you like them, 
really add a new dimension to the ordinary postings. Even if you 
don't contribute, I agree with the other posts here which describe 
them as theatre - great to watch (up to a point, and you can easily 
walk out if they turn out a dud). 

However, I feel distinctly nastier about FILKS. I'm afraid I really 
cannot stand these, and personally never look at them after glancing 
at a few early on. Apart from anything else, I have never heard of 
most of the songs they are based on, which makes them meaningless. 

I suppose they are easy to spot, like Tbay, so equally easy to ignore 
if you want to. However, I'd still like to understand the rationale 
for them being on the main list. They seem to me to be somewhere 
between fanfic and OTC.

Carolyn




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 11:13:10 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (gulplum)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 11:13:10 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqn25b+3d3e@...>
Message-ID: <bqn4s6+cupp@...>

Carolyn wrote:

> ... I feel distinctly nastier about FILKS. I'm afraid I really 
> cannot stand these, and personally never look at them after 
> glancing at a few early on. Apart from anything else, I have never 
> heard of most of the songs they are based on, which makes them 
> meaningless. 
> 
> I suppose they are easy to spot, like Tbay, so equally easy to 
> ignore if you want to. However, I'd still like to understand the 
> rationale for them being on the main list. They seem to me to be 
> somewhere between fanfic and OTC.

Ahh... I was wondering when this subject would crop up, and although 
I was going to raise it elsewhere, this is perhaps an opportunity to 
get my thoughts out of the way.

Although I recognise most of the songs, and I enjoy and admire 
filking as an art, I agree that filks really should have no place on 
the main list. However, they're fairly infrequent (I'd estimate one 
post in 500) and they don't generate threads, so perhaps banning 
Caius and others from the main list is a little harsh (and 
unnecessary).

Most of the time, I enjoy reading them (although, truth be said, 
their quality is very variable) and they do relieve the atmosphere 
occasionally. However, they don't actually add anything to discussing 
canon and so if we were apply the rules strictly, they should be 
limited to OT-C.

So, in summary, I don't feel strongly enough to suggest banning them 
to OT-C, but they *can* give the impression of being privileged which 
is never a good idea.

Incidentally, something I've been meaning to say for a long time, is 
that, if filks are to be left on the main list, could the "filk" 
header please be at the beginning of the subject rather than the end? 
It's not always there at present (for starters, this helps in sorting 
large numbers of posts).

Oh, BTW (and off topic): Shaun, were you really implying that the 
sincere -> "sine cera" etymology was actually included in your Latin 
textbook at school? I didn't realise that this particular canard was 
quite so well-established! (Not to mention, the author of any such  
textbook would have to be an idiot and not know his subject as well 
as he thought.)





From ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 15:15:46 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:15:46 -0000
Subject: TBAY, Filks, combining posts, HBfile
In-Reply-To: <3FCF94D8.2790.B819BC@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqnj32+kl8d@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" 
<drednort at a...> wrote:

> My view is that if TBAY needs the list to survive, as you believe, 
and the list 
> doesn't need TBAY to survive, then TBAY is being specially 
privileged by being 
> on the list. If TBAY can't stand on its own two feet, why is the 
entire list expected 
> to 'subsidise' it?
>
<SNIP>

A Goldfeesh:

This whole debate over TBAY reminds me of when I joined this list a 
couple of years ago.  Shortly after I joined an immense SHIPping war 
broke out.  I remember getting a few digests in which 23 out of 25 
posts concerned SHIPping, of which I was not interested in the 
least. Then came the inevitable call, by others who felt like I did, 
to move all SHIPping offlist and that it contained too much fluff, 
not enough canon and anyway, *who the heck gave a flying fig if Ron 
ended up with Hermione or ran off with the Giant Squid in the first 
place*.  Penny (msg #31619), the listmum at the time, and John 
Walton (msg #31641)both had some good advice as mods.  I'm just 
trying to point out things haven't really changed much, even though 
the list is so much bigger now.  If a person dislikes TBAY just skip 
over it or delete it.  The same goes for FILKS.  Neither take up 
that much list volume that I can see. Also, if a TBAY post is 
lacking canon nothing prevents another listmember from calling the 
poster on it.  Just quote a bit of the post and ask if they'd care 
to provide more canon to it or point out where it is.  I wish I'd 
done this a couple of weeks ago when I saw a TBAY with very very 
minimal canon and *tons* of fluff.  TBAY or not, if a person is 
posting with little canon-ask them for it.  Perhaps the person 
doesn't realize what is necessary or needs reminded.

The thing I see that takes up a ton of list volume is that hardly 
anyone anymore (other than Catlady) combines posts. Instead of one 
nice (though perhaps long) post, I see posters having 3 or 4 short 
posts in row on different subjects.  Why can these not be combined?

This brings me to the (Not So)Humongous BigFile.  Tom Wall, in an 
earlier post, pointed out that it didn't have much information about 
canon in it any longer.  Nor does it have the examples of citing 
like I believe it once did- I wish I would have kept an older copy 
of it.  Plus, I noticed it was lacking (in section two) the bit 
about combining posts that it used to have. This, I believe, should 
be reinstated. 

I would also like to suggest that (instead of redoing all the HB 
again) the older version would be posted again for those who would 
like to look through it and get more specific tips.  It contained 
useful information that should not have just been trashed. The older 
version could be more like guidelines, than the actual rules, 
perhaps.  After all, if a person is on this list, they can 
apparently read huge tomes and a vast amount of posts, but not a 
long file on list rules and ettiqutte?  It doesn't seem too much to 
ask, really.

A Goldfeesh (who also wishes more people would remember to sign 
their posts, having seen that even some of the older members 
neglecting it too)




From ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 15:39:17 2003
From: ameliagoldfeesh at ameliagoldfeesh.yahoo.invalid (ameliagoldfeesh)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 15:39:17 -0000
Subject: Searching and Archive List Questions
Message-ID: <bqnkf5+mij8@...>

A Goldfeesh:

I have a couple of questions about searching.  

1- Is searching on Yahoo so slow because of the number of posts it 
has to go through?  Right now there are 86488 posts. 

2-HPfGU has one archive list currently which has 7818 messages on it.
I believe these were from HPfGU being on Yahoo Clubs.

3- Would moving some of the current (say first 20,000)messages onto 
an archive group make it easier to search for messages?  Perhaps 
batching messages into groups of 20,000 (an arbitrary number) per 
archive.  Example HPfGU-Archive Two would have 1-20,000 then HPfGU-
Archive Three would have 20,001-40,000 etc.  
     If this would effect searching speed this would at least 
make "recent history" searches simpler.  At any rate, searching 
would not be a lot more difficult and frustrating as it currently 
is. 

However, I must say this is all a theory since I don't know what 
makes the darn searches so difficult.  It might just be Yahoo and 
not the number of messages.  I'm wondering if anybody does know?

A Goldfeesh (just after having my last post concerning combining 
posts, I, of course, post two in a row- go figure)  





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 16:01:49 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 16:01:49 -0000
Subject: Searching and Archive List Questions
In-Reply-To: <bqnkf5+mij8@...>
Message-ID: <bqnlpd+g2cj@...>

Amelia wrote:

> 2-HPfGU has one archive list currently which has 7818 messages on 
it.
> I believe these were from HPfGU being on Yahoo Clubs.
> 
> 3- Would moving some of the current (say first 20,000)messages 
onto 
> an archive group make it easier to search for messages?  Perhaps 
> batching messages into groups of 20,000 (an arbitrary number) per 
> archive.  Example HPfGU-Archive Two would have 1-20,000 then HPfGU-
> Archive Three would have 20,001-40,000 etc.  
>      If this would effect searching speed this would at least 
> make "recent history" searches simpler.  At any rate, searching 
> would not be a lot more difficult and frustrating as it currently 
> is. 

Oddly enough, you should go check out the files section of the 
archive group above, as well as

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives2/

and

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives3/

where the admirable Paul Kippes has done just that, with slightly 
different numbers of messages.  Look in the files section, not the 
messages.  At present, the archives go up to message 58,999, just 
short of OOP release.

Anyone with Winzip or similar program (you can download these free) 
can then download these archives and open them.  

This doesn't solve all search problems (e.g. a search across 
archives is still tricky) but use of a word processor program should 
expand your options.

David




From annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 16:32:04 2003
From: annemehr at annemehr.yahoo.invalid (annemehr)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 16:32:04 -0000
Subject: TBAY, Filks, combining posts, HBfile
In-Reply-To: <bqnj32+kl8d@...>
Message-ID: <bqnni4+s76f@...>


> A Goldfeesh:
<snip>
> The thing I see that takes up a ton of list volume is that hardly 
> anyone anymore (other than Catlady) combines posts. Instead of one 
> nice (though perhaps long) post, I see posters having 3 or 4 short 
> posts in row on different subjects.  Why can these not be combined?

Annemehr:

This is something I've always wondered about -- what exactly are all
the advantages and disadvantages of combining posts?  Combining is
presumably good for people who receive individual e-mails.  I don't
see that it makes any difference to those who receive daily digests. 
I read the list on webview by clicking message index and then expand
messages, so combining makes no difference to me.

On the other hand, combining posts makes the threading function
useless, which can sometimes be annoying, especially as the search
function doesn't work very well either.  Still, I suppose the only way
to have *all* the posts be threaded properly is for everyone to always
reply from webview, which is impractical for many.

Do several short posts take up much more room on the server than
combining them into one?  That might be a good reason to combine, even
if the threading function is lost.

> A Goldfeesh:
> This brings me to the (Not So)Humongous BigFile.  Tom Wall, in an 
> earlier post, pointed out that it didn't have much information about 
> canon in it any longer.  Nor does it have the examples of citing 
> like I believe it once did- I wish I would have kept an older copy 
> of it.  Plus, I noticed it was lacking (in section two) the bit 
> about combining posts that it used to have. This, I believe, should 
> be reinstated.

Annemehr:
I still have my copy from when I joined in Sept. '02.  If anyone wants
a copy of that version, just e-mail me (I'd just forward it to you, A
Goldfeesh, but I have a vision of your inbox full of HB files people
have sent, unbeknownst to me -- so you e-mail me too if you want mine,
okay?).
 
> A Goldfeesh:
> I would also like to suggest that (instead of redoing all the HB 
> again) the older version would be posted again for those who would 
> like to look through it and get more specific tips.  It contained 
> useful information that should not have just been trashed. The older 
> version could be more like guidelines, than the actual rules, 
> perhaps.

Ah, the Pirate's Code!
::wriggles in anticipation -- we're having movie night tomorrow!::

Annemehr
wishing she could find a poster of the moment Jack Sparrow realises
the Interceptor is coming after them in the Dauntless...





From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 18:36:41 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 18:36:41 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FCF91AB.12491.ABAF25@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqnurp+so9o@...>

> > I like TBAY. TBAY messages are like puppet shows, little 
> > vignettes produced to illustrate ideas about HP in a whimsical 
> > format. Although it's somewhat campy and can be confusing, it's 
> > fun and adds freshness and creativity to the board (which has 
> > somewhat of a tendency to grind away in plodding, pedantic 
> > discussion now and then).
 
> Yes - but what I think may be being missed is that some people 
> actually *enjoy* that 'plodding, pedantic, discussion', as you 
> describe it. Some of us don't think there'd be anything 
> particularly wrong with a list where people just discussed matters 
> in a straightforward fashion and don't feel any great need for 
> flights of whimsy.

If no one enjoyed pedantic discussion, would it be there? Anyone who 
doesn't enjoy it at least somewhat probably doesn't stay on HPfGU 
very long. (And it's a very, very long toss from "don't think there'd 
be anything particularly wrong with a list where people just 
discussed matters in a straightforward fashion" to "take anything 
that isn't straightforward discussion and ban it, or move it *over 
there*.")

Who sits down to dinner and eats just meat every night; just meat, 
with no vegetables, or salad, fruit, bread, or dessert? Those rooting 
for segregating TBAY (and possibly more) strike me as family members 
announcing, "Well, *I* despise turnips, and I don't want to have them 
at table. If *you people* want to eat turnips, do it somewhere else, 
or at least go eat in the kitchen." (Why can't you just pass the bowl 
and go back to your roast beef? Or you could go partake of meals in a 
group consisting solely of meat eaters, where you would never be 
asked, "Please pass the turnips." It isn't even like it's something 
*pickled*, where you might have a point about the vinegar fumes 
getting up your nose.) It is *so* trivial to simply click the "next" 
option (or delete those messages) if one doesn't wish to be part of 
TBAY! Or FILK. or FF. (It would be very interesting if someone wanted 
to do a statistical analysis; what percentage of messages is wheat 
and what is chaff to which members?)

This is a *social* group; the variety (along with the stunning degree 
of general intelligence) is what makes it so terrific. And do those 
who love TBAY just read and respond to TBAY? Don't they participate 
throughout the group? Someone said that segregating TBAY would kill 
it. I agree. (I'm hearing Gollum's voice from TTT now: "That would 
kill us--*kill* us!") But I also think that, as it became moribund, 
those trying to keep it alive would be missed on the main board; and 
they might not come back. It that what you want? Although I am not 
primarily a TBAY-er, the notion of kicking it off the main board 
bothers me very much. Because HPfGU is not *about* the pedantic 
discussions, is it? Isn't it about the people having them? (That's 
what I'm there for.) And that includes the TBAYers. And the FILKers. 
And the FFers. (Hmmm...it occurs to me that I've been each of those, 
at least briefly--as well as participating in my share of pedantry.)

> I also think 'organised' whimsy is less whimsical than whimsy that 
> just happens (-8

Organized? TBAY? The "(-8" means you're kidding, right? ;-)

ADMIN...poll time yet/ever?

Sandy




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 19:34:37 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:34:37 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
Message-ID: <bqo28d+lt8n@...>

Richard wrote:
> I think there's a basic misunderstanding between Shaun and Eileen. 
> The issue was about how TBAY (and TBAY posts) are *perceived*. Shaun 
> (and others, including myself) has explained his perception. It's 
> ever so slightly incorrect for Eileen to state that his perception is 
> wrong. 

No. It isn't actually. You see, Shaun changed the issue when he
suggested banning TBAY. From then on, it's not about perception. It's
about facts. And the fact is that TBAY as a category lives up to HPFGU
standard for canon discussion. Specific TBAY posts may not, but *any*
post to HPFGU may not live up to the HPFGU standards. So, to suggest
that the category is any less valid because someone hasn't followed
the rules of the category is a non sequitur to say the least.

Shaun wrote:
> Yes - but what I think may be being missed is that some people
actually *enjoy* 
> that 'plodding, pedantic, discussion', as you describe it. Some of
us don't think 
> there'd be anything particularly wrong with a list where people just
discussed 
> matters in a straightforward fashion and don't feel any great need
for flights of 
> whimsy.

Yes, and some of us would think there'd be something wrong. Are you
saying that your emotional needs somehow trump mine? Shouldn't we be
looking for an objective standard here? And we have one. HPFGU is
about canon discussion. TBAYs are canon discussion. 

Shaun wrote:
>My view is that if TBAY needs the list to survive, as you believe, 
>and the list doesn't need TBAY to survive, then TBAY is being 
>specially privileged by being on the list. If TBAY can't stand on 
>its own two feet, why is the entire list expected to 'subsidise' it?

I am baffled that you can continue using this language of
*subsidization*. TBAY is canon discussion. It belongs on the list as
much as any pedantic and Binns-like message belongs. The reason it has
a header is not because it is something different in essence. The
reason it has a header is for the convenience of people like yourself,
who don't like it. To use the fact that is has a header as some proof
that it doesn't belong on the list is a circular argument.

Shaun wrote:
>For somebody who is only on HPFGU and is already feeling overwhelmed
>by the number of posts - and I think there are people in that
>situation - I'm not sure TBAY is a help.

There are several faulty assumptions here. Number one, of course, is
the idea that HPFGU has a duty to cater to the feelings of each and
every member (well, except for the TBAYers, obviously.) Some people
are always going to feel overwhelmed by HPFGU. A lot of them feel
overwhelmed by long and pedantic posts. Others feel overwhelmed by
intelligent posts. Should we ban anything but the most obvious
discussions about thestrals and the gleam in Dumbledore's eye for
their convenience? There really must be some other reason than "It
might make someone uncomfortable!" for banning a form of canon discussion.

The second faulty assumption is that all newbies dislike TBAY. TBAY's
on-going popularity gives the lie to that. Most everyone on the Bay
today is new. They came along as newbies and the Bay tickled their
fancy sooner or later. For the average TBAY post I make, I get emails
from several newbies saying how much they enjoy the Bay. And rare is
the TBAY thread in which there isn't a TBAY newbie posting. This may
not be apparent to some listies since we are very friendly and
welcoming on the Bay and greet people with familiarity that really has
no basis in their being long-time TBAY posters!

Saintana wrote:
>My basic stand is: if you want to role-play,
>go somewhere and role-play, it's not what I
>joined HPfGU for and I REALLY don't thing it
>belongs there.

How is TBAY role-playing, may I ask? It's canon discussion using the
time-tested methods of dialectic and the metaphorical setting. Is
Boethius's "Consolation of Philosophy" now a role-playing game? 

I RP and I write fanfiction, and honestly, they are nothing similar to
TBAY.

Sandy wrote:
>(And it's a very, very long toss from "don't think there'd
>be anything particularly wrong with a list where people just
>discussed matters in a straightforward fashion" to "take anything
>that isn't straightforward discussion and ban it, or move it *over
>there*.")

Amen! 

TBAY is not here, as some members seem to think, on sufferance. TBAY
is here because it has a right to be here, as long as the rules of
HPFGU remain that the relevant standard a post must live up to is its
discussion of canon. 

Eileen




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 20:12:29 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 12:12:29 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] More About TBAY
References: <bqo28d+lt8n@...>
Message-ID: <01ae01c3baa2$f25179c0$503d1c40@...>

Eileen wrote:

<How is TBAY role-playing, may I ask?>

Role-playing is the taking on of a character
and moving them around in a situation.
Doesn't matter if the character is you, it's
still role-playing.  Doesn't matter if
somewhere in all the dribble and setting
there is a cannon point, it's still
role-playing.  And it's not what I came here
for.

<Is
Boethius's "Consolation of Philosophy" now a
role-playing game?>

Okay, as I have no clue what the hell you're
referencing here I'm assuming you're trying
to prove just how smarter you are then
me...not working.

<I RP and I write fanfiction, and honestly,
they are nothing similar to
TBAY.>

I RP and I write fanfiction as well, in fact
those two are what I devote most of my time
to besides my own writings.  And they ARE
similar, in fact they're quite the same
considering some of the theories I've seen
here have been in my offlist role-plays...the
only difference is that while you all have
your own names and places, I play with the
actual cannon characters...not that big of a
difference really.

Saitaina
****
Brave and bold they're not.  They ain't the
bravest heroes...but they're the only ones
we've got.


http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 19:19:15 2003
From: kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid (kkersey_austin)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:19:15 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqo1bj+tcce@...>

There have been some really good posts on this subject already, so
I'll try not to repeat others' points ad nauseum. Eileen covered my
take on TBAY pretty well - done well, it is both entertaining and
illuminating. I think it is a particularly useful phenomenon for a
couple of reasons, one personal, and one more general.

Since OOP (and come to think of it, longer than that) I have pretty
much given up on reading, skimming, or even dipping into the main list
with any sort of regularity. I just don't have the hours a day to sort
through for the interesting tidbits. However, occasionally I do a
seach on "TBAY" and catch up as best I can on what the current
theories are. My hope is that many of the really interesting ideas
will be generate some TBAY discussion, and generally I follow all the
threads generated by, or referred to in, those posts, whether they
stay in TBAY or not. 

I agree that many TBAY posts are self-indulgent, difficult to follow,
and fail to move the discussion forward either due to repetition or
lack of new ideas. I do *not* think that the proportion of TBAY posts
like this is any greater than that of non-TBAY posts. In fact, my
perception is that quite the opposite is true. Most of the TBAY
regulars are pretty good writers, and the ones that aren't don't seem
to so any better in non-TBAY format.

There is another function of TBAY that I don't think anyone has
addressed yet (apologies if I missed it) - the "role-playing" provides
a sort of safety net for discussing potentially contentious
differences of opinion. (I'm going to refer listee writing in regular
prose style as a "poster" and to a TBAY persona as a "theorist" - I
hope that is consistent with general usage on the list.) 

In TBAY, a theorist can throw someone overboard, commit acts of piracy
or vandalism, bare their teeth and scream, threaten someone with a Big
Paddle(tm) or even get into a barroom brawl. Never mind all the
cannonades. But all the violence is done to a theorist's TBAY persona
or an allegorical representation of a theory. It's slightly removed
from a direct attack on a real life poster or his or her words. A
theorist can really *make it personal* in TBAY, and therefore *avoid*
making it personal in real life. 

It's actually kind of hard to write a kind evisceration of a
straightforward discursive post, to politely point out that a
particular theory that some person has labored over long and hard(or
not!) is *wrong*. TBAY provides a measure of freedom by allowing
*theories* to be attacked, instead of the particular words of a
particular poster. 

I've been on the list (a lurker for the most part) since right about
the time TBAY started, and I was at the time terribly confused (and
still am at times) by *some* of the references. I am heartened by
Constance Vigilance's offer to work on a TBAY encyclopaedia - a more
detailed, up-to-date history than that found in Hypothetic Ally would
be so much fun, and so useful. Meanwhile, the better TBAY posts, like
the better non-TBAY posts, provide adequate context and references to
understand the argument. And the better posts provide some *action*.
The boring TBAY post might posit an acronym and little else, expecting
others to do the work of figuring out how it fits into the current
state of theorizing; or just Mary-Sue (long non-allegorical
discriptions of what a TBAY denizen is wearing, eating, drinking, etc.
are the worst offenders). But I've seen enough boring, repititious,
drifting, ill-thought out posts that are written in straight prose
that I firmly believe that these qualities are not an artifact of the
TBAY format.

OK, I seem to be repeating myself a bit. I'll stop. :-)

For the record, let TBAY stay on the main list; let's do what we can
to encourage good posting behaviour whatever the format; and if you
don't want to read it, skip it. 


KKersey, who has been trying for nearly two years to think of a good
list name.


p.s. Eileen! I was shocked to hear you say that your Mathematics Major
brother doesn't think in symbols - Mathematics *is* symbols. It *is*
metaphor. And to do the interesting stuff, you've got to understand
that (I kind of suspect that's true of higher-level magic in the
potterverse, too). Hope he has a back-up career plan :-)  By the way,
my end-of-semester study plan was always to skip the cram sessions and
read as much 19th century Russian lit as I could. Worked pretty well
for me, anyway.





From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:09:30 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:09:30 -0000
Subject: Searching and Archive List Questions
In-Reply-To: <bqnlpd+g2cj@...>
Message-ID: <bqo7qa+rjh3@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> 
> Oddly enough, you should go check out the files section of the 
> archive group above, as well as
> 
> http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives2/
> 
> and
> 
> http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups-Archives3/
> 
> where the admirable Paul Kippes has done just that, with slightly 
> different numbers of messages.  Look in the files section, not the 
> messages.  At present, the archives go up to message 58,999, just 
> short of OOP release.


Thanks for the information about the archived messages,Dave.

That makes me wonder, if the messages are archived why are they 
still on the main list? I think Amelia was asking (correct me if I'm 
wrong): Will it help speed up the search process to remove a portion 
of the messages from the main list? 
Jen R.





From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:24:53 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:24:53 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <01ae01c3baa2$f25179c0$503d1c40@...>
Message-ID: <bqo8n5+g2tp@...>

Eileen:
>How is TBAY role-playing, may I ask?

Saitaina:
> Role-playing is the taking on of a character and moving them around 
> in a situation. Doesn't matter if the character is you, it's
> still role-playing.  Doesn't matter if somewhere in all the dribble 
> and setting there is a cannon point, it's still role-playing.  And 
> it's not what I came here for.

Is TBAY role-playing? I'd say, "sometimes." So what? ("Dibble" is 
pejorative...why go there, eh?) And "it's not what I came here for" 
may as easily be an indication that one is in the wrong place as one 
that something present in the place is out-of-place. (Gods, am I 
doing Rumsfeld? <Reference OT Chatter discussion>) FYI: I am speaking 
in the most general terms here and am *not* implying that anyone 
should go/be elsewhere.

Eileen:
> Is Boethius's "Consolation of Philosophy" now a role-playing game?

Saitaina:
> Okay, as I have no clue what the hell you're referencing here I'm 
> assuming you're trying to prove just how smarter you are then
> me...not working.

Although *I* would have guessed from the name that Boethius was a 
*painter* (silly, uneducated (but I am smart) me), I can see the 
relevance of pointing out that (and this was not the first reference 
to this) the TBAY style predates the recognition of "role-playing" 
(as a distinct subset of forms of human communication/interaction); 
and the specifics (names, titles) are handy as evidence that one is 
not just making things up.

(Uh, it's "smarter than," not "smarter then," as I pointed out a few 
posts back (is this some new (grrr) *style* that's passed me 
by?); "than" is a comparator and "then" is either "thus" or refers 
to "when," or a combination of the two. Or something like that--as I 
said, I'm uneducated. But autodidactic.)

Eileen:
> I RP and I write fanfiction, and honestly, they are nothing 
> similar to TBAY.
 
Saitaina:
> I RP and I write fanfiction as well, in fact those two are what I 
> devote most of my time to besides my own writings.  And they ARE
> similar, in fact they're quite the same considering some of the 
> theories I've seen here have been in my offlist role-plays...the
> only difference is that while you all have your own names and 
> places, I play with the actual cannon characters...not that big of a
> difference really.

I RP. I write some, too; fiction, and otherwise. I see similarities 
in TBAY. Isn't >this< *really* a matter of perception? And, anyway, 
is it *the* issue at hand?

Sandy




From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:34:28 2003
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:34:28 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqn4s6+cupp@...>
Message-ID: <bqo994+uni2@...>

Carolyn:
> > I suppose they are easy to spot, like Tbay, so equally easy to 
> > ignore if you want to. However, I'd still like to understand the 
> > rationale for them being on the main list. They seem to me to 
be 
> > somewhere between fanfic and OTC.

Richard 
> Ahh... I was wondering when this subject would crop up, and 
although  I was going to raise it elsewhere, this is perhaps an 
opportunity to  get my thoughts out of the way.
> 
> Although I recognise most of the songs, and I enjoy and 
admire  filking as an art, I agree that filks really should have no 
place on  the main list. 
<snip>
, they don't actually add anything to discussing 
> canon and so if we were apply the rules strictly, they should be 
> limited to OT-C.

I can't speak for all filkers, but  my filks usually do have a canon 
point  and sometimes I've found that a filk can actually convey a 
theory better than a straightforward  exposition. 

For example I observed some similarities between the plight of 
Dorothy's companions in the Wizard of Oz and the characters of 
Sirius, Lupin and Snape. Nobody seemed to get it until I filked "If 
I Only Had a Brain."

I'm not sure I understand the concept of certain posts as 
"privileged."  I can see where it would be annoying for someone 
who doesn't care for TBay or Filks to have to read (or skip) those 
posts on the Main List while far more fascinating (to them) topics 
are consigned to OT-C for the sin of being off-canon,  but  I 
wonder if this has more to do with the size of  the potential 
audience. If the OT-C list had as many members as the Main 
List, would this still be an issue?


Pippin
posting on her own behalf




From arrowsmithbt at arrowsmithbt.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:02:58 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at arrowsmithbt.yahoo.invalid (arrowsmithbt)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:02:58 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqo7e2+uvql@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" <abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> Dear Everybody,
>  
> One of the reasons that we decided to establish -Feedback was to
> allow us to find out about the group's needs and opinions, and
> occasionally we'd like to ask for your thoughts about various subjects.


Could be setting a dangerous precedent, even with the best of intentions.

Evening, everybody. First post on Feedback. Just intended to browse, but
when someone actually solicits my views I can become positively garrulous.

I've done a speed scan of the posts so far, but not in fine detail. Lots of
interesting ideas and comments, but as a member of HPfGU with the
massive seniority of, ooh, six months, the one thing that is evident is
that you're not going to please everybody on the main site. Then what?
Would this Feedback site (has no-one come up with an acronym yet?) be
a wailing wall, a complaints desk or a safety valve? Or an umpire?

OK, it's on a temporary basis for now, but if it  helps Admin overcome
problems before they grow and fester then it should be made permanent.
But there are 11,000 members out  there and at  least some will be fully
paid up members of the awkward squad too. Once they learn that there's
a public forum where they can bend an Elf's ear and  demand satisfaction
for wrongs real or imaginary, you're going to have your hands full. Even
if that is not the way the site was intended to be used.
Can the Admin handle this on a continuing basis?


>  
> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
> message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory? 
 
TBAY can be a lot  of fun; one of the good things about them is that the
personality of the poster comes through, something that doesn't happen
often with regular posts. They allow more elbow room; you can be discursive,
test out wild theories, conduct ersatz feuds within civilised limits (something 
that might be misunderstood in a normal post), invent alter egos for yourself
and other participants in the thread. It's self indulgence.

Personally, I use them to cheat.

When I joined the site and read a few TBAYs I  had absolutely no idea what
the ground rules were. Couldn't find any guidelines anywhere. So I asked 
Kirstini "What gives?" She was kind enough to lay out the basics and with 
those, together with a few bits of history from Eloise, off I went.

I suspect that TBAYs are often written for the enjoyment of the writer more
than the fans; it's almost a form of expression, an exercise in form and
function. It's the borderline between fan fiction and canon. 
 
 
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
> you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?
 
Yes, I  read most, but not all. Just like ordinary posts they have to touch
on an aspect of the books or characters that interests me.

Yes. This is where I cheat. Most of those I've written are closer to FF than
TBAY. It means not only do I write about the canon characters, I get to
play with them as well.

The only reluctance I have in writing them is that they are hard work.
IMO much, much harder than even the most minutely researched, closely
argued analysis. It's very easy to fall flat on your face with a TBAY. Of the 
ones I write maybe a third get posted. Others may find it easier.

 
> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such as
> Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

Some of the older theories can be quite difficult to get to grips  with.
The idea is plain enough, but often you feel that you're missing something
critical; that there are unspoken assumptions that are important for full
understanding. Perhaps because the TBAY has been removed from its
context; the posts made at the same time that instigated or influenced it. 
For example, what is the real, critical difference between a TBAY and a
Flying Hedgehog? None that matters, so far as I  can see.

To make newbies welcome all that is needed are examples of the form.
If good examples are posted they will be followed up and emulated.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?
> 

A map would be  nice.
 
Kneasy





From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:47:33 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:47:33 -0000
Subject: TBAY--Canon characters vs. personified theories
In-Reply-To: <bqo7e2+uvql@...>
Message-ID: <bqoa1l+b0it@...>

Kneasy:

> Yes. This is where I cheat. Most of those I've written are closer 
to FF than
> TBAY. It means not only do I write about the canon characters, I 
get to
> play with them as well.

Ah, but in my understanding, this is a misconception. I meant to 
point out this sole flaw in Dumbledad's brilliant post. TBAY does not 
take the canon characters and use them. TBAY involves the 
personification of *theories.* Not the same thing at all. The genuine 
Snape-from-the-books, Harry, etc., shouldn't appear in TBAY--what 
TBAY is about is symbolism, allegorical representations of theories. 

This is one thing, probably the most important thing, that 
distinguishes TBAY from fanfiction. It involves symbolic interactions 
of personified theories in an often allegorical form--not the 
manipulation of actual canon characters.

Eileen? Your take?

~Amanda






From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 21:46:17 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 08:46:17 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqo28d+lt8n@...>
Message-ID: <3FD045D9.27737.369287@localhost>

On 4 Dec 2003 at 19:34, lucky_kari wrote:

> No. It isn't actually. You see, Shaun changed the issue when he
> suggested banning TBAY. From then on, it's not about perception. It's
> about facts. And the fact is that TBAY as a category lives up to HPFGU
> standard for canon discussion. Specific TBAY posts may not, but *any*
> post to HPFGU may not live up to the HPFGU standards. So, to suggest
> that the category is any less valid because someone hasn't followed
> the rules of the category is a non sequitur to say the least.

No, it is about perception, because unless someone decides to analyse all 80,000 
posts in the archives, and work out what proportion of TBAY posts do not meet 
the standard of Canon discussion, *and* what proportion of posts in general do 
not, we don't have any facts.

My perception is that TBAY posts tend to contain at least 10 lines of fluff that have 
nothing to do with canon for every one line of actual canonical discussion. While 
very few posts to HPFGU are fluff free, I think TBAY posts have a general 
tendency to be much 'fluffier' than non-TBAY posts.

Your perception may not match that - but basically unless someone is prepared to 
do some sort of detailed textual analysis of a least a sizeable random sample of 
the list, we don't have anything approaching facts to deal with.

We're dealing with conflicting perceptions.
 
> Yes, and some of us would think there'd be something wrong. Are you
> saying that your emotional needs somehow trump mine? Shouldn't we be
> looking for an objective standard here? And we have one. HPFGU is
> about canon discussion. TBAYs are canon discussion. 

No, my emotional needs do not trump yours. However, yours do not trump mine 
either. And, frankly, what I see being used as the major argument for TBAY is "But 
I like TBAY". And that's a perfectly valid argument - HPFGU is primarily there for 
people to enjoy after all.

However, when that's the argument used, then I think those who *don't* like TBAY 
have a valid counterpoint and that's the point of view I am presenting.

I have no huge problem with TBAY being on HPFGU. I do have a problem with 
the apparent belief by some TBAYers that everybody should agree with them that 
it's a positive thing. I don't think it is. I think it's bad for the list. And I am going to 
say so.

I also have a real problem with people saying over and over again that TBAYs are 
canon discussion as if this is a proveable fact. Because I don't believe it is. I do 
read TBAY and I see a significant proportion of TBAY posts that seem to me to be 
nothing but an excuse for some roleplaying fun. I've no problem with that - I've 
been roleplaying for nearly 22 years. I just don't think it belongs on a discussion 
list.

I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone else. But it seems to me that some people 
on the list believe their opinions are facts - and anybody elses opinions are only 
opinions.

> Shaun wrote:
> >My view is that if TBAY needs the list to survive, as you believe, 
> >and the list doesn't need TBAY to survive, then TBAY is being 
> >specially privileged by being on the list. If TBAY can't stand on 
> >its own two feet, why is the entire list expected to 'subsidise' it?
> 
> I am baffled that you can continue using this language of
> *subsidization*. TBAY is canon discussion. It belongs on the list as
> much as any pedantic and Binns-like message belongs. The reason it has
> a header is not because it is something different in essence. The
> reason it has a header is for the convenience of people like yourself,
> who don't like it. To use the fact that is has a header as some proof
> that it doesn't belong on the list is a circular argument.

Um - continue using? This is the first time I have used any language of 
'subsidisation'. And I used it response to your comment that you think TBAY 
needs the list to survive. 

I have referred to TBAY being 'privileged' before, because I honestly believe it is 
being privileged. I have been told to take posts I have made - posts about canon 
issues - to another list because they were too long.

My post was CANON DISCUSSION. My post took 12 solid hours of research to 
do. I put a lot of work into it, and I was extremely annoyed to be told to move 
related explicitly to a canon point. Yet I was told to move it because it was too 
long.

Yet any suggestion that the same should apply to TBAY posts is greeted with 
howls of outrage.

I'm asking that TBAY posts be held to the same standard as my post was - or my 
post be given the same privileged treatment TBAY posts are. One or the other.

If fluffy roleplaying based discussion of canon points is allowed on the main list, 
so should hard science based discussion of canon points be allowed on the list.

As for the fact that headers exist being evidence that something that doesn't 
belong on the list - personally I do think that is so. I don't think it's a circular 
argument at all.

Basically on internet mailing lists, generally headers are typically used for one of 
two purposes - to highlight posts that everybody should read. And to filter posts 
that are of limited interest. HPFGU seems to use headers in both ways - to try and 
get people to read ADMIN messages, and to 'warn' people of FILK or TBAY, as 
examples.

When you have a list with 11,000 members, I honestly do think that if you've 
acknowledged that some posts are of limited interest, then it is time to give them a 
list of their own - unless you're lucky enough to use listprocessing software that 
allows for header filtering, which yahoo doesn't.

> Shaun wrote:
> >For somebody who is only on HPFGU and is already feeling overwhelmed
> >by the number of posts - and I think there are people in that
> >situation - I'm not sure TBAY is a help.
> 
> There are several faulty assumptions here. Number one, of course, is
> the idea that HPFGU has a duty to cater to the feelings of each and
> every member (well, except for the TBAYers, obviously.) Some people
> are always going to feel overwhelmed by HPFGU. A lot of them feel
> overwhelmed by long and pedantic posts. Others feel overwhelmed by
> intelligent posts. Should we ban anything but the most obvious
> discussions about thestrals and the gleam in Dumbledore's eye for
> their convenience? There really must be some other reason than "It
> might make someone uncomfortable!" for banning a form of canon discussion.

So because we're not going to ban everything, we shouldn't discuss banning (or 
rather moving) anything?  

The issue under discussion here is TBAY - not other forms of posting. Discussing 
those could be worthwhile, certainly, but I don't see that it's particularly relevant to 
this discussion. If the people in charge of this list want to raise other issues, I'd be 
happy to stick my oar in on those if I have any opinion. (-8
 
> The second faulty assumption is that all newbies dislike TBAY. TBAY's
> on-going popularity gives the lie to that. Most everyone on the Bay
> today is new. They came along as newbies and the Bay tickled their
> fancy sooner or later. For the average TBAY post I make, I get emails
> from several newbies saying how much they enjoy the Bay. And rare is
> the TBAY thread in which there isn't a TBAY newbie posting. This may
> not be apparent to some listies since we are very friendly and
> welcoming on the Bay and greet people with familiarity that really has
> no basis in their being long-time TBAY posters!

No, there's no assumption that 'all newbies dislike TBAY'. I haven't made that 
assumption at all. In the absence of any evidence one way or the other, I would 
assume that about the same proprtion of newbies like it as on the list in general.  

> Saintana wrote:
> >My basic stand is: if you want to role-play,
> >go somewhere and role-play, it's not what I
> >joined HPfGU for and I REALLY don't thing it
> >belongs there.
> 
> How is TBAY role-playing, may I ask? It's canon discussion using the
> time-tested methods of dialectic and the metaphorical setting. Is
> Boethius's "Consolation of Philosophy" now a role-playing game? 

More or less, yes (-8

No, it's not a game - but RPGs aren't the only form of Role Playing.

 
> I RP and I write fanfiction, and honestly, they are nothing similar to
> TBAY.

Yes, and I've been roleplaying for 21 years and writing fanfic for about 20, and to 
me, TBAY seems very much like roleplaying.  

Maybe you think roleplaying only refers to roleplaying games - it doesn't. RPGs 
are one form of roleplaying. Personally i don't see TBAY as that similar to 
fanfiction - but I do see an awful lot of reolplaying going on there, and I've seen 
numerous TBAYers describe it as such. Indeed, CARP (Cyber Action Role 
Playing) has, at times, been listed as a feature of TBAY.
 
> TBAY is not here, as some members seem to think, on sufferance. TBAY
> is here because it has a right to be here, as long as the rules of
> HPFGU remain that the relevant standard a post must live up to is its
> discussion of canon. 

That's your opinion - and you're entitled to it. I just don't think it's an unassailable 
fact.

  

Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 22:00:03 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:00:03 -0000
Subject: The TBAY debate
Message-ID: <bqoap3+62bn@...>

I had to come and jump back in for another second or so to 
acknowledge that I misspellled "dribble" as "dibble," to nod in 
recognition that there are other adjectives for me 
than "autodidactic," and primarily to add one more (way-duh-minnit!) 
think to the "Is TBAY RP?" question:

Doesn't the (and I read this somewhere official) presence of "CARP" 
(cyber action role playing, anyone?) in the Bay imply, well, uh...

Sandy

P.S. Addressing Kneasy's projection that this area will become 
clogged with hoards of people bringing their every little irritation 
to ADMIN's attention...I worry more that it will become an arena 
where members and factions battle it out (which may not be a 
completely bad thing, come to think on it; get all that angst off the 
other lists and into a context specifically devoted to answering 
questions, working out issues, and (we can hope) finding common 
ground).




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 22:07:21 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:07:21 -0000
Subject: Anal Autodidactics Anonymous, was Re: The TBAY debate
In-Reply-To: <bqoap3+62bn@...>
Message-ID: <bqob6p+h9t8@...>

Sandy, the autodidactic:

> P.S. Addressing Kneasy's projection that this area will become 
> clogged with hoards of people bringing their every little 
irritation 
> to ADMIN's attention...

"hordes"

~Amanda, who can't help it, she's an editor, and whose personal 
button is "cannon" for "canon"







From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 22:52:17 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:52:17 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FD045D9.27737.369287@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqodr1+a0cr@...>

Shaun wrote:

> Your perception may not match that - but basically unless someone 
is prepared to 
> do some sort of detailed textual analysis of a least a sizeable 
random sample of 
> the list, we don't have anything approaching facts to deal with.
> 
> We're dealing with conflicting perceptions.

There is an underlying philosophical issue here: how can we know any 
fact, except through our perceptions?  IMO, it confuses the issue.

I retired about a week ago from the HPFGU admin team, after about 
two years.  During that time, I approved (and rejected) a number of 
pending messages , and as a team we discussed a great number of 
messages.

In my considered - I'm tempted to say professional - opinion, it is 
quite easy in the vast majority of cases to determine whether a post 
passes the canon test, and different elves come to the same answer 
in those cases.  That does leave a little room for perception, I 
grant you, but for all practical purposes that's as good a fact as 
they come in an uncertain world.

> I also have a real problem with people saying over and over again 
that TBAYs are 
> canon discussion as if this is a proveable fact. Because I don't 
believe it is. I do 
> read TBAY and I see a significant proportion of TBAY posts that 
seem to me to be 
> nothing but an excuse for some roleplaying fun. I've no problem 
with that - I've 
> been roleplaying for nearly 22 years. I just don't think it 
belongs on a discussion 
> list.

I believe that what really *is* hard to perceive correctly is the 
motivation of a poster for posting to the list.  A TBAY post may 
well be an excuse for fun, whether it contains extensive canon 
discussion or little.  So may a 'straightforward' post.  I believe 
that any criterion for deciding what posts belong on the list should 
avoid consideration of motivation.

> My post was CANON DISCUSSION. My post took 12 solid hours of 
research to 
> do. I put a lot of work into it, and I was extremely annoyed to be 
told to move 
> related explicitly to a canon point. Yet I was told to move it 
because it was too 
> long.

I can understand the frustration here.  However, I don't believe 
this case advances the issue.  I'm afraid don't remember the case in 
question, and can't speak for the admin team any more, but I believe 
the canon criterion essentially stands on HPFGU.  I believe specific 
past cases, which may turn out to have been errors by the admin 
team - we have made them - can't serve as the basis for determining 
list policy.

David




From sevenhundredandthirteen at sevenhundredandthirteen.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 22:49:03 2003
From: sevenhundredandthirteen at sevenhundredandthirteen.yahoo.invalid (sevenhundredandthirteen)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 22:49:03 -0000
Subject: TBAY as an Intro only
Message-ID: <bqodkv+stc@...>

To jump right into the TBAY debate, I'd like to recall the MAGIC 
DISHWASHER post right after OotP. In this post, they used a TBAY 
intro which was fun and set the scene and involved role-playing and 
did all the other stuff that makes TBAY good. THEN, they had a line 
break, and from then on the theory was structured orderly without 
pointless interjection from characters. This to me was the perfect 
TBAY post. 

I do enjoy reading TBAY for it's narrative quality, but when I just 
want to follow a theory and find out what canon can support it, the 
TBAY format is distracting and time consuming.

The only TBAY post that I have written involved me writing a logical 
and ordered post without TBAY fluff, then adding a few lines of 
character at the top to make it look like I'd attempted to set myself 
up a persona in The Bay. This way, all my reply was ordered and in 
one block of monolgue and all the character interaction was separated 
from it. This to me works as the best compromise for TBAY and non-
TBAY readers. If you have a line such as "If you just want the canon 
and no fluff skip to the asterisk" at the top of your post it enables 
people to ignore the TBAY if they don't like it. Of, in my case, skip 
the TBAY the first time, then on rereading go an enjoy the drama.

And, I have noticed that people often structure multi-character TBAYs 
with pointless characters who do nothing but agree with what the 
author is saying. Surely the point of having two or more characters 
is that they have opposing views and can debate each side of a 
theory? This is when using a dialogue between two TBAY-ers becomes 
interesting and useful. 

Also, TBAYs often become more about the author's issues and problems 
rather than the theory's value. I'm thinking of TBAYs such as Elkins' 
Crouch Nine Part Saga where we all got a better understanding of 
Elkins' relationship with her father, but had to wade through a 9 
part epic that may have been able to be condensed into half that. 
And, what's worse, is that this post (as an example) is often linked 
with the instruction 'Go and read this, it is great.' And it is 
great. But it's also an incredibly daunting experience for a newbie 
to be forced to read 9 extended posts of personal issues just to 
understand a theory. 

And the TBAY posts are often the most epic and popular theories 
around. It's a shame to think that people (who ignore TBAY 
completely) are missing out on such wonderful and thought-out 
theories merely because the author has written a novel.

So, what does everyone think of the idea of having TBAY as an Intro 
only? That way we still have all the fun of TBAY, but in a clearly 
separate section of the post as the rest of the argument. You can 
read it for the drama, or skip it for the facts...

~<(Laurasia)>~





From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 07:11:14 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 23:11:14 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
References: <bqodr1+a0cr@...>
Message-ID: <007901c3bafe$f88d1180$a6706751@kathryn>





Shaun wrote:

> I also have a real problem with people saying over and over again
that TBAYs are
> canon discussion as if this is a proveable fact. Because I don't
believe it is. I do
> read TBAY and I see a significant proportion of TBAY posts that
seem to me to be
> nothing but an excuse for some roleplaying fun. I've no problem
with that - I've
> been roleplaying for nearly 22 years. I just don't think it
belongs on a discussion
> list.

davewitley

I believe that what really *is* hard to perceive correctly is the
motivation of a poster for posting to the list.  A TBAY post may
well be an excuse for fun, whether it contains extensive canon
discussion or little.  So may a 'straightforward' post.  I believe
that any criterion for deciding what posts belong on the list should
avoid consideration of motivation.

K

I think you misunderstood Shaun's point slightly (either that or I did). He
wasn't saying that the problem was someone posting for fun - after all
that's why we all post all kinds of messages, if it wasn't fun we wouldn't
keep doing it. I think he was having a problem with the fact that some TBAY
posts tend to be more about the roleplaying than the making of a canon
point.

I know that while I like the concept of TBAY I very rarely read the posts
because often I have to do some real work (either in looking stuff up or
just in ploughing through the fluff) to work out what point the poster is
trying to make,

Possibly it would have been better to say that some posts seem to be nothing
but an exercise in roleplaying. After all we're all here to have fun - no
matter how seriously we take things - that's how I choose which posts to
read, either the topic or the poster has to indicate to me that I'm going to
enjoy myself. Of course for me the fun tends to be in getting into a heated
(but friendly) discussion with someone, so I read posts by specific people
knowing that more often than not I'm going to vehemently disagree with them
(tries to avoid looking at those people on *this* list who are on my 'are we
even reading the same books?' list), whereas for others the fun may be
trying to explain away the minutae of daily life in the WW. Anyway, my point
was that no one has any problem with people having fun - it's when that fun
doesn't really seem to fit with the list that we wonder.

Personally I have no problem with TBAY on the main list, even if I don't
read it often.

K
"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."




From elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 23:18:30 2003
From: elfundeb at elfundeb2.yahoo.invalid (elfundeb2)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:18:30 -0000
Subject: HBfile/The Canon Rule/Combining
In-Reply-To: <bqgt30+vfis@...>
Message-ID: <bqofc6+cic2@...>

I've been wanting to jump into some of the discussions here, but 
every time I look at this list, the number of things I want to 
comment on gets longer and longer.  That's a good thing, of course. 
;-)  Thanks for everyone's thoughts and ideas.

First, the disclaimer:  I'm a member of list admin, but this message 
reflects only my personal opinions.

Second, some background:  A lot of the things that have been 
discussed here over the last week are things that the list 
administrators have discussed many times.  With many of these issues, 
there are pros and cons to all the alternatives.  Usually no 
alternative is perfect, and the admin team must weigh the pros and 
cons of each option.  Sometimes, the right answer for one point in 
time is not the right answer six months later; other times, the only 
way to know what's best is to experiment in an effort to hit 
the "sweet spot" that provides maximum benefit for members with a 
minimum of burden or frustration.  As a result, the rules have 
evolved over time to reflect the sense of the community at that 
particular time, and they will undoubtedly continue to evolve.  

The revision of the HBfile is a case in point (and you can blame me 
for this one, since I was one of the principal drafters of the new 
HBfile).  As the group became larger, the rules became more 
formalized and the HBfile grew in length and degree of detail until 
it was a *very* daunting exercise to attempt to read and synthesize 
all the important information in it, and there was evidence that a 
substantial number of members had not made a serious attempt to read 
it before posting.  There was also concern that the HBfile was 
written in an in terrorem style that presented HPFGU as too 
forbidding and unfriendly a place for most posters.  We also heard 
from new members on moderated status who *did* read it and found that 
it was unhelpful in spite of the long and detailed examples.  This 
especially occurred with newbies whose posts were rejected for 
snipping; we found that many were more concerned with taking a quote 
out of context and erred on the side of caution in their snipping 
habits.  

For all these reasons, a concerted effort was made to slim down the 
document, to make it more friendly as well as more user-friendly, and 
to move more tangential material to other documents that could be 
reached via links, in order to improve the likelihood that a new 
member would actually read far enough into the document to get to the 
posting guidelines.

Experience over the last several months has shown us that in some 
cases members are confused about things where there used to be 
specific guidance.  As a result, a number of additions have been 
made, and we're continuing to consider where additional guidance is 
needed.  

In order to keep the HBfile from mushrooming back into its old 
unwieldy self, one possibility is that that guidance may take the 
form of a separate document that's included in the Admin folder in 
the file section, so instead of rummaging through the HBfile for the 
specific information you're looking for, there will be a standalone 
document with specific guidelines for, for example, TBAY or message 
formatting issues.  Using a separate document for discrete forms of 
advice would also help (I think) in giving advice to members; instead 
of referring them to the HBfile as a whole, they can be referred to a 
specific document that addresses a particular area.

We've also discovered that some members have a lingering fondness for 
the detail in the old HBfile, though I think the jury's still out on 
whether the changes to the HBfile have negatively impacted post 
quality.  I think one of the best teachers is to read good posts; 
therefore, one of the biggest things that affects post quality, IMO, 
is the tenor of the board itself.  When it is dominated by 
experienced, thoughtful posters, post quality is high.  Over the 
summer (and the new HBfile was issued only a week before OOP was 
released) the list was dominated by newcomers.  Many old members 
hesitated to post at all, assuming that their posts would be buried 
quickly by the posts of excited newcomers, and post quality 
inevitably suffered from their absence.  I think that trend has 
reversed itself and list quality has improved.  (Not that we didn't 
have good posters among the newcomers; we did, and those are the ones 
that have stayed and are contributing to the improvement in overall 
list quality.)  

And on some specific HBfile issues --

> Tom, in his first post to Feedback, wrote:

> When I first joined HPfGU in January 2003, I read through the 
HBfile 
> and was struck by the extensive explanations concerning canon: what 
> it is, when to use it, how to use it, and so forth. From my *first* 
> impression, canon was a Big Deal, and it was important to cite it 
> correctly and copiously. 
> 
Jen Reese:
> I've always interpreted the canon rule to mean you actually quote 
> from the book or an interview with JKR, and base an argument around 
> that (but then, I take things very literally <g>). 
> 
That's how I read the old rules.  I thought they meant that *every* 
canon reference required a specific citation.  However, I noticed 
that very few members actually did so, except in the longer, more 
well-thought-out posts.
> 
Tom again:
> Therefore, in order to not look like a buffoon in front of so many 
> prolific members, I made a concerted effort to buff up my own 
> knowledge of the books; I also took to carrying them around with me 
> so that I'd be able to cite the canon properly.

Oh, I can relate to this.  After being caught in a canon error in my 
second or third post, I went back and reread the books.  Twice.  And 
for awhile, I included cites for *everything*.

> When the HBfile was revised a little while ago, I noticed that - in 
> contrast to the old file - the new document gave canon almost no 
> attention. I mean, 'canon' was mentioned as a word, and it was used 
> in explanations of the prefixes we use on the boards, but a full-
out 
> description of canon and its various attendant uses wasn't to be 
> found anywhere in the new HBfile.

Yes, we realized that in this instance (and a couple of others) a 
little too much was cut, and have re-inserted the following into the 
HBfile:

<<All posts to the main list should discuss the "canon," that is, the 
works of JK Rowling. >>

What I think Tom and Amelia Goldfeesh are suggesting is that perhaps 
some of former section 2.7 (which discusses canon citations) be 
reinstated as well.  It's short, it's written in a user-friendly 
fashion, and it contains a useful reminder.  Good suggestion.

Annemehr on combining:
> 
> This is something I've always wondered about -- what exactly are all
> the advantages and disadvantages of combining posts?  Combining is
> presumably good for people who receive individual e-mails.  I don't
> see that it makes any difference to those who receive daily 
digests. 
> I read the list on webview by clicking message index and then expand
> messages, so combining makes no difference to me.
> 
> On the other hand, combining posts makes the threading function
> useless, which can sometimes be annoying, especially as the search
> function doesn't work very well either.  Still, I suppose the only 
way
> to have *all* the posts be threaded properly is for everyone to 
always
> reply from webview, which is impractical for many.

This is a very succinct explanation of the pros and cons of combining 
that the admin team has been discussing over the years.  The rule was 
intentionally softened in the HBfile revision, but this is one of 
those "no right answer" issues.  

I tend to think that combining works best for a series of short 
responses.  Because of the threading issue as well as the fact that 
the last topic in a long combined subject header might not even be 
visible (especially for those who get the list on email), I prefer 
that posters be selective about combining.  Also, some internet 
programs (like my old aol program) made combining difficult, if not 
impossible.  But that's my personal opinion.  I know other people are 
more irritated if they have to open too many short posts.
> 
> Do several short posts take up much more room on the server than
> combining them into one?  That might be a good reason to combine, 
even
> if the threading function is lost.

I am *not* an authority on this, but I think that because of all the 
source coding, combined posts unquestionably use less bandwith than 
multiple posts. 
> 
> I still have my copy [of the old HBfile] from when I joined in 
Sept. '02.  If anyone wants
> a copy of that version, just e-mail me (I'd just forward it to you, 
A
> Goldfeesh, but I have a vision of your inbox full of HB files people
> have sent, unbeknownst to me -- so you e-mail me too if you want 
mine,
> okay?).

Rather than besiege Annemehr with requests, just go to the Admin 
files at

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

and open oldhbfile.html

We never *really* got rid of it.
>  
A Goldfeesh:
> > I would also like to suggest that (instead of redoing all the HB 
> > again) the older version would be posted again for those who 
would 
> > like to look through it and get more specific tips.  It contained 
> > useful information that should not have just been trashed. The 
older 
> > version could be more like guidelines, than the actual rules, 
> > perhaps.

A lot of the information that used to be in the HBfile is still 
around; it was simply moved to separate files, which can be found in 
the Admin section of the files:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/files/Admin%20Files/

Most of them are already linked in the HBfile.

Debbie




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 23:25:22 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (gulplum)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:25:22 -0000
Subject: TBAY/This list/combining posts
In-Reply-To: <bqo28d+lt8n@...>
Message-ID: <bqofp2+jhao@...>

Eileen replied to my previous comments with:

> And the fact is that TBAY as a category lives up to HPFGU
> standard for canon discussion. Specific TBAY posts may not, but 
> *any* post to HPFGU may not live up to the HPFGU standards. So, to 
> suggest that the category is any less valid because someone hasn't 
> followed the rules of the category is a non sequitur to say the 
> least.

Sorry to be call you on this, but I have been absolutely consistent 
in stating that I have nothing against TBAY as a "category". 

What I have been trying to put across is my perception that over the 
last two years, the concept has become increasingly cheapened, and 
the proportion of fluff in TBAY posts as a whole has increased 
dramatically. For instance, the last few TBAY posts I looked at 
included whole preambles which actually had nothing to do with the 
topic at hand. 

To put it very briefly, the metaphors of TBAY itself are beginning to 
take over from the metaphors of the theories being discussed. 

The reason why TBAY is an issue for debate for me is similar to what 
Shaun has been saying: whilst there are fairly frequent adminitions 
to members to trim quotes and use some form of attribution, there is 
no evidence that any effort is being put into keeping TBAY in order. 
I have no idea what's going on behind the scenes, but I've not seen 
any ADMIN messages advising TBAYers to curb their enthusiasm for 
flights of fancy, and to put it bluntly, "keep to the point".

I have other things to say about the quality of posts in general, and 
will say them in due course (yes, I have a LOT to say on that 
subject), but for the time being, we're talking about TBAY, and I 
agree with Shaun that a *perception* that TBAY is being "privileged" 
by not being reined in as much as standard discursive posts is 
perfectly reasonable (OK, it's a perception I happen to share, so I 
*would* say that, wouldn't I?). :-)

Incidentally, as there has been talk of a TBAY "primer" of some sort, 
I would suggest that the easiest and least cumbersome method of doing 
it would be for the Captains of the various vessels and other TBAY 
denizens to write up a short summary of their positions themselves. 
This would avoid unnecessary misunderstandings, and give each 
theorist the opportunity to use their own words and thus weigh the 
various components of their theories as they see fit. (A perfect 
example of what I mean is that the main MAGIC DISHWASHER explanation 
on the Fantastic Posts page comes from Grey Wolf).

I think that's my last word on the TBAY debate (although I reserve 
the right to return to the subject)  :-) as I think I've repeated 
myself enough already and don't need to repeat myself *again*. :-)

There was a question of what function this list should perform 
(sorry, I'm on web view and thus have difficulty referring to other 
posts, so I'm not quoting). IMO, the "welcome" message made it 
absolutely clear that the ADMIN team was not going to consider this a 
policy-making forum, but a consultative one.

I am a firm believer in intelligent market research and customer/user 
feedback. If you don't know that something's wrong (or perceived to 
be wrong - perception forms a great percentage of human interaction), 
you can't fix it. Of course, it's up to whoever is "in charge" to 
decide to fix it or not - people have a right to take their custom 
elsewhere if matters of importance to them are not fixed to their 
satisfaction. 

I therefore don't expect everything I've said (or have yet to say) to 
be taken on board and acted upon, but I know that I have at least 
highlighted my concerns. They might be trivial, and they might be 
concerns which others might not share, but this is a community and 
it's not a democracy but a benevolent dictatorship, with "those in 
charge" simply trying to help the largest number of people have fun 
while treading on the fewest feet possible. (urgh. Too many metaphors 
in there, I think.)

On the subject of combining posts. I have deliberately included this 
here to show one of the (potential) downsides of this convention. 
I've written a heck of a lot of words in this post already, and I 
suspect that a lot of people will either have given up reading it by 
now, or their attention is beginning to drift. Including too many 
topics in a single post is therefore perhaps not particularly 
advisable.

My own (usual) standard for combining posts is that if I have 
something substantive to say in one thread, and a short comment in 
another, I will usually append the short comment to the longer post. 
The same applies if I have short comments to make on two (or more) 
topics, or indeed to two (or more) posts on the same topic. If I have 
several paragraphs to say on two separate topics, I will post two 
separate messages. 

That is a result of my interpretation of the "combine posts"/"no one-
liners" rules. Of course, one-liners are a no-no, and I take that 
reasonably literally, i.e. more than one extended paraghraph is an OK 
post, less is not. 

Catlady is a perfect example of combined posts (sometimes, to be 
honest, perhaps she includes a few too many in each post) :-) because 
they are collections of (apposite and valuable) short contributions. 
I would not expect multi-paragraph contributions in several threads 
to be combined, partially for the reasons I outlined above, partially 
because it makes threading difficult, and partially because two short-
ish posts are easier to read than one long one. 

I suspect that this very post has made my point. :-)


-- 
GulPlum AKA Richard, who stands suitably admonished by the person who 
reminded us to sign posts :-)




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec  4 23:58:55 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:58:55 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FD045D9.27737.369287@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqohnv+j06v@...>

Shaun wrote:
> My perception is that TBAY posts tend to contain at least 10 lines 
> of fluff that have nothing to do with canon for every one line of 
> actual canonical dicussion.
<snip>
> I think TBAY posts have a general tendency to be much 'fluffier' 
> than non-TBAY posts.
<snip>
> unless someone is prepared to do some sort of detailed textual 
> analysis
<snip>

You went from discussing posts to discussing *lines* in posts (yeah, 
I noticed); so what you want is not just an analysis of *posts*, but 
a line-by-line examination? And who is going to set up the criteria 
for whether or not any individual line of any individual post 
is "fluffy" or "canon-based," anyway? (This concern with "facts" just 
gets better and better.)

> No, my emotional needs do not trump yours. However, yours do not 
> trump mine either. And, frankly, what I see being used as the major 
> argument for TBAY is "But I like TBAY". And that's a perfectly 
> valid argument - HPFGU is primarily there for people to enjoy after 
> all.

It might be useful to remember that basic emotional needs generally 
concern a need or desire one has for oneself to be *included*; I 
think a desire to *exclude* other persons or things must be somewhat 
more complicated. Those wanting to exclude/partition off TBAY, 
granted, probably are somewhat concerned with wanting to devote more 
bytes/seconds on those things they're more interested in; they don't 
want to "waste" time or computer resources. But I *suspect* that a 
large part of what bothers some people about TBAY is that it *is* 
whimsical. As in, maybe, it's bad enough to be so involved in a 
series of *children's books* without also having the added 
embarrassment of admitting (even to oneself) that one is spending 
large chunks of time somewhere people dare to be *silly* in their fun 
with it. (Ring any bells, anyone?)

> However, when that's the argument used, then I think those who 
> *don't* like TBAY have a valid counterpoint and that's the point of 
> view I am presenting.

The difference, again, is inclusion vs. exclusion. Those who like 
TBAY are not asking for anything (press "delete" or "next" is closer 
to nothing than anything, IMO) from those who don't other than to be 
ignored; (some of) those who don't are after *a change in the status 
quo*, based on *their* idiosyncrasies.

> I have no huge problem with TBAY being on HPFGU. I do have a 
> problem with the apparent belief by some TBAYers that everybody 
> should agree with them that it's a positive thing. I don't think it 
> is. I think it's bad for the list. And I am going to 
> say so.

Do you honestly think anyone is trying to change your mind? I don't. 
I think they *are* trying to make sure that your opinion and those of 
like-minded folks are not the ones which prevail.

> I also have a real problem with people saying over and over again 
> that TBAYs are canon discussion as if this is a proveable fact. 
> Because I don't believe it is. I do read TBAY and I see a 
> significant proportion of TBAY posts that seem to me to be nothing 
> but an excuse for some roleplaying fun. I've no problem with that - 
> I've been roleplaying for nearly 22 years. I just don't think it 
> belongs on a discussion list.

Absent the analysis we know is not going to happen regarding whether 
or not TBAY posts are disproportionately lacking in canon, your 
opinion is just that (and has no more and no little weight than 
those, like mine, which oppose yours). Anyway, what "belongs on a 
discussion list" is what membership consensus (or majority) says 
belongs (with a little input from ADMIN, of course <g>).

> I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone else. But it seems to me 
> that some people on the list believe their opinions are facts - and 
> anybody elses opinions are only opinions.

Yep, you are. And it seems to me that you, and I, and most everyone, 
generally state(s) their opinion(s) pretty flatly (as if they were 
fact).

> My post was CANON DISCUSSION. My post took 12 solid hours of 
> research to do. I put a lot of work into it, and I was extremely 
> annoyed to be told to move related explicitly to a canon point. Yet 
> I was told to move it because it was too long.
<snip>

You are *really* stuck on this, aren't you?

> I'm asking that TBAY posts be held to the same standard as my post 
> was - or my post be given the same privileged treatment TBAY posts 
> are. One or the other.

So...one elf may have (we have not seen evidence and are being asked 
to rely on your ah, perception? memory?) judged a perfectly 
acceptable post of yours as not. Once. One stipulated and anonymous 
(as you not only don't have the message, but haven't identified an 
individual) elf. And you are basing your philosophy about all past 
and future TBAY posts and posters on that one experience. (Okay. Just 
so we're clear here.) And others here are supposed to be convinced by 
that. (BTW: didn't work for me.)

Do you still have that post? How 'bout if you were invited to 
resubmit it? At least provisionally? (Or is that a *really bad* idea?)

> If fluffy roleplaying based discussion of canon points is allowed 
> on the main list, so should hard science based discussion of canon 
> points be allowed on the list.
<snip>

Of course it should. I think it's obvious to everyone (?) that the 
facts as you present them indicate that one elf once made one bad 
call. I confess I forget if you mentioned this: did you ask for 
clarification?

> When you have a list with 11,000 members, I honestly do think that 
> if you've acknowledged that some posts are of limited interest, 
> then it is time to give them a list of their own - unless you're 
> lucky enough to use listprocessing software that allows for header 
> filtering, which yahoo doesn't.

You have a right to that opinion. Not only do I not agree with it, my 
meta-opinion is that you will not prevail. (All posts are of limited 
interest, since we are all interested in difference things to some 
degree or other; it's just that not all of them are as easy to "lump 
together" (or acknowledge) as, for instance, TBAY. Me, if I see one 
more "fill-in-the-blank," I'm gonna take an axe to my keyboard!)

> So because we're not going to ban everything, we shouldn't discuss 
> banning (or rather moving) anything?

I thought that's what we were doing.

> The issue under discussion here is TBAY - not other forms of 
> posting. Discussing those could be worthwhile, certainly, but I 
> don't see that it's particularly relevant to this discussion. If 
> the people in charge of this list want to raise other issues, I'd 
> be happy to stick my oar in on those if I have any opinion. (-8

IMO, it is entirely relevant to bring the other prefixed sorts of 
messages into this discussion as it relates to ghetto-izing (ouch; 
sorry) any one sort of prefixed messages. (If you don't think so, go 
google "First they came for the Jews." Apologies to anyone who might 
be offended by my choice of analogies; I do not mean in any way to 
trivialize anything related to the Pastor's very evocative prose.) 
This isn't just about TBAY, per se. For me, it boils down to: Does 
the value TBAY (FILK, FF) has to those who value it outweigh the 
antipathy of those who don't? As far as I can tell, leaving it in 
penalizes fewer people to a far lesser degree than kicking it out 
would.

Sandy




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 00:07:35 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:07:35 -0000
Subject: Anal Autodidactics Anonymous, was Re: The TBAY debate
In-Reply-To: <bqob6p+h9t8@...>
Message-ID: <bqoi87+pg9m@...>

Sandy:
> > P.S. Addressing Kneasy's projection that this area will become 
> > clogged with hoards of people bringing their every little 

Amanda: 
> "hordes"

Really? Hordes? <checking--yep, you're right, piles of people are 
hordes; it's piles of gold that are hoards> Oops. Thanks.

Sandy (who is uneducated, not uneducable)




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 00:18:16 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (gulplum)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 00:18:16 -0000
Subject: TBAY as an Intro only
In-Reply-To: <bqodkv+stc@...>
Message-ID: <bqois8+aqvh@...>

Laurasia wrote:

<SNIP>

> So, what does everyone think of the idea of having TBAY as an Intro 
> only? That way we still have all the fun of TBAY, but in a clearly 
> separate section of the post as the rest of the argument. You can 
> read it for the drama, or skip it for the facts...

It's a huge pity that I didn't see that message before I posted my 
most recent comments. I now have to go back on my promise (mainly to 
myself!) not to return to discussing TBAY, and also to expand on 
something I said in that post (which is not something I ever like 
doing). :-)

Laurasia has above highlighted the one thing she likes most about 
TBAY which is the one thing about it for which I have the least 
patience, and the one thing that hasn't featured in this debate. It 
seems that what the debate HAS been about up to now is what Laurasia 
dislikes about TBAY!

Namely, she likes the (IMO) long-winded and detailed introductions to 
TBAY which, from my perspective, are completely irrelevant to the 
format and are not what TBAYers have been defending. What TBAYers 
(including myself, which is scary!) have been defending is the 
discussion of theories by the use of extended metaphors. 

What Laurasia is defending is the fluff which I (and, from what I can 
tell, Shaun) would prefer TBAY posts to cut down.

So before this discussion goes completely off the rails, let's make 
sure that we're talking about the same thing here (because it seems 
as if we are not). This is what I understand to be the position:

What typifies a "true" (and IMO useful) TBAY post is the use of the 
extended metaphors of the Bay to confront two or more conflicting 
theories. 

A post along the lines of 

"GulPlum walked into the pub [blah, blah, blah for three or more 
paragraphs] and said: [standard discursive post, quoting canon where 
required, etc]" and ends with three paragraphs about drunkenly 
walking out of the pub or equivalent 

is NOT a TBAY post. It is a standard discursive post with loads and 
loads of fluff (on this occasion, I shall revert to my original term 
of "waffle") which is only nominally a TBAY post, but actually 
undermines what TBAY is all about and what makes it special.

That waffle has no place on the list. It is the equivalent of 
excessive quoting or irrelevant rambling. 

Unless, of course, I have COMPLETELY misunderstood this list for the 
last two years and the TBAY proponents' talk of extended metaphors 
and comparing themselves to great classical writers and philosophers 
is just so much hot air?

So can we please make sure that when we say "TBAY" we're actually 
talking about the same thing before we continue this debate?

-- 
GulPlum AKA Richard, who likes to establish that he's using the same 
language as his collocutors when it's necessary




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 00:50:26 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 2003 19:50:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] TBAY/This list/combining posts
Message-ID: <60AFA7E3.08ABD791.4B073798@...>

Actually, I disagree that this list will become Lucy's desk from Peanuts :-D .  What I *am* afraid of, I already see happening - personal attacks.  The recent posting between Eileen, Saitaina, and Sandy makes me worry.  Now, I'm low-level on the list...I'm not important - I'm not a Mod or an Elf or anyone of any consequence.  So I'm sure I'll get a Howler or two for this, but whatever.  TBAY is very personal to some people.  Attacking TBAY might come across as a personal attack on some people.  There's a line between your posts and your person that can become very blurry (I know, Kneasy's posts on how the family Harry saw in Snape's Pensieve might be Snape's wife and son made me flip out (-: ).  I'm actually rather saddened that we can't discuss this like, well, grown-ups.

Oryomai



From siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 00:54:21 2003
From: siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid (Susanne)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 16:54:21 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] TBAY/This list/combining posts
In-Reply-To: <bqofp2+jhao@...>
References: <bqofp2+jhao@...>
Message-ID: <91194845868.20031204165421@...>



Hi,

Thursday, December 04, 2003, 3:25:22 PM, hp at ... wrote:

> <snip> and I
> agree with Shaun that a *perception* that TBAY is being "privileged" 
> by not being reined in as much as standard discursive posts is 
> perfectly reasonable (OK, it's a perception I happen to share, so I 
> *would* say that, wouldn't I?). :-)

I agree with this.

While I don't mind TBAY posts on the main list all that much
(they are clearly marked, along with other subjects that, it
seems, have their share of list members who don't want to be
bothered with said subject. SHIP, for example), I've always
had the feelings that these posts are considered so
phenomenally creative and well written by some, that they deserve to
occupy a special place, outside some of the rules applied to
other posts (the pedantic, straight forward ones ;) ).

Almost as if they are the "celebrities" among the regular
posts.

This is, of course, just my personal perception.  I've read
some TBAY posts, but, being pretty straight forward and to
the point, the style is somewhat annoying to me, and several
times I gave up and deleted, before the actual point of the
theory became clear.

> Catlady is a perfect example of combined posts (sometimes, to be
> honest, perhaps she includes a few too many in each post) :-)
> because 
> they are collections of (apposite and valuable) short contributions.

What  concerns me in regards to combining is the fact that
all the topics included sometimes make for an extremely long
subject line, which my mail program just cuts off at a point
and continues with ....
To find out which subjects were actually addressed, I have
to plow through the whole post, which usually contains a
bunch of topics that don't interest me.

I prefer even a short reply as an individual post. It makes
it a lot easier to read what I'm interested in, and delete
the post with a subject I don't want to follow.

These are my feelings on those two subjects, and like
Gulplum, I don't expect the Admin to change everything to
suit *me* :)

I've been able to enjoy the list for a little over two years
now, mostly as a lurker, with only an occasional post.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at ...

Visit our pet rabbits: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/






From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 01:17:14 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:17:14 -0000
Subject: TBAY as an Intro only
In-Reply-To: <bqois8+aqvh@...>
Message-ID: <bqomaq+9ch1@...>

GulPlum:
> What TBAYers (including myself, which is scary!) have been 
> defending is the discussion of theories by the use of extended 
> metaphors. What Laurasia is defending is the fluff which I (and, 
> from what I can tell, Shaun) would prefer TBAY posts to cut down.
<snip>
> What typifies a "true" (and IMO useful) TBAY post is the use of the 
> extended metaphors of the Bay to confront two or more conflicting 
> theories. 

(Extended metaphors? Really? That's what that's called? 
Ummm...kidding, sort of.)

Why have a setting at all, then, or virtual characters populate it? 
(Although I know that some characters personify theories.) Why then 
don't those who want to employ extended metaphors do so and let them 
sink or swim (that was unintended) on their own? How effective is an 
extended metaphor which needs a spokesperson (beyond the ungarbed 
narrative voice of the poster)? It seems to me that TBAY must have 
grown out of more than a desire to have a forum in which to extend 
(and mix) metaphors (after all, the main list is an adequate forum 
for that, isn't it?). Isn't TBAY a group hallucination (maybe fantasy 
is a better word) which manifests for the sense of community as well 
as for its content? (Hmmm...that could be another possible motive (on 
the part of those who feel excluded, for whatever reason) for wanting 
to rid the main list of TBAY...)

Sandy, still didacting




From constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 01:24:05 2003
From: constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid (constancevigilance)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 01:24:05 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqo994+uni2@...>
Message-ID: <bqomnl+fklo@...>

On this list and OT-Chatter, there was a certain degree of outrage 
when it was discovered that, apparently, the most senior members had 
decided to segregate themselves off into an elite list. Whether or 
not that actually happened is not the point of this post. What I AM 
seeing is some members wanting to banish certain types of posts. The 
TBAY and FILK posts are generally more difficult to construct, and 
thus are written by the most energetic and often, more skilled 
posters. If those posts are banished to a seperate list, wouldn't 
that tend to cause those very posters to wander away from the main 
list even more? Wouldn't it almost ENSURE that an elite list sucked 
off the best and brightest?

I'm appending this to Pippin's message because she is one of our most 
talented posters, and does post in both TBAY and FILK format. The 
main list would suffer greatly if she were made to feel unwelcome. 
Neither of these formats generate a great deal of bandwidth. FILKs 
are especially benign because they don't even take a thread with them.

I do think that the filks make a canon point. I don't recall any that 
were simply off-topic. In any case, filks are subject to the same elf-
moderation as any post. It is true that the quality of filks can 
vary. But the quality of all posts vary, too. Picking on just these 
posts in that regard is unfair.

We filkers do try to identify our filk posts in the header. I don't 
think it is too much trouble for those who do not like filks to 
simply delete them. The rest of us can simply regard filks as a bit 
of color in the list. I think most of us do use the FILK: prefix, 
too. If the complaint is inconsistency of header, we can try harder 
to standardize.

Constance Vigilance, proud filker, but not in the same class as Caius 
or Pippin






From tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 01:48:08 2003
From: tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid (tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 20:48:08 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
Message-ID: <1e3.14e5036c.2d013dd8@...>

<In a message dated 12/4/2003 7:41:00 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
<msbeadsley at ... writes:
<But I *suspect* that a 
<large part of what bothers some people about TBAY is that it *is* 
<whimsical. As in, maybe, it's bad enough to be so involved in a 
<series of *children's books* without also having the added 
<embarrassment of admitting (even to oneself) that one is spending 
<large chunks of time somewhere people dare to be *silly* in their fun 
<with it. (Ring any bells, anyone?)
Umm, no offense, but why would anyone even think that. Most people that self 
concious would never pick up a Harry Potter book in the first place, let alone 
join an internet group devoted entirely to it. That has nothing to do with 
being annoyed with TBAY. I bet half the people on this list still watch Saturday 
morning cartoons and read other fantasy books. 

Its just the genre that we are annoyed with. Just like some people cannot 
watch horror films and others can't stand romance. Its just a personal 
preference. Honestly, if these people were that self conscious, they would have been 
offended by JK's description of a muggle, and would have put the book down then 
and there. 

    TBAY just makes some people gag, and they cannot help it, that's just the 
way they are. I also feel that if a person who has too long of a post 
containing only canon is not allowed to post, or that it should be moved elsewhere, 
then so should TBAY. 

Personally I do not want it to be moved, you can just suck it up and skip it. 
Its just that no one should say that the reason somebody does not like TBAY 
is because they have a lousy sense of humour, or because they have issues. 

Katie
sorry if I sounded nasty, but that is not called for.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 02:35:53 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:35:53 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqohnv+j06v@...>
References: <3FD045D9.27737.369287@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FD089B9.23503.90082A@localhost>

On 4 Dec 2003 at 23:58, msbeadsley wrote:

> You went from discussing posts to discussing *lines* in posts (yeah, 
> I noticed); so what you want is not just an analysis of *posts*, but 
> a line-by-line examination? And who is going to set up the criteria 
> for whether or not any individual line of any individual post 
> is "fluffy" or "canon-based," anyway? (This concern with "facts" just 
> gets better and better.)

No, I don't want a line by line examination. Because I think that would be 
incredibly to carry out and would involve the criteria you mention.

What I object to though is people claiming their position is simple fact in the 
absence of that type of evidence.

My view is that the differences here relate to different people's perceptions - I 
don't think they relate to facts.

Yet, I'm having to deal with people who insist that the canonicity of TBAY posts is 
a proven fact. I don't think it is. And I don't think it easily can be shown to be one.

I'm seeing an attitude from some people that their opinions are facts - and 
therefore are somehow more important than other people's opinions. Well, I 
happen to think everybody's opinion and perception is just as important as 
everyone elses.

The number of lines concerns me only because I don't think a post that takes 40 
lines as a lead up to a 2 line piece of canon is particularly canon based. And I 
personally think that quite a number of TBAY posts fall into that type of category - 
yes, they may contain canon - but 95% of what they contain has nothing to do 
with canon.

That's not just TBAY - it happens with other posts as well. It's just that I don't see 
anyone defending the practice when it comes to other posts.

Some TBAYers seem to take the view that if a TBAY post contains even the most 
minute piece of canon, that makes it acceptable.

Well, by that criteria, I suspect virtually every single MOVIE post contains at least 
a tiny piece of canon.

Yet, movie posts have been moved to another list. 

So I don't think the standard of just containing some canon is enough. I think 
posts need to be viewed as a whole.

> It might be useful to remember that basic emotional needs generally 
> concern a need or desire one has for oneself to be *included*; I 
> think a desire to *exclude* other persons or things must be somewhat 
> more complicated. Those wanting to exclude/partition off TBAY, 
> granted, probably are somewhat concerned with wanting to devote more 
> bytes/seconds on those things they're more interested in; they don't 
> want to "waste" time or computer resources. But I *suspect* that a 
> large part of what bothers some people about TBAY is that it *is* 
> whimsical. As in, maybe, it's bad enough to be so involved in a 
> series of *children's books* without also having the added 
> embarrassment of admitting (even to oneself) that one is spending 
> large chunks of time somewhere people dare to be *silly* in their fun 
> with it. (Ring any bells, anyone?)

The point is, the presence of TBAY posts on the main list IMHO, do *exlude* 
people. Injokes (and TBAY is, IMHO, full of injokes) serve to exclude anyone who 
isn't in on the joke.

Are some people against TBAY because it's whimsical? Maybe. But I'm not. 
That's got nothing to do with my problems with it.

> The difference, again, is inclusion vs. exclusion. Those who like 
> TBAY are not asking for anything (press "delete" or "next" is closer 
> to nothing than anything, IMO) from those who don't other than to be 
> ignored; (some of) those who don't are after *a change in the status 
> quo*, based on *their* idiosyncrasies.


Actually those who like TBAY are asking for something. They are asking people 
who receive their messages via e-mail to download mail they are not interested in. 
They are asking people who prefer to discuss matters in a straightforward fashion 
to accept that at any moment, somebody might decided to take one of their 
messages and fork the thread into one they don't feel comfortable with.

What they are asking may be totally reasonable - but the suggestion that that they 
don't ask anything is simply wrong, in my opinion.

Am I after a change in the status quo? Not particularly. What I am asking for is 
that people don't just assume that the status quo is automatically a good thing. 
Just because things have been done a particular way in the past is not a reason 
they have to continue that way. I'm not asking that the status quo be changed - I'm 
merely asking that the possibility of change not be automatically dismissed.

If TBAY remains on the list, that will be fine with me. I'll accept that a decision has 
been taken by those in authority on the list that it should remain.

What I object to, though, is what seems to me to be a belief by some who like 
TBAY that those of us who don't should simply shut up and not make our views 
known.

I've no problem with people disagreeing with me on this - but I have a serious 
problem when they try to claim their opinions are somehow more factual than 
mine.

> Do you honestly think anyone is trying to change your mind? I don't. 
> I think they *are* trying to make sure that your opinion and those of 
> like-minded folks are not the ones which prevail.

And I have no problem with that - if that is all they are doing. But I am not going to 
accept them saying something is a fact if I do not believe it is a fact.

They are entitled to their opinions. They should not, however, in my opinion, claim 
their opinions are proven facts.

Doing so, to me, looks like an attempt to stifle discussion by claiming some 
people have facts, and some only have opinions.

> Absent the analysis we know is not going to happen regarding whether 
> or not TBAY posts are disproportionately lacking in canon, your 
> opinion is just that (and has no more and no little weight than 
> those, like mine, which oppose yours). Anyway, what "belongs on a 
> discussion list" is what membership consensus (or majority) says 
> belongs (with a little input from ADMIN, of course <g>).

Actually I think what belongs on a discussion list is what those running the list say 
belongs. And I'll be satisifed with whatever their decision is because by asking the 
question and giving us this forum to discuss it on, they are showing they are 
willing to consider what the list membership wants.

My point *IS* that my opinion is just my opinion - and has no more and no little 
weight than anyone else. And because I am aware of that, I have explicitly stated 
that my posts are based on my opinions and my perceptions. It seems to me that 
my being open about this has been used by at least one poster as an excuse to 
dismiss what I have to say - by simply claiming that there is 'really no doubt' that 
their opinions are correct, no matter what I think.

And that annoys me.

> > I'm as entitled to my opinion as anyone else. But it seems to me 
> > that some people on the list believe their opinions are facts - and 
> > anybody elses opinions are only opinions.
> 
> Yep, you are. And it seems to me that you, and I, and most everyone, 
> generally state(s) their opinion(s) pretty flatly (as if they were 
> fact).

Actually, I don't think I do.

Virtually every post I have made in this thread has included phrases like 'I think'. 
'That's my opinion', 'And personally I think', 'My personal view',
'That's not my perception.', 'That's my perception, and it 
may be wrong', and the ubiquitous 'IMHO'.

I actually tend to be very careful to make the difference between what I believe to 
be fact and what I believe to be my opinion, very clear in most of my posts. That 
comes from my job where the difference is considered absolutely critical at times, 
and I don't expect others to be as obsessive about it as I am.

But when people start explicitly claiming things to be fact, and to me they seem to 
be simply their own unproven opinions, I don't think it's obsessive to react to that.

> > My post was CANON DISCUSSION. My post took 12 solid hours of 
> > research to do. I put a lot of work into it, and I was extremely 
> > annoyed to be told to move related explicitly to a canon point. Yet 
> > I was told to move it because it was too long.
> <snip>
> 
> You are *really* stuck on this, aren't you?

I'm annoyed about it yes. I don't see why my posts should be censored and TBAY 
be allowed to get away with far more egregious behaviour.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect TBAYers to be held to the same standard 
I've been held to.

One fair standard is what I want to see - and I don't think TBAY posts are held to 
the same standard I have been.

> So...one elf may have (we have not seen evidence and are being asked 
> to rely on your ah, perception? memory?) judged a perfectly 
> acceptable post of yours as not. Once. One stipulated and anonymous 
> (as you not only don't have the message, but haven't identified an 
> individual) elf. And you are basing your philosophy about all past 
> and future TBAY posts and posters on that one experience. (Okay. Just 
> so we're clear here.) And others here are supposed to be convinced by 
> that. (BTW: didn't work for me.)

No, not once. It's happened more than once (four times, I think) - that incident is 
just the one that most annoys me because I spent a great deal of time on that 
post, and explicitly read through all the administrivia I could find to make sure it 
was acceptable before I posted it, and I still got called on it.

The others were posts I'd spent a few minutes on, and I wasn't really that worried 
about them. But that post is the one that most annoyed me. 

Secondly, this list is not the place for me to post those messages. But I have been 
asked today by one of the list elves to forward the message in question to her and 
I have done so.

It's not one experience I'm talking about here - just because I use one post as an 
example, doesn't mean it's the only thing that irritates me.
 
> Do you still have that post? How 'bout if you were invited to 
> resubmit it? At least provisionally? (Or is that a *really bad* idea?)

I still have the post and I have today forwarded it to a list elf who asked to see it.

I'm not really that interested in resubmitting it. I don't really care if it's allowed on 
the list or not. What concerns me is that all messages be held to the same 
standard. There should be, as much as possible, one standard for all messages 
on the list. I was told I shouldn't have posted a particular message for reasons 
that I have no problem with - provided those reasons are also applied to other 
posters to the list including TBAY posters.

Now, is it possible my post was rejected by mistake? Sure - maybe it was. And if I 
am told that was the case, my position on TBAY would change considerably.

But e-mails I sent to the list owner address asking for clarification of the list 
policies went unanswered. So until I hear otherwise, I assume that there is a list 
standard and my post violated it. Which is fine. Provided other posters are also 
being held to that standard.

> Of course it should. I think it's obvious to everyone (?) that the 
> facts as you present them indicate that one elf once made one bad 
> call. I confess I forget if you mentioned this: did you ask for 
> clarification?

Yes, I did. And received no answer. Now, maybe that is going to change now - if 
so I, for one, will consider this thread to have been worthwhile.

Now maybe there was a mistake made in my case - with the volume of messages 
sent to the list, I could certainly understand the occasional mistake being made.

But I can't assume a mistake was made simply because I don't agree with the 
decision.

> You have a right to that opinion. Not only do I not agree with it, my 
> meta-opinion is that you will not prevail. (All posts are of limited 
> interest, since we are all interested in difference things to some 
> degree or other; it's just that not all of them are as easy to "lump 
> together" (or acknowledge) as, for instance, TBAY. Me, if I see one 
> more "fill-in-the-blank," I'm gonna take an axe to my keyboard!)

I don't think I'll prevail either - but that's not going to stop me saying it if I want to 
(unless of course, the list administrators tell us all to shut up, in which case I will 
comply)

> IMO, it is entirely relevant to bring the other prefixed sorts of 
> messages into this discussion as it relates to ghetto-izing (ouch; 
> sorry) any one sort of prefixed messages. (If you don't think so, go 
> google "First they came for the Jews." Apologies to anyone who might 
> be offended by my choice of analogies; I do not mean in any way to 
> trivialize anything related to the Pastor's very evocative prose.) 
> This isn't just about TBAY, per se. For me, it boils down to: Does 
> the value TBAY (FILK, FF) has to those who value it outweigh the 
> antipathy of those who don't? As far as I can tell, leaving it in 
> penalizes fewer people to a far lesser degree than kicking it out 
> would.

And I agree that's perfectly possible. But that's a decision for the list 
administration to make after they've seen all opinions. I'm giving mine.

 
Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 02:41:58 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 13:41:58 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqodr1+a0cr@...>
References: <3FD045D9.27737.369287@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FD08B26.31665.959BAD@localhost>

On 4 Dec 2003 at 22:52, davewitley wrote:

> I can understand the frustration here.  However, I don't believe 
> this case advances the issue.  I'm afraid don't remember the case in 
> question, and can't speak for the admin team any more, but I believe 
> the canon criterion essentially stands on HPFGU.  I believe specific 
> past cases, which may turn out to have been errors by the admin 
> team - we have made them - can't serve as the basis for determining 
> list policy.

And I would agree - I don't believe single cases should serve as the basis for 
determining list policy. But I do think they can stand as evidence of how the policy 
is being interpreted and enforced.

And, yes, there may have been errors made - but I attempted to seek clarification 
by writing to the listowner address (I confess I had lost the name of the listelf I 
was supposed to keep when I joined the list) and received no reply.

So I'm left with the assumption that my post did violate list policy - which I don't 
have a problem with. Provided the policy is enforced fairly.

Now, today, someone has e-mailed me and asked to see the post in question. If 
I'm told there was a mistake made with my post, that would change my position on 
TBAY by a reasonable amount. I still wouldn't like it myself, but at least it wouldn't 
seem to me that a double standard was at work.



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 02:46:56 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 02:46:56 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <1e3.14e5036c.2d013dd8@...>
Message-ID: <bqorj0+en8m@...>

> <msbeadsley at y... writes:
> <But I *suspect* that a 
> <large part of what bothers some people about TBAY is that it *is* 
> <whimsical. As in, maybe, it's bad enough to be so involved in a 
> <series of *children's books* without also having the added 
> <embarrassment of admitting (even to oneself) that one is spending 
> <large chunks of time somewhere people dare to be *silly* in their 
> <fun with it. (Ring any bells, anyone?)

> Umm, no offense, but why would anyone even think that. Most people 
> that self concious would never pick up a Harry Potter book in the 
> first place, let alone join an internet group devoted entirely to 
> it.

Uh, it seems to me that you are making several *major* assumptions 
here. I never said that those reacting in that way knew it; I think 
it's likelier they don't. Many (probably most) people aren't 
conscious of being self-conscious, or what they're that way about.

> That has nothing to do with being annoyed with TBAY. I bet half the 
> people on this list still watch Saturday morning cartoons and read 
> other fantasy books.

I can only speak for myself, and the answers are "never," and "all 
the time."

> Its just the genre that we are annoyed with. Just like some people 
> cannot watch horror films and others can't stand romance. Its just 
> a personal preference.

Probably, for those who say, "Oh, when I see the TBAY prefix I just 
hit "next" or "delete." It's anyone who might seem very anxious to 
get TBAY off the main list (and I'm not even *sure* any such exist) I 
suspect of deeper stuff.

> Honestly, if these people were that self conscious, they would have 
> been offended by JK's description of a muggle, and would have put 
> the book down then and there. 

More assumptions here, IMO. And I cannot imagine anyone reading JKR's 
depiction of Muggles and thinking "Hey, she means me." JKR writes 
Muggles as "THEM" (as opposed to "US") from (literally) the first 
word of the first book.

> TBAY just makes some people gag, and they cannot help it, that's 
> just the way they are. I also feel that if a person who has too 
> long of a post containing only canon is not allowed to post, or 
> that it should be moved elsewhere, then so should TBAY.

How did we get from "annoyed with TBAY," to "makes <some> people 
gag"? That's a pretty strong indictment (especially since you just 
suggested that the very carefully and lovingly crafted efforts of 
some of your fellow list members make some other list members all but 
throw up).

You took an account of how and why a non-TBAY post was rejected at 
face value because it suited you, whereas what I said (which included 
an "I suspect" and a "maybe") warrants that you state, "that is not 
called for." What is it that isn't called for? My opinion, consisting 
of a *theory* about what may be going on behind the scenes with 
generic anti-TBAY someones? My stating of same?

I meant to be *thought*-provoking, honest...

Sandy




From tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 03:07:48 2003
From: tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid (tiamik72 at katie_wible.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 22:07:48 EST
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
Message-ID: <27.4cce0f44.2d015084@...>

Sandy stated:
You took an account of how and why a non-TBAY post was rejected at 
face value because it suited you, whereas what I said (which included 
an "I suspect" and a "maybe") warrants that you state, "that is not 
called for." What is it that isn't called for? My opinion, consisting 
of a *theory* about what may be going on behind the scenes with 
generic anti-TBAY someones? My stating of same?
Its not that your opinion is not called for. I may be wrong, but it sounds 
like you're  trying to say that people who do not like TBAY lack something 
important, like a sense of humor. There are many justifiable reasons for a person 
not to like TBAY, it does not have to stem from some deep unknown 
consciousness. ( yes, some might,but the majority, no) It could simply be annoying, like it 
is for me. Im not trying to offend anyone, and I could honestly care less 
about hitting the "skip" button, because i usually do, no complaints. 

If you like to do TBAY, good for you. You should not just assume that if 
somebody does not like what you like, that they have something wrong with them, or 
that they lack a sense of humor. That just really offended me, and i don't 
really no why. And I already said that I support TBAY, and that it should not 
have to be removed off the list. It was just the way I felt about you thinking 
that I, and others,are not whimsical enough to understand and appeciate TBAY. 

Katie


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 03:15:39 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 19:15:39 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
References: <bqorj0+en8m@...>
Message-ID: <04cc01c3bade$189f3960$503d1c40@...>

Sandy wrote:

<It's anyone who might seem very anxious to
get TBAY off the main list (and I'm not even
*sure* any such exist) I
suspect of deeper stuff.>

Umm, love, considering I read many children's
books, participate in role-plays, watch the
Disney channel and cartoons constantly, spend
time playing board games and interacting with
small children...I don't think I have issues
with whimsy.  I do have issues with TBAY and
want it off the list...so no, those two don't
go together.

I find you're being rude to those of us who
don't want to see TBAY on the Main List when
I have not been.  Accusing me of deeper
issues is not something I'm happy with
especially when it's in direct opposition of
the very fabric of myself as a person.

Saitaina
****
Brave and bold they're not.  They ain't the
bravest heroes...but they're the only ones
we've got.


http://www.livejournal.com/users/saitaina

"No, one day I'm going to look back on all
this and plow face-first into a tree because
I was looking the wrong bloody way. And I'll
still be having a better day than I am
today."




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 03:15:10 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 14:15:10 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqnurp+so9o@...>
References: <3FCF91AB.12491.ABAF25@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FD092EE.429.9DB4B@localhost>

On 4 Dec 2003 at 18:36, msbeadsley wrote:

> This is a *social* group; the variety (along with the stunning degree 
> of general intelligence) is what makes it so terrific. And do those 
> who love TBAY just read and respond to TBAY? Don't they participate 
> throughout the group? Someone said that segregating TBAY would kill 
> it. I agree. (I'm hearing Gollum's voice from TTT now: "That would 
> kill us--*kill* us!") But I also think that, as it became moribund, 
> those trying to keep it alive would be missed on the main board; and 
> they might not come back. It that what you want? Although I am not 
> primarily a TBAY-er, the notion of kicking it off the main board 
> bothers me very much. Because HPfGU is not *about* the pedantic 
> discussions, is it? Isn't it about the people having them? (That's 
> what I'm there for.) And that includes the TBAYers. And the FILKers. 
> And the FFers. (Hmmm...it occurs to me that I've been each of those, 
> at least briefly--as well as participating in my share of pedantry.)

I'd like to point out that moving TBAY to a separate list does not mean moving 
TBAYers off the main list. I'm on HPFGU, and OT-Chatter, and Movies. I'd almost 
certainly join a TBAY list as well.

There's no reason why those on a separate TBAY list should be missed on the 
main list, because I assume that they would still be on that list as well. And I 
assume they'd make just as many postings - unless of course the TBAY list 
became so active as to take up all their time.

My view is that TBAY itself would probably benefit from a separate list. I seem to 
have a higher opinion of its resilience than many of the people involved in it do. I 
certainly don't want to see TBAYers off the main list, nor do I want to see their 
pastime die out.
 
> > I also think 'organised' whimsy is less whimsical than whimsy that 
> > just happens (-8
> 
> Organized? TBAY? The "(-8" means you're kidding, right? ;-)

Even riots get organised sometimes (-8.

TBAY isn't that organised, I admit - but it is a posting style with its own guidelines, 
so I think describing it as having some degree of organisation is reasonable.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 03:18:54 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda Geist)
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2003 21:18:54 -0600
Subject: TBAY and personal styles
Message-ID: <005801c3bade$843e7e60$f85baacf@...>

I wrote a post some time back, to the main list, I think, but I'm far from
certain. It involved the fact that some people tend to process information
objectively/logically, and some people tend to process it
subjectively/emotionally.

I think part of the TBAY disputes is this. It's a different style. The
reason it gets so heated--and to be honest, I've never seen any discussion
of the merits of TBAY that didn't--is that it does always seem to call into
question the validity of these different means of naturally processing
information.

Everyone's a mix--but I think that those who tend to like TBAY are those of
us who lean toward emotion. We are also the shippers (although I still deny
Snape/Lily is a ship--you can love someone without having a relationship).
And the canon content and value of the form is *intuitive* to those who
enjoy and use it; it's self-evident, why don't these other people *get* it?
It can't be the posts; they must be attacking the way I enjoy this list; it
must be my personal style they're faulting.

And those who lean more toward logic and objective analysis, the Davids and
Caiuses, the ones who make me nervous when I try to answer them--it's just
as clearly intuitive and self-evident that TBAY is a waste of time; fluff.
And critiques of them for not "getting it" or liking it, because it *can't*
be that self-evident stuff, shift off into personal reactions as well.

I think there's room for both styles, myself. Because most of us are a mix,
and have moods. Some days I feel like tackling a long TBAY post; some days I
don't. Just like any day on the list. Yeah, I run a certain risk of
restating something that has already been said if I jump in later, when I've
been skipping--but that risk occurs in either style of thread.

This discussion may be moot--TBAY occurred, I believe, as a response to the
doldrums of waiting around for book 5. It really was an insanely long wait.
There was nothing new under the sun. I remember rejoicing and congratulating
on the list when someone had a New Thought about something. It just didn't
happen. TBAY was an outlet, a way to make the list fun and fresh.

No, I don't think it was conscious; I think it was a natural evolution,
grounded in earlier list in-jokes (I myself bobbed along in an inner tube
(because Snape/Lily wasn't a ship) beside one of the first ships, towing my
little ice chest of margaritas, before the bay existed. The references are
built from the creative closing lines or intros to posts.

But we have new canon now, and TBAY isn't as prominent; it's fun, but it's
not the escape it used to be for many of us. Much like the heyday of movies
during the war. Or so I perceive.

Just another thought.

~Amanda in her personal capacity
--------------------
Those who cannot hear the music, think the dancers daft.




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 11:26:48 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 03:26:48 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
References: <27.4cce0f44.2d015084@...>
Message-ID: <00b101c3bb22$abff18d0$a6706751@kathryn>



Katie

If you like to do TBAY, good for you. You should not just assume that if
somebody does not like what you like, that they have something wrong with
them, or
that they lack a sense of humor. That just really offended me, and i don't
really no why. And I already said that I support TBAY, and that it should
not
have to be removed off the list. It was just the way I felt about you
thinking
that I, and others,are not whimsical enough to understand and appeciate
TBAY.

K

I have to agree with Katie. I know Sandy (uh was it Sandy? if not sorry,
I've lost track) said 'some people' when she made the comment but it really
did sound like she felt that there's something wrong with those of us who
aren't keen on TBAY (I waver on the subject I have to admit. In theory I
like it, but in practice I usually delete all the messages and find them a
total waste of space). I also disagree with whoever it was who said that
TBAY posts are harder to write than normal list posts - I think that rather
depends on the post. S/He was comparing them to fiction or rp, well I do
both and yet I still find that certain posts to the list (not all of them by
any means, sometimes I dash list posts off without having to put much
thought in at all if it's something I feel I know a lot about) take me a lot
more time and effort to write than the equivalent length of fiction or rp
would take me, especially if I'm arguing with someone who is putting their
point intelligently and persuasively. I dislike the suggestion that TBAY
posts are somehow automatically 'better' than non-TBAY posts. I agree there
are some very skilled writers in TBAY - but I don't find their non-TBAY
posts to be of a lesser quality than the posts I've read of theirs in the
TBAY style. I think how 'difficult' a post is to write and how 'good' it is
are dependent on the topic and the author and are completely irrelevent to
the discussion of TBAY. After all it's the style most people are discussing
not the quality.

K




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 03:30:58 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 03:30:58 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <27.4cce0f44.2d015084@...>
Message-ID: <bqou5i+g0lc@...>

> If you like to do TBAY, good for you. You should not just assume 
> that if somebody does not like what you like, that they have 
> something wrong with them, or that they lack a sense of humor. That 
> just really offended me, and i don't really no why.

Well, okay. I don't think that's what I said. And it's certainly not 
what I meant. (I was referring to reactions way stronger than "not 
liking what I like.") Thanks for clearing that up.

Pax!
Sandy




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 04:36:24 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 04:36:24 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <04cc01c3bade$189f3960$503d1c40@...>
Message-ID: <bqp208+g52a@...>

> Sandy wrote:
> <It's anyone who might seem very anxious to
> get TBAY off the main list (and I'm not even
> *sure* any such exist) I suspect of deeper stuff.>

<snip>
> I find you're being rude to those of us who
> don't want to see TBAY on the Main List when
> I have not been.  Accusing me of deeper
> issues is not something I'm happy with
> especially when it's in direct opposition of
> the very fabric of myself as a person.

I didn't address (and wasn't thinking of) you or anyone else in 
particular. (So it's hard for me to understand just who it is you 
think I'm being rude to.) But I do think that anyone who is *really* 
determined to get TBAY off the main list *must* have deeper issues 
(as no one has articulated anything I find sufficient to explain it 
(when measured against the feelings I *do* understand of those who 
want TBAY to stay right where it is that I *know* TBAY's opponents 
are well aware of). And before you say that my failure to understand 
does not impact the relevance or validity of such feelings, I will 
invite anyone who'd like to, to enlighten me). It's my opinion. I may 
be wrong, or annoying, or upsetting, or all three, and more. (Maybe 
I'm just being an idiot; it's been known to happen.) I do hope I 
haven't been rude; I wasn't trying to be rude (if I had been (oh 
boy!) I'll bet I'd already have an ADMIN message). But that 
(rudeness), is also a matter of perception; and while I apologize if 
I was, and am certainly sorry you took it that way, I'd 
like "feedback" from someone who's a little more neutral on the 
subject at hand before I regret or reconsider my behavior.

Sandy




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 19:44:19 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 11:44:19 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: More About TBAY
References: <bqp208+g52a@...>
Message-ID: <005e01c3bb68$2cef0280$a6706751@kathryn>



Sandy


I didn't address (and wasn't thinking of) you or anyone else in
particular. (So it's hard for me to understand just who it is you
think I'm being rude to.) But I do think that anyone who is *really*
determined to get TBAY off the main list *must* have deeper issues
(as no one has articulated anything I find sufficient to explain it
(when measured against the feelings I *do* understand of those who
want TBAY to stay right where it is that I *know* TBAY's opponents
are well aware of). And before you say that my failure to understand
does not impact the relevance or validity of such feelings, I will
invite anyone who'd like to, to enlighten me).

K

At least a couple of peole have explained quite clearly *why* they feel TBAY
has no place on the list. I'm sorry you don't understand those reasons but I
think deciding that when they give those reasons they're obviously trying to
cover up some deeper agenda and suggest there must be something wrong with
them is unfair. If you don't understand the arguments they've made - try
getting them to explain them. Frankly I don't think the reasons people have
given for why TBAY has to stay on the main list are particularly 'good'
reasons (ie they don't convince me), but I accept that that's how they feel
and I'm not accusing them of having any deeper agenda. As with any topic you
just have to do people the courtesy of believing them when they say that
they feel very strongly about something even when it makes no sense to you.
This attitude of assuming they have 'issues' they're afraid to articulate,
especially when you imply that it's because they are somehow flawed (ie they
have no sense of whimsy or have had a sense of humour bypass), *is*
offensive. And I'm sorry if you don't agree with that and I'm quite willing
to believe you when you say you didn't mean it that way, but since at least
3 people have now pointed out to you that it was insulting, you're just
going to have to realise that a slightly more careful choice of words might
be prudent in future - after all if people get the impression you're trying
to shoot down your opponents rather than their arguments they do tend to
assume it's because you don't have any persuasive arguments of your own.
(I'm *not* saying that you don't, although like I say I haven't heard any
reasons that convince me there's a good reason why TBAY couldn't have its
own list, I am simply saying that that is the impression you give when you
seem to have resorted to implying that people who disagree with you have
some kind of problem)

K

"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."




From tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 12:16:59 2003
From: tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid (Tim Regan)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 12:16:59 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <005e01c3bb68$2cef0280$a6706751@kathryn>
Message-ID: <SEA2-DAV73hsKd6QR7j00002a77@...>

Hi All,
 
As I've stated already,  I'm not a TBAY fan. But, it seems to me that many
TBAY fans are list oldies, i.e. people who have been active posters on the
main list from the early days (not me, I joined in Spring 2002). I love the
sense of continuity and history given to the list by these long-serving
members, so it's important to me that it still feels like home to them.
Therefore I'd like us to continue to welcome TBAYs on the main list. 
 
Cheers,
 
Dumbledad.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 15:19:36 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:19:36 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <SEA2-DAV73hsKd6QR7j00002a77@...>
Message-ID: <bqq7m8+hfb5@...>

Dumbledad wrote:
  
> As I've stated already,  I'm not a TBAY fan. 

(reasoning snipped)

> Therefore I'd like us to continue to welcome TBAYs on the main 
list. 

I think the spirit of this post is excellent.  However, I'd like to 
make a tangential point about the nature of the TBAY post, 
illustrated by the first statement above.

I may have forgotten something, but Dumbledad's statement that he is 
not a TBAY fan took the form of a TBAY post involving Snape and Binns.

The first time I read it, I assumed it stated and rationalised a 
personal preference for baldly stated, as opposed to TBAY style, 
posting.

While reading some of the responses, however, I went back and re-read 
it, and wondered.  I wondered if in fact it was meant to say that 
people of a particular *type* - typified by Snape and Binns - do not 
like the TBAY style.  Indeed, the Snape character described *HPFGU* 
as ridiculous or preposterous or some such: which might be taken to 
imply that the point of view put into his mouth about TBAY was that 
of someone unsympathetic to HPFGU as a whole.

So I wondered if it was intended as a subtle shot across the bows of 
those who want to restrict TBAY on the main list in some way: that 
they are bitter and twisted like Snape, or dull and lifeless like 
Binns.

It seems I was wrong (perhaps fortunately), but I think this does 
illustrate how material which is apparently 'fluff' on a first 
reading may in fact be an integral part of a canon post.  It also 
illustrates how a sophisticated poster might want to use this sort of 
format to introduce ambiguity into their message, so that two people 
might come away from the same post with diametrically opposed 
conclusions.  (I think the ability to generate that sort of ambiguity 
is a good thing, myself.)

Does this have any bearing on issues of list administration and 
policy?  I think it does, though perhaps not strongly so.  I think it 
means that there is a fairly organic spectrum of canon based 
discussion, which even the use of a prefix does damage to, and 
therefore I'd like to see TBAY posting continue on the main list.

Shaun raised the issue of the netiquette of 'forking' threads from 
one style into another - I'd like to address this in a separate post 
later when I have more time.

Just in case anyone missed it first time around, I'll repeat I'm no 
longer a member of the admin team.

David, who has twice tried and failed to be able to read 'Huckleberry 
Finn'




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 15:55:37 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 15:55:37 -0000
Subject: About TBAY : what is expected from a listee ?
Message-ID: <bqq9pp+espv@...>


Hello everybody, the weather's nice today, isn't it ?

Well, I have read all those TBAY-war-related messages (up to message 
176), while all the time trying to figure out my own feelings on the 
matter. So here goes.

When I came back to this list, earlier this year, it took me quite a 
while to start to understand what ever was going on with TBAY. And 
even longer to start getting a grasp on it. And still I often find 
myself going "???" when I read a TBAY post. So do I like TBAY posts ? 
I'd say rarely, and it depends. It depends on many things.

The most obvious one is the quality of the individual posts : how 
well do they read ? But that goes for any post.

Another one is their pertinence : was it really necessary to use the 
TBAY format, which, as many have pointed, contains a lot of fluff ? 
When I see a TBAY post where the format doesn't bring anything to the 
matter, I am a bit annoyed. Unless it is *very* well written :-)

And another one is their accessibility : how easy are they to 
understand when you're not a fanatic TBAYer ? And that one is a 
biggie. I'm not sure TBAY fans realize how much background and how 
specific a mindset are necessary to understand some TBAY posts. You 
have to know the theories, you have to know their personas, you have 
to know what happened before (some theorists are nice and give enough 
background info for any novice to understand, but some don't, which 
creates a *very* uncomfortable feeling of being left out) and finally 
you have to figure out the metaphors and other symbolic stuff (which 
I don't).

And I'm not even talking about *writing* a TBAY post...

The same goes for FILKs, by the way. It's a different format, which 
requires specific knowledge and likings. But the problem is not as 
acute with FILKs, since as far as I know that format is very rarely 
used for debating.

So my question is : what is expected of a basic listee ? When I got 
on the list, 3 years ago, I had the feeling that the requirements 
were quite simple:
- One had to read and speak English well enough to communicate 
feelings and opinions with others.
- One had to know what "canon-related discussions" meant. Well, 
actually, this one didn't even exist in my time, but it was kind of 
obvious to most members.
- And one had to have enough self-restraint not to insult the fellow 
list-members, and be polite in every circumstances.
And if one respected all 3 conditions, one could expect to enjoy 
*fully* the discussions on the list.

But it seems to me like those conditions have hardened since. Among 
others, the following conditions have come up :
- One has to read the *whole* material offered to them, *and* disgest 
it ! That material includes but is not restricted to : the HBFile 
(that one is logical), the Fantastic Posts, the Hypothetic Alley and 
ALL the archives !!
- As a consequence : one had better be on top of every theory that 
ever came up out there, and know everything that's already been said 
about anything.
(As a consequence of those two, we get A LOT of people beginning 
their post with "I don't know if that topic has already been 
discussed, I searched the Archives but couldn't find anything, so 
anyway I'm sorry if this has been discussed before and if it has can 
someone please point me to the right messages, thank you". That gets 
boring after a while, and it gives me the horrible feeling that this 
list is anything but welcoming...)
- And a third condition is : one has to familiarize oneself with 
unusual formats like TBAY and FILK, unless one prefers to miss out on 
some discussions. And if one just can't "get it", one will have to 
skip those threads.
And *that one* feels *particularly* unwelcoming to me...

So I repeat my question : what is expected of a listee ? To put it 
more simply : what is expected of *me* ? Is it not enough that I have 
some knowledge of English (which is not my mother language), that I 
know my books pretty well, and that I try to remain courteous (my 
apologies to anyone I might have offended in the past) ? Apparently 
not, since it's not enough to allow me to participate in ALL threads.

In other words, there are threads on this list that require not only 
tremendous specific knowledge, but also additional capacities or 
specific mindsets, just to participate in and enjoy. There's a word 
for that, it's discrimination.

Unless of course the basic standards have changed. Have they ?

If they have, then this should be mentioned, and members should be 
warned that if they do not meet those new requitements they won't be 
able to understand everything that's going on. Hard but fair. And it 
would probably reduce the membership of this list quite drastically 
for sure.

If they haven't, then discriminatory behaviours shouldn't be allowed 
to take hold. And people who request that other people have a 
specific mindset to understand them and who don't care about being 
understandable by everyone should be reminded what this list is 
about. If they want to have their own fun, they can go and create 
their own list somewhere else.

Note : this is not just a matter of *knowledge*, but most of all a 
matter of capacity and mindset. Discrimination by knowledge is 
impossible to avoid. When someone gets talking about alchemy, for 
example, they get me lost. But I don't hold it against them, because 
the only difference between them and me is a real-life learned thing. 
With TBAY it's different. In order to be able to just understand some 
TBAY posts (let alone participe), I not only have to acquire a great 
load of specific background, but I also have to develop (if that's 
possible) a very specific mindset. And that's unfair to me.

Or am I a below-average listee ?

Del





From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 16:06:47 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 16:06:47 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqq7m8+hfb5@...>
Message-ID: <bqqaen+d67k@...>

"davewitley" wrote:

> So I wondered if it was intended as a subtle shot across the bows 
> of those who want to restrict TBAY on the main list in some way: 
> that they are bitter and twisted like Snape, or dull and lifeless 
> like Binns.

I, Del, grimly answer :

And after that we're going to wonder why some people get paranoid and 
feel attacked when the original poster didn't mean anything bad...

> It seems I was wrong (perhaps fortunately), but I think this does 
> illustrate how material which is apparently 'fluff' on a first 
> reading may in fact be an integral part of a canon post.  It also 
> illustrates how a sophisticated poster might want to use this sort 
> of format to introduce ambiguity into their message, so that two 
> people might come away from the same post with diametrically 
> opposed conclusions.  (I think the ability to generate that sort of 
> ambiguity is a good thing, myself.)

And I, Del, think it's a very dangerous thing. You used the 
terms "subtle", "sophisticated" and "ambiguity". Those terms are 
awfully dangerous terms when they refer to posts and posters. They 
are wonderful when they refer to the canon : I just love the way JKR 
has us thinking everything and its opposite. But when it comes to 
posts, to what people say and do on this list, I think that "clearer 
is better". We have enough misunderstandings, enough bruised egos and 
hurt feelings, without people *intentionally* making ambiguous 
statements and subtle irony.

Del, who's not sure she likes being compared to either a "bitter and 
twisted Snape" or a "dull and lifeless" Binns




From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 17:06:18 2003
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:06:18 -0000
Subject: More About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <005e01c3bb68$2cef0280$a6706751@kathryn>
Message-ID: <bqqdua+f92e@...>

Speaking for myself again:

One thing I learned back in art school was that it's very difficult
to criticize anyone's taste without hurting their feelings. 

 It's one thing for me to say that fantasy casting, to pick my own 
particular bugbear, doesn't appeal to me, and that *I* have 
trouble taking it seriously. It is quite another to say, even IMHO, 
that it's a load of old tosh. To imply that everyone who likes 
fantasy casting has a screw loose would  hardly be flattering.

It might not be amiss to add a note here about why the Movie list 
was spun off instead of being given a prefix on the main list. It 
was not because the List Elves felt that movie talk would be too  
fluffy. Rather, we anticipated a lot of people would want to 
discuss the Movie who hadn't read the books at all. We wanted 
to preserve the List as a book discussion group. So we had a 
very hard and fast rule about all movie references being on the 
movie list -- and then JKR herself made hash of the formula by 
comparing the books to the movies in an interview. 

What that points up is that any distinction between what's 
relevant to  canon and what's not is going to be arbitrary. 
If there's a perceived difference in the posting standards for TBay  
I think it has more to do with the shortcomings of the moderation 
process than with TBay per se. 

The standards *are*  different between moderated and 
unmoderated posts. Moderation is an instruction process, and 
just as you can flunk your driver's test for drifting over the speed 
limit even though  on the highway people do it all the time, 
moderated posts get sent back for flaws that would be passed 
over in a regular post. 

This isn't ideal, but the idea is that by the time someone is 
released from moderated status, they have an idea of what's 
expected of them. The alternative would be to either enforce a 
draconian posting standard on the list as a whole, or to allow 
newcomers to model themselves on the lower range of what's 
acceptable rather than the higher. It was the perception that this 
was happening which led to the institution of moderation for new 
members in the first place.

What does this have to do with TBay?  Well, very few list 
members have the confidence to assay a TBay post while they 
are still in moderation. If Elkins had tried to post her Crouch epic 
as a moderated member, or if she  had asked the List Elves 
whether it was too long, she might well have been directed to put 
it in the Essays folder of the file section instead.  

This would not have been  a judgement call on the relevance of 
Elkins's disquisitons,  but a decision for the convenience of 
members who may have   slow connections for which they are  
paying by the minute.


Pippin







From erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 07:17:50 2003
From: erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid (erinellii)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 07:17:50 -0000
Subject: We'd like to pick your brains about TBAY
In-Reply-To: <3FD089B9.23503.90082A@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqpbeu+4f9n@...>

Hi, everyone,
Well, I wasn't going to post my reply to this thread until I finished 
the last part of the TBAY I'm writing now (Evil!Bill), but I'm sort 
of stuck on that, I was discussing it offline with someone, and they 
pointed out that my biggest canon point for what Bill might do in the 
future was flawed, so I'm having to rework it.  And as it's the 
Holiday season, and I'm busy with RL....

I have been reading to see what everyone was saying on this issue, 
though, and decided I'd better post what my opinions before the 
thread died down and I lost my chance.  Disclaimer: Everything that 
follows is my opinion and should not be taken as fact unless 
otherwise stated. So first, the original questions:

1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, 
is the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?

Erin:
So many people have already said this better than I would have. The 
explanation I most identified with was that TBAY is the theories 
people have thought about for so long that they almost seem like real 
physical objects or persons to the thinker.  


2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to respond
to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about 
the TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

Erin:
Yes, I read them all the time, and have posted a few now. The first 
post of Evil!Bill was my third ever TBAY post.  What prompted me to 
do so?  In a word, Elkins.  The first post of hers I ever read was 
one someone directed me to, on Redeemable!Malfoy and was non-TBAY, 
but it was so good that I went looking for others she'd written, and 
many of those turned out to be TBAY and I was hooked.


3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find discussions
of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts (such 
asEvil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY 
theories)and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? 
What can veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

Erin:
Well, I found it a bit intimidating just because many times the 
standard of writing there was so good.  And I think my own writing is 
adequate, but not exactly fantastic.   I also wasn't sure what the 
rules were when it came to having another theorist speak. But I am 
someone seeks help when I need it, and before my first post I emailed 
Abigail, a veteran Tbayer, and she was really helpful.  Hypothetic 
Alley was also very helpful.


4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to know
before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY 
style?

Erin:
I guess the thing that confused me most was the other theorists and 
where they stood on the various theories- who has what badge or 
belonged to what ship. Just a couple days ago, I got an email from 
Melody (to whom I've not yet responded- sorry, Melody), one of the 
members of the Magic Dishwasher Defense Team, worried that I had 
mistaken Pippin for Pip!Squeak.  I did know that they were not the 
same person, but I actually had thought Pippin's TBAY self lived at 
the Safe House also, because she has a spy theory (ESE!Lupin) and the 
Safe House is the place for those.  I correct that in the last post, 
if I can actually get around to finishing it.

But should something be done to make that easier? A map of 
theorists?  I don't know... because some theorists (like Elkins and 
She-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named [oh, all right, Cindy] are no longer around 
and so it might be akward if someone who didn't know them decided to 
drag them into a TBAY.  Maybe those who aren't willing to do the work 
and talk to people offlist just shouldn't post TBAY.  If a few 
mistakes are made that way, they can be corrected in responses if the 
subject has something else to say, or offlist in private email if 
they don't. 


Now, on to the discussions (not to say character attacks) that have 
taken place since :-)  Or, really, just what one guy has said:

Shaun Hately said:
> The point is, the presence of TBAY posts on the main list IMHO, do 
*exlude* people. Injokes (and TBAY is, IMHO, full of injokes) serve 
to exclude anyone who isn't in on the joke.

Erin:
Well, yes, I would have to say that was a true definition of the word 
injoke. The thing is, anyone who wants to be in on the joke can be!  
I am a case in point.  I joined HPfGU in April, posted enough to get 
off moderated status, and then ignored the group for months until the 
end of August.  So I would say I've only been an active poster for 
about four months.  Yet I had no problem comprehending TBAY or the 
injokes. I simply used the archives and Hypothetic Alley to look up 
what I didn't recognize.  So no one has to be excluded- if they 
choose not to take the time to look these things up, that is their 
choice, and a perfectly valid one.  But no one is preventing them 
from doing so except themselves.

Yes, TBAY *is* full of references to past theories and acronyms. But 
is that a bad thing?  Not in my opinion.  I included several in my 
Evil!Bill posts purposely, in hopes that it would make people curious 
enough that they would *want* to go and look up these great old 
theories and see some of the best writing ever done on this list.  I 
included message numbers specifically in order to make it easier for 
the people who were interested in doing so. I think it enriches the 
whole HPfGU experience for posters to have a working knowledge of the 
more basic theories here.



Shaun Hately:
> Yet, I'm having to deal with people who insist that the canonicity 
of TBAY posts is a proven fact. I don't think it is. And I don't 
think it easily can be shown to be one.

Erin:
You have had to- er- "deal" with some over-enthusiastic TBAY 
defenders, I agree.  But I think there's a reason for that.  You took 
a post that basically asked us for our opinions on how to make TBAY 
more accessable to newbies and started, out of nowhere, talking about 
kicking it off the list altogether.  So I think it understandable 
that many people who love it felt compelled to leap to its support.

I'm with those who think it would be a death sentence to the Bay.  We 
need newbies to be able to see the style and participate in order to 
generate fresh new ideas.  And on its own list, there just wouldn't 
be enough traffic to attract newbies.  In November, there were maybe 
15 TBAY messages, most of them responses to Evil!Bill from people I'd 
basically begged offlist to respond.  (mind you, I *have* gotten 
quite a few unsolicited offlist emails from posters telling me 
they've loved reading it) And that was a HEAVY Tbay month.

So to people who see it as I do, you haven't just proposed moving 
TBAY offlist, you've proposed KILLING this style they love.  I think 
I understand where the snipiness comes from.  So please forgive me 
for any touches of it you may sense in this post of mine.

As for showing the canonicity of TBAYs, the only problem I could see 
would be if your definition of canon was very different from my 
definition of it.  If not, we just go and count the Tbays that focus 
on canon.  I'm willing to do this after Christmas if you'd like.  
It's really not so hard.



Shaun Hately said: 
> I'm seeing an attitude from some people that their opinions are 
facts - and therefore are somehow more important than other people's 
opinions. Well, I happen to think everybody's opinion and perception 
is just as important as everyone elses.

Erin:
Do you seriously think that?  If, for instance, I started spouting 
out my opinion that everyone who ate peanut butter was an evil green 
Satan-worshipping alien from Hell and must be destroyed, would you 
count my opinion as important as that of the guy next to me whose 
opinion was "that lady is crazy"?  Somehow, I think not.

I agree that opinions, by definition, are not facts.  But perceptions 
can be wrong. That is why we have the word "misperception". Because 
sometimes people do have wrong perceptions, wrong first impressions 
based on wrong facts.  I'm not trying to say yours are wrong, just 
that it *is* possible for a perception to be wrong.



Shaun Hately: 
> The number of lines concerns me only because I don't think a post 
that takes 40 lines as a lead up to a 2 line piece of canon is 
particularly canon based. And I personally think that quite a number 
of TBAY posts fall into that type of category - yes, they may contain 
canon - but 95% of what they contain has nothing to do with canon.
 
Erin:
I'm not sure how well percentages go with opinions.  Some might think 
you're sort of blurring the line there.  Can you really have an 
opinion on a percentage?  I've always seen them as cold hard facts.  
And I don't see the percentages you're speaking of reflected in the 
TBAY posts at all.  Perhaps you're thinking of one particular post?  
Maybe the one you read that soured you on TBAY in the first place?  
After Christmas is over, I'd be perfectly willing to count up the 
lines of, say, the last 50 Tbays and get you some real percentages 
instead of ones you have to make up yourself.



Shaun Hately: 
> Some TBAYers seem to take the view that if a TBAY post contains 
even the most minute piece of canon, that makes it acceptable. Well, 
by that criteria, I suspect virtually every single MOVIE post 
contains at least a tiny piece of canon.
> 
> Yet, movie posts have been moved to another list. 

Erin:  
And have you actually *read* the movie list?  Half the time people 
post just to say "OOOh, Alan Rickman is so hot!"  or  "The movie 
comes out in June! Yay! I can't wait!"  That is not the same as TBAY.

Some of the movie posters haven't even read the books. Whereas most 
TBAY posters are ones who have actually obsessively researched the 
books.  And I really don't get how anyone could argue that movie 
posts contain canon.  Movie canon, perhaps.  But not book canon.  
They are two different canons completely. Only if you were comparing 
movie canon to book canon could the post be said to contain real 
canon; that is, book canon.  



 Someone wrote (And Shaun, please attribute these, cause I'm replying 
to your post and can't find it on there, which makes it impossible 
for me to quote without looking through 50 messages and it's already 
12 midnight here and I have school in the morning): 

> > The difference, again, is inclusion vs. exclusion. Those who like 
> > TBAY are not asking for anything (press "delete" or "next" is 
closer to nothing than anything, IMO) from those who don't other than 
to be ignored; (some of) those who don't are after *a change in the 
status quo*, based on *their* idiosyncrasies.
 
>Shaun Hately wrote: 
> Actually those who like TBAY are asking for something. They are 
asking people who receive their messages via e-mail to download mail 
they are not interested in. 
> They are asking people who prefer to discuss matters in a 
straightforward fashion to accept that at any moment, somebody might 
decided to take one of their messages and fork the thread into one 
they don't feel comfortable with.
> 
> What they are asking may be totally reasonable - but the suggestion 
that that they  don't ask anything is simply wrong, in my opinion.

Erin:
I think you guys pretty much said the same thing, except the first 
person said it was "nothing" for someone to push the delete button, 
and Shaun makes like it's a big deal to push the delete button.

Me, I push the delete button for a lot of things.  Any message 
with "Dumbledore's Gleam" or "Mark Evans" in the title, for instance. 
But I'm not proposing a seperate "Dumbledore's Gleam" list (though on 
reflection, that might not be such a bad idea...)because deleting 
does not seriously inconvience me. Any group as big as HPfGU is gonna 
have some stuff that doesn't interest everyone. But I don't think 
maybe 5 messages a month are gonna cause you finger cramps or 
anything.

And come on, Shaun, do you really live in fear that (gasp!) someone 
might put one of your theories into a TBAY?  Do you honestly think 
anyone else does?  This is a list for adults, everyone on here should 
be able to deal with reading a little bit of roleplaying without 
flipping out. Yes, I agree that it is roleplaying.  But whereas other 
roleplayers make up their own fanfiction as they roleplay, TBAYers do 
so in order to discuss canon.



Shaun Hately: 
> Am I after a change in the status quo? Not particularly. What I am 
asking for is that people don't just assume that the status quo is 
automatically a good thing. 
> Just because things have been done a particular way in the past is 
not a reason they have to continue that way. I'm not asking that the 
status quo be changed - I'm merely asking that the possibility of 
change not be automatically dismissed.

Erin:
Well, the status quo must be doing something right, because we have 
one of the largest memberships for any Harry Potter group online.  
And certainly the most well-informed one, IMO.  I really don't see 
the need to change.  But when you ask that the list be split, by 
putting TBAYs on another list altogether, don't fool yourself, that 
*is* asking for change.

And you know, I think the very reason TBAY is good for the list is 
that it shakes up the staus quo a bit, makes you think about the 
theories in ways you normally wouldn't.  Sort of turns canon inside 
out in an oftentimes nearly subversive way.  If you like shaking up 
the status quo so much, logically you should like TBAY. Unless you 
only like change you've instigated yourself.  Gaah, here I am making 
my own character attacks-- I'm leaving it in as an example of just 
how easy it is to get overworked about something and stick in these 
little snipy bits- that one just rolled off my fingers before I 
thought how it sounded- but I don't really mean it, ok Shaun?  And 
anyone else should be aware that that sort of thing is bad.  I'm 
closing my ears in the oven right now.




Shaun Hately: 
> If TBAY remains on the list, that will be fine with me. I'll accept 
that a decision has been taken by those in authority on the list that 
it should remain.

Erin:
The way I see it, that decision has already been made.  It was made a 
year and a half ago when TBAY first started showing up on the list 
and they had some of the same dicussions we're having now.  I for one 
was pretty flabbergasted when you came out of the blue and proposed 
axing it altogether.  I'm with Eileen when she says TBAY is not here 
on sufference.  What was being asked of us was how to improve TBAY, 
not whether or not it should be on the list at all.



Shaun Hately: 
> Virtually every post I have made in this thread has included 
phrases like 'I think'.  'That's my opinion', 'And personally I 
think', 'My personal view', 'That's not my perception.', 'That's my 
perception, and it may be wrong', and the ubiquitous 'IMHO'.

Erin:
I'm aware that sometimes I don't do this... it runs contrary to all 
my instincts.  I'm just trying to finish up a college education, and 
before that a high school one, where the phrase "In my opinion" could 
get you a zero on a big paper.  I've had countless teachers tell me 
to NEVER EVER use this phrase, because "everyone knows it's your 
opinion already, it's your paper, isn't it?"  So I tend to translate 
that into "it's my post, so of course everyone knows that my opinion 
is the one being expressed".  I've tried very hard to drop the phrase 
from my vocabulary after being told it is unprofessional, and even 
that it is one that women use more frequently, and that men in the 
business world won't take a woman as seriously if her remarks begin 
with "I think" or "In my opinion".  

And then I find out that it is considered polite on the web to throw 
that out there a lot.  Lots of times, I'll have to just go back 
through my messages and sprinkle in some IMO's, cause I don't write 
them naturally.  So if there isn't one where you think there should 
be, I apologize.  IMO, when a poster has an actual verifiable fact, 
they should have to say "This is a fact, and this is where I got it 
from", and everything else should be taken as opinion.  But I 
recognize that I'm not gonna change the accepted practice all by my 
lonesome.

 
 Someone wrote:
 This isn't just about TBAY, per se. For me, it boils down to: Does 
the value TBAY (FILK, FF) has to those who value it outweigh the 
> > antipathy of those who don't? As far as I can tell, leaving it in 
> > penalizes fewer people to a far lesser degree than kicking it out 
> > would.

Erin:
This IMO, states the case perfectly.  Bravo to whoever the heck that 
was.


Erin
"All BB GUN, All The Time"





From strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 17:51:57 2003
From: strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid (strom5150)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 17:51:57 -0000
Subject: About TBAY : what is expected from a listee ?
In-Reply-To: <bqq9pp+espv@...>
Message-ID: <bqqgjt+civ9@...>


Some snippage of what Del said:
> 
> And another one is their accessibility : how easy are they to 
> understand when you're not a fanatic TBAYer ? And that one is a 
> biggie. I'm not sure TBAY fans realize how much background and how 
> specific a mindset are necessary to understand some TBAY posts. You 
> have to know the theories, you have to know their personas, you 
have 
> to know what happened before (some theorists are nice and give 
enough 
> background info for any novice to understand, but some don't, which 
> creates a *very* uncomfortable feeling of being left out) and 
finally 
> you have to figure out the metaphors and other symbolic stuff 
(which 
> I don't).

Now Danielle:

First of all, Del, let me address the final line of your post: IMHO, 
you are not a below-average listee, and I base that on having read 
many of your posts on the main list.

As I have read and reflected on this current TBAY war, um...I mean 
discussion, there are a few things I have come up with to say, and 
your post frames my thoughts well.

Like you, I do also get the "uncomfortable feeling of being left out" 
of TBAY posts. (Well, I get that with the really good regular posts, 
as well, to be honest!) But let's just address TBAY here. 

Some of them are great, some good, some bad, for the many reasons 
that have already been discussed. And it does often feel like an 
exclusive club, with high barriers to entry.

But here's the Big Point, I think:
The fact that I feel this way is NOT a problem with TBAY - it's MY 
problem.

If I want to join a new culture, I need to study and learn the group 
norms and mores of that culture. The members may make me feel welcome 
with kind words and encouragement, but in the final act it is UP TO 
ME to make myself an acceptable member of that group. Is this 
discrimination? Not IMO. One of the big problems I have with some 
people is that they believe that all cultures/groups should change to 
accept them. A person from Country A goes on vacation to Country B, 
and fails to study the cultural norms, fails to pick up even the most 
rudimentary aspects of the language, etc. - in short, the person 
expects everyone in Country B to adapt to him/her. Well, that's not 
how it works.

I know that to be a "good" resident of TBAY, I WILL have to read all 
or most of the prior TBAY posts. I WILL have to visit Hypothetic 
Alley to brush up on the theories. And, I will have to read the 
regular posts of TBAY residents, to get a better idea of their 
characters. This will be time-consuming work, even more so if the 
metaphorical style of the Bay is totally new to me. But, that's what 
it takes to become a member of another culture or group - if you want 
to do it correctly, and be a "good" member.

Again, I don't feel that this is discriminatory, though it may seem 
exclusionary at first. 

(Yes, there's a difference, IMO. Now, I'm not looking at a 
dictionary, but to me discrimination is barring people based on some 
inherent aspect of themselves that cannot be changed and shouldn't 
matter anyway. Exclusionary, the way I'm using it here, means that I 
may not have what it takes to participate yet, but I can change that 
and then enter the group. Please don't grab your dictionaries and 
correct me - I'm just trying to make a point so please take my words 
as I've presented them.)

TBAY does not discriminate - anyone can move in. But, as I stated 
above, you may feel excluded until you do what it takes to get up to 
speed on how things work there.

So, more snippage from Del:

> > And I'm not even talking about *writing* a TBAY post...


Danielle:

Again, I personally think that it's wrong to attempt to participate 
in the activities of a culture/group until you have observed it for 
awhile. Or perhaps if you have a mentor in the group who actively 
helps you become acclimated. Many members of TBAY seem open to 
providing guidance to newbies.

Del again:
> So my question is : what is expected of a basic listee ? When I got 
> on the list, 3 years ago, I had the feeling that the requirements 
> were quite simple:
> - One had to read and speak English well enough to communicate 
> feelings and opinions with others.
> - One had to know what "canon-related discussions" meant. Well, 
> actually, this one didn't even exist in my time, but it was kind of 
> obvious to most members.
> - And one had to have enough self-restraint not to insult the 
fellow 
> list-members, and be polite in every circumstances.
> And if one respected all 3 conditions, one could expect to enjoy 
> *fully* the discussions on the list.
> 
> But it seems to me like those conditions have hardened since. Among 
> others, the following conditions have come up :
> - One has to read the *whole* material offered to them, *and* 
disgest 
> it ! That material includes but is not restricted to : the HBFile 
> (that one is logical), the Fantastic Posts, the Hypothetic Alley 
and 
> ALL the archives !!
> - As a consequence : one had better be on top of every theory that 
> ever came up out there, and know everything that's already been 
said 
> about anything.

Danielle:

Yup, that's about it! ,<g>

Honestly, I don't have time for this either. But, I'm working on it. 
And, when I feel comfortable with everything about TBAY, I may just 
wander in. But again, it's up to me!

Danielle
(Who is not a b*tch, does not play one on TV, and hopes that nothing 
she said was insulting to anyone nor degraded their own comments and 
opinions in any way. Having said that, she dons her flame-resistant 
cloak in anticipation.)






From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 22:31:33 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 09:31:33 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: We'd like to pick your brains about TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqpbeu+4f9n@...>
References: <3FD089B9.23503.90082A@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FD1A1F5.29558.6C1CB6@localhost>

On 5 Dec 2003 at 7:17, erinellii wrote:

> Shaun Hately said:
> > The point is, the presence of TBAY posts on the main list IMHO, do 
> *exlude* people. Injokes (and TBAY is, IMHO, full of injokes) serve 
> to exclude anyone who isn't in on the joke.
> 
> Erin:
> Well, yes, I would have to say that was a true definition of the word 
> injoke. The thing is, anyone who wants to be in on the joke can be!  
> I am a case in point.  I joined HPfGU in April, posted enough to get 
> off moderated status, and then ignored the group for months until the 
> end of August.  So I would say I've only been an active poster for 
> about four months.  Yet I had no problem comprehending TBAY or the 
> injokes. I simply used the archives and Hypothetic Alley to look up 
> what I didn't recognize.  So no one has to be excluded- if they 
> choose not to take the time to look these things up, that is their 
> choice, and a perfectly valid one.  But no one is preventing them 
> from doing so except themselves.

Yes, but that is not the point I was trying to make here. I was responding to a 
statement by a TBAYer that TBAY doesn't exclude anyone. I believe it does. The 
fact that a person can choose to do some extra work to avoid that exclusion does 
not change that fact.

TBAY is exclusive - and that can be OK. But let's acknowledge it, not deny it.

Erin: 
> Yes, TBAY *is* full of references to past theories and acronyms. But 
> is that a bad thing?  Not in my opinion.  I included several in my 
> Evil!Bill posts purposely, in hopes that it would make people curious 
> enough that they would *want* to go and look up these great old 
> theories and see some of the best writing ever done on this list.  I 
> included message numbers specifically in order to make it easier for 
> the people who were interested in doing so. I think it enriches the 
> whole HPfGU experience for posters to have a working knowledge of the 
> more basic theories here.

And I have a working knowledge of what the most basic theories are, and that 
absolutely nothing to do with TBAY in my opinion. The fact that TBAY gives 
theories nice neat labels doesn't mean people need those labels to understand 
the theories.
 
> Shaun Hately:
> > Yet, I'm having to deal with people who insist that the canonicity 
> of TBAY posts is a proven fact. I don't think it is. And I don't 
> think it easily can be shown to be one.
> 
> Erin:
> You have had to- er- "deal" with some over-enthusiastic TBAY 
> defenders, I agree.  But I think there's a reason for that.  You took 
> a post that basically asked us for our opinions on how to make TBAY 
> more accessable to newbies and started, out of nowhere, talking about 
> kicking it off the list altogether.  So I think it understandable 
> that many people who love it felt compelled to leap to its support.

No, I didn't.

In fact the very words I wrote in this thread were:

"Please realise that nothing I am saying here should be 
interpreted as a suggestion TBAY shouldn't be on the list. I 
fully understand on a list with over 10,000 members there 
will be posts I don't like, and I don't expect people to 
stop posting - however, I do wonder if a separate list
for TBAY might be a good idea."

I did not 'out of nowhere' start talking about kicking it off the list.

I was responding to a specific question asked: "We'd like to know how you 
perceive TBAY."

The post that I responded to did not, as you claim, just ask for our opinions on 
how to make TBAY more accessible. It asked a lot more than that.

"1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe TBAY 
messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY message? 
What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if any, is the difference 
between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?"

That was the first series of questions asked and none of those have anything to 
do with making TBAY more accessible. We weren't asked about accessibility until 
the third group of questions.  

I suggest if you think that was all the thread was about, you need to go back and 
read the original post. There were 16 questions asked in that original post, only 4 
of which were aimed at 'accessibility'. And I answered those as well. Just nobody 
seems to have taken exception to those answers.

But please before you accuse me of having taken a post that only asked about 
accessibility, and having changed it to something else, please go back and check 
the original posts, where you will see we were asked questions about our 
perceptions of TBAY in general, not just what we thought could make it more 
accessible.

And before you start accusing me of 'out of nowhere' talking about kicking TBAY 
off list, go back and read my first paragraph where I explicitly said I wasn't talking 
about that. My suggestion at the end of that paragraph that I wondered if a 
separate list for TBAY might be a good idea was actually mostly out of concern for 
TBAY and TBAYers. When I joined the list TBAY posts seemed a lot more 
common than they are now, and I thought that part of the reason why they are 
diminishing could be because they were being lost on the main list. My original 
suggestion that TBAY could be better off on its own list was intended to be 'TBAY-
positive'. A way of helping TBAY to flourish for those who enjoy it.

As my posts have gone on, yes, I've made other suggestions. But that's been as a 
reaction to my perception as this thread has gone on that some TBAY posters feel 
TBAY is worthy of special treatment. I don't believe it is worthy of special 
treatment. I think TBAY posts should be held to the same standards as other 
posts - and if TBAY posters expect more than that, I think they should start their 
own list. And, unfortunately, at the moment, I remain unconvinced that TBAY 
posts are held to the same standard.

Erin:
> I'm with those who think it would be a death sentence to the Bay.  We 
> need newbies to be able to see the style and participate in order to 
> generate fresh new ideas.  And on its own list, there just wouldn't 
> be enough traffic to attract newbies.  In November, there were maybe 
> 15 TBAY messages, most of them responses to Evil!Bill from people I'd 
> basically begged offlist to respond.  (mind you, I *have* gotten 
> quite a few unsolicited offlist emails from posters telling me 
> they've loved reading it) And that was a HEAVY Tbay month.

Well, if TBAY is only surviving because people are *begging* other people other 
people offlist to post, I'm not sure that its really viable on the main list anymore. I 
think the death sentence has already been passed. That's a pity - but I wonder if 
it's true.

Erin: 
> So to people who see it as I do, you haven't just proposed moving 
> TBAY offlist, you've proposed KILLING this style they love.  I think 
> I understand where the snipiness comes from.  So please forgive me 
> for any touches of it you may sense in this post of mine.

I can forgive snipiness, but I really wish people would read what I said in my 
original post, before they accuse me of 'out of nowhere' suggesting TBAY be 
banned.

My original suggestion was made partly because I believed it would *BENEFIT* 
TBAY. Now I could be wrong about that - but what you've said in this post 
indicates to me that TBAY is dying now. Maybe a new list wouldn't save it. But I'm 
wondering if anything would - if the only way you're getting TBAY posts is by 
begging off list for them, I don't see how it's going to last.

Erin: 
> As for showing the canonicity of TBAYs, the only problem I could see 
> would be if your definition of canon was very different from my 
> definition of it.  If not, we just go and count the Tbays that focus 
> on canon.  I'm willing to do this after Christmas if you'd like.  
> It's really not so hard.

I have never said that there are *no* TBAY posts based on canon, or that contain 
canon. I am very well aware that most do.

What I've objected to is claims by some people that seem to be that *ALL* TBAY 
posts are canon, and that is an automatic fact. TBAY posts, like any posts, can be 
offtopic. The only way that wouldn't be so if someone in authority declared all 
TBAY posts are automatically canonical for list purposes - which would be clear 
evidence of special treatment.

Secondly, I am not convinced that the fact that a 40 line post contains 2 lines of 
canon makes the whole post a canonical post. I do not believe HPFGU imposes a 
standard that a post is automatically ontopic if it contains any canon points at all, 
among a mass of other material.

If it did, many MOVIE posts (not all) would be ontopic because they mentioned 
canonical characters.

The standard is, I believe, higher than just containing a piece of canon.

My view (and this is personal) is that a post should be viewed as on-topic if it 
*substantially* contains canon material *and material intended to illuminate the 
canon*. TBAY posts *can* and *often do* meet that criteria.

But they do not automatically do so. I have rarely seen a TBAY post I would 
consider *completely* off-topic - but I have seen quite a number where I think the 
'noise to signal' ratio (the proportion of fluff as compared to canon based 
substance) is higher than I think would be likely to be tolerated in other posts.
 
> Shaun Hately said: 
> > I'm seeing an attitude from some people that their opinions are 
> facts - and therefore are somehow more important than other people's 
> opinions. Well, I happen to think everybody's opinion and perception 
> is just as important as everyone elses.
> 
> Erin:
> Do you seriously think that?  If, for instance, I started spouting 
> out my opinion that everyone who ate peanut butter was an evil green 
> Satan-worshipping alien from Hell and must be destroyed, would you 
> count my opinion as important as that of the guy next to me whose 
> opinion was "that lady is crazy"?  Somehow, I think not.

OK, I'll be more precise. I think everybody's opinion and perception on any 
particular discrete issue is just as important as everyone elses and is just as likely 
to be factual as anyone elses in the absence of objective evidence.

I could be this precise with everything I say if you want (sometimes I have to be at 
work) but I really don't think most people want to wade through all that.

Erin:
> I agree that opinions, by definition, are not facts.  But perceptions 
> can be wrong. That is why we have the word "misperception". Because 
> sometimes people do have wrong perceptions, wrong first impressions 
> based on wrong facts.  I'm not trying to say yours are wrong, just 
> that it *is* possible for a perception to be wrong.

Yes, perceptions can be wrong.

Go back to my second post: "That's my perception, and it may be 
wrong".

The point is, I've been quite open about the fact that I'm giving my opinions and 
my perceptions and I know they may be wrong.

Some other people have simply been stating that their unproven assertions are 
facts - and acting as if the fact that they say they have a fact, and I say have an 
opinion, automatically elevates their views over mine.
 
> Shaun Hately: 
> > The number of lines concerns me only because I don't think a post 
> that takes 40 lines as a lead up to a 2 line piece of canon is 
> particularly canon based. And I personally think that quite a number 
> of TBAY posts fall into that type of category - yes, they may contain 
> canon - but 95% of what they contain has nothing to do with canon.
>  
> Erin:
> I'm not sure how well percentages go with opinions.  Some might think 
> you're sort of blurring the line there.  Can you really have an 
> opinion on a percentage?  I've always seen them as cold hard facts.  
> And I don't see the percentages you're speaking of reflected in the 
> TBAY posts at all.  Perhaps you're thinking of one particular post?  
> Maybe the one you read that soured you on TBAY in the first place?  
> After Christmas is over, I'd be perfectly willing to count up the 
> lines of, say, the last 50 Tbays and get you some real percentages 
> instead of ones you have to make up yourself.

I read a bunch of TBAY posts last night -  I was at work on an uneventful night 
shift and I ran out of anything else to do, so I decided to check my perceptions 
and see if I still felt the same way. I'd have checked even more TBAY posts 
except the archives started giving me an error.

Please note what I said: "I personally think that quite a number of TBAY posts fall 
into that type of category - yes, they may contain canon - but 95% of what they 
contain has nothing to do with canon."

I didn't say all, I said 'quite a number'. That distinction is very important because I 
don't think most TBAY posts are anywhere near 95% fluff. Most seem to me to be 
around 50/50, and that's pretty much what I saw last night. A couple were much 
higher.

Now this is perception - someone else looking at the same post might well come 
up with a different answer because sometimes things were borderline.

When I say 95% I'm not being particularly precise. If I was being precise I would 
say 94.72% or something similar to that. Maybe percentages don't go with 
opinions for you - but they do for me, because of the nature of my work. I'm 
required to analyse a *lot* of numbers, probabilities, etc, and I'm used to being 
very precise. If I use something so crude as 95%, that really is an estimate for me 
(-8

No one post has soured me on TBAY. Quite the contrary - there's a few extremely 
well written posts that have softened my view on TBAY.
 
> Shaun Hately: 
> > Some TBAYers seem to take the view that if a TBAY post contains 
> even the most minute piece of canon, that makes it acceptable. Well, 
> by that criteria, I suspect virtually every single MOVIE post 
> contains at least a tiny piece of canon.
> > 
> > Yet, movie posts have been moved to another list. 
> 
> Erin:  
> And have you actually *read* the movie list?  Half the time people 
> post just to say "OOOh, Alan Rickman is so hot!"  or  "The movie 
> comes out in June! Yay! I can't wait!"  That is not the same as TBAY.

Yes, I do read the movie list - and there are some posts that are that lacking in 
substance. But there's a great deal of posts that contain book Canon as well.

Yes, I probably overstated by saying 'virtually every single MOVIE post' contains 
some canon - but a lot do. But that's not enough for them to be acceptable on the 
main list.

Erin:
> Some of the movie posters haven't even read the books. Whereas most 
> TBAY posters are ones who have actually obsessively researched the 
> books.  And I really don't get how anyone could argue that movie 
> posts contain canon.  Movie canon, perhaps.  But not book canon.  
> They are two different canons completely. Only if you were comparing 
> movie canon to book canon could the post be said to contain real 
> canon; that is, book canon.  

Um - "Harry Potter is a wizard."

That's Book Canon and Movie Canon.

There's a great deal of overlap between the two. There are important differences 
as well - but there's plenty of canon that apllies in both, so if the standard on 
HPFGU was solely that posts should contain some book canon, that should be 
enough.

But that isn't the standard applied. As best I can see, the standard applied is 
something like that posts should be *substantially* based on the book canon, 
without too much extraneous material being included.

Erin: 
>  Someone wrote (And Shaun, please attribute these, cause I'm replying 
> to your post and can't find it on there, which makes it impossible 
> for me to quote without looking through 50 messages and it's already 
> 12 midnight here and I have school in the morning): 

I'm sorry - but I honestly can't see the reason to attribute every paragraph in posts 
where I am only replying to *one* person. I can understand the need to do so in 
cases where you're replying to more than one person but that isn't what I have 
done here.  

> >Shaun Hately wrote: 
> > Actually those who like TBAY are asking for something. They are 
> asking people who receive their messages via e-mail to download mail 
> they are not interested in. 
> > They are asking people who prefer to discuss matters in a 
> straightforward fashion to accept that at any moment, somebody might 
> decided to take one of their messages and fork the thread into one 
> they don't feel comfortable with.
> > 
> > What they are asking may be totally reasonable - but the suggestion 
> that that they  don't ask anything is simply wrong, in my opinion.
> 
> Erin:
> I think you guys pretty much said the same thing, except the first 
> person said it was "nothing" for someone to push the delete button, 
> and Shaun makes like it's a big deal to push the delete button.

No, I don't make it a big deal. In fact, I explicitly say and you have *quoted* me 
sayting that what is being asked for may be totally reasonable.

I find it rather strange to be having views assigned to me less than two lines after 
someone has quoted me saying something quite different.

I'd also point out that for the (I would assume) fairly substantial number of people 
who receive the list via digest, there is no delete button for particular posts.

There is at least one blind person on the list who 'reads' their e-mail by running it 
through a speech synthesiser. I know him. He doesn't have the option to easily 
delete TBAY posts.

People should bear in mind, IMHO, that not everybody uses the net the way they 
do. And what may seem like a minor inconvenience to you because of the way 
you use the net may be a major one for other people.

There's only a limited amount anybody can do about that - but please don't forget 
the fact.
 
Erin:
> Me, I push the delete button for a lot of things.  Any message 
> with "Dumbledore's Gleam" or "Mark Evans" in the title, for instance. 
> But I'm not proposing a seperate "Dumbledore's Gleam" list (though on 
> reflection, that might not be such a bad idea...)because deleting 
> does not seriously inconvience me. Any group as big as HPfGU is gonna 
> have some stuff that doesn't interest everyone. But I don't think 
> maybe 5 messages a month are gonna cause you finger cramps or 
> anything.
> 
> And come on, Shaun, do you really live in fear that (gasp!) someone 
> might put one of your theories into a TBAY?  Do you honestly think 
> anyone else does?  This is a list for adults, everyone on here should 
> be able to deal with reading a little bit of roleplaying without 
> flipping out. Yes, I agree that it is roleplaying.  But whereas other 
> roleplayers make up their own fanfiction as they roleplay, TBAYers do 
> so in order to discuss canon.

Where on earth do you get the idea I live in fear that someone might put one of 
my theories into a TBAY? In fact, I'd be rather flattered if that every happened, I 
certainly don't fear the idea.

*But* it would probably take me out of the discussion. Now I freely admit that 
that's largely due to me, not them - but I think it's a reality for quite a number of 
people, and I think that makes TBAY divisive.

I wouldn't be offended if someone started discussing one of my ideas in Turkish - I 
wouldn't be afraid of the fact either.

But I wouldn't be involved in the discussion from then on - and a split would have 
occurred.

Multiple discourses, whatever form they take, tend to create division. Now you 
may think that's acceptable, and that's OK. But I think people should at least 
acknowledge it.  
 
> Erin:
> Well, the status quo must be doing something right, because we have 
> one of the largest memberships for any Harry Potter group online.  
> And certainly the most well-informed one, IMO.  I really don't see 
> the need to change.  But when you ask that the list be split, by 
> putting TBAYs on another list altogether, don't fool yourself, that 
> *is* asking for change.

And initially I didn't ask for that. I explicitly didn't ask for that. I only started to 
suggest it seriously when I started being attacked by TBAYers for daring to 
express an opinion they didn't agree with.

Erin:
> And you know, I think the very reason TBAY is good for the list is 
> that it shakes up the staus quo a bit, makes you think about the 
> theories in ways you normally wouldn't.  Sort of turns canon inside 
> out in an oftentimes nearly subversive way.  If you like shaking up 
> the status quo so much, logically you should like TBAY. Unless you 
> only like change you've instigated yourself.  Gaah, here I am making 
> my own character attacks-- I'm leaving it in as an example of just 
> how easy it is to get overworked about something and stick in these 
> little snipy bits- that one just rolled off my fingers before I 
> thought how it sounded- but I don't really mean it, ok Shaun?  And 
> anyone else should be aware that that sort of thing is bad.  I'm 
> closing my ears in the oven right now.

(-8

Seriously - I don't have any problem with 'shaking up the status quo' but honestly I 
don't really think TBAY does that anymore. It's become part of the status quo 
itself.

That happens over time. In the 1950s a black man sitting down at a lunch counter 
shook up the status quo. Today, in most places at least, it doesn't. TBAY, IMHO, 
doesn't do much to shake up the list because it's become something people 
basically either participate in, or ignore.

> Shaun Hately: 
> > If TBAY remains on the list, that will be fine with me. I'll accept 
> that a decision has been taken by those in authority on the list that 
> it should remain.
> 
> Erin:
> The way I see it, that decision has already been made.  It was made a 
> year and a half ago when TBAY first started showing up on the list 
> and they had some of the same dicussions we're having now.  I for one 
> was pretty flabbergasted when you came out of the blue and proposed 
> axing it altogether.  I'm with Eileen when she says TBAY is not here 
> on sufference.  What was being asked of us was how to improve TBAY, 
> not whether or not it should be on the list at all.

First of all, just because a decision was made a year and a half ago, doesn't mean 
it should never be revisited.

Second of all, go back and read the message that started this thread. It wasn't just 
about 'improving' TBAY. We were asked for our perceptions of TBAY. I answered 
that question honestly and have found myself attacked over and over and over 
again, by people who seem to think that everybody should agree with them, or 
shut up. And who also seem to have totally missed the very first paragraph I 
wrote.

> Shaun Hately: 
> > Virtually every post I have made in this thread has included 
> phrases like 'I think'.  'That's my opinion', 'And personally I 
> think', 'My personal view', 'That's not my perception.', 'That's my 
> perception, and it may be wrong', and the ubiquitous 'IMHO'.
> 
> Erin:
> I'm aware that sometimes I don't do this... it runs contrary to all 
> my instincts.  I'm just trying to finish up a college education, and 
> before that a high school one, where the phrase "In my opinion" could 
> get you a zero on a big paper.  I've had countless teachers tell me 
> to NEVER EVER use this phrase, because "everyone knows it's your 
> opinion already, it's your paper, isn't it?"  So I tend to translate 
> that into "it's my post, so of course everyone knows that my opinion 
> is the one being expressed".  I've tried very hard to drop the phrase 
> from my vocabulary after being told it is unprofessional, and even 
> that it is one that women use more frequently, and that men in the 
> business world won't take a woman as seriously if her remarks begin 
> with "I think" or "In my opinion".  

There are times when it is inappropriate to refer to things as your opinions, and 
some academic papers meet that test. My style of writing has developed in a 
different context where I am paid to give my opinions - but where if someone 
mistook one of my opinions for a hard fact, people could die (that's unusual and 
unlikely, but it is possible). So I tend to be very careful to make the distinction.

As I said, I don't expect most people to be this careful - it wouldn't be reasonable. 
But given the fact I do do it, I found the suggestion that I "generally state (my) 
opinion pretty flatly (as if they were fact)" very odd indeed. Because that's about 
the last thing I've been doing in this thread.  



Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 23:07:07 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:07:07 -0000
Subject: The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
Message-ID: <bqr32r+3hk5@...>

I went back through all the posts beginning with ADMIN's request for 
TBAY and reread them all (and made a list and wrote a one-sentence 
synopsis of each one; anyone interested in *that* can just ask).

It's possible I *was* rude. For that I'm sorry. I wish I'd found a 
way to express those thoughts in a way no one would or could take 
exception to. Although the probability of success may approach zero, 
I am here to try it again. Because rereading the whole mess has only 
made me more certain that I'm onto something here and just haven't 
found quite the right way to say it.

Disclaimer: this is ALL just my opinion. I've been known to be an 
idiot at times. I do not intend to offend anyone. I am not unaware 
that I may do so, however. (There is a difference.)

One discussion point has been whether or not TBAY conforms to canon 
guidelines (always/usually/often/ever). Opinions differ (no surprise) 
and there is no consensus. Majority opinion seems (to me, and I 
counted) to be that TBAY posts conform to main list canon at least as 
well as general posts. (Although there was further discussion as to 
the per-line canon-worthiness of TBAY posts; I'm not going back 
there, although I don't deny anyone's right to do so.) Some people 
like TBAY, or even love it; others dislike it, or even hate it. (We 
knew that, didn't we?) No consensus. A lot of people are sort of 
seesaw-neutral, with mixed feelings. Majority here seems to be 
(again, I counted, and invite you to do so yourself) in favor of 
supporting TBAY's existence on the main list. It was at least implied 
that TBAY is OT, and as appropriate to remove to its own area as the 
movie discussions were thought to be. There was not a lot of support 
for that. There was one opinion expressed that, indeed, TBAY would 
even *benefit* by being moved. Many others disagreed. It was said 
that TBAY is a burden on those who have to navigate the rest of the 
board while avoiding it. Than again, the low percentage of TBAY posts 
was mentioned several times (and seems to me to be a sufficient 
rebuttal of expressions of "the trouble it takes" to ignore TBAY. 
Someone expressed the fear that their messages might be shanghaied 
(spell check says that's right, but urg) off to TBAY, but, well, that 
seems very easy to fix (as well as not having been taken very 
seriously). Some people think the format is inappropriate to the main 
list; others think TBAY has been allowed to become deplorably full of 
weeds; and some think TBAY and TBAYers is unfairly exempted from the 
general rules and favored by ADMIN. Did I miss anything?

(Personal note: the issue of whether or not TBAY is "resilient" 
enough to handle a move to its own area: is this a trick question? 
It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" for those wanting to move it: 
whether it survives or not, they win; even if it survives, its 
supporters can hardly do more than break even. As there seems to be 
little actual impetus for moving it, its ostensible resilience is 
moot. Again, strictly my opinion.)

I said I suspected intensely anti-TBAY folks of having ulterior 
motives for wanting to shut it down or exile it to cyber-Siberia. And 
that I thought maybe it was due to a discomfort with including its 
often high silliness quotient on a board they might want to think of 
as "serious," as in "serious lit'ry analysis." Or that some people 
might feel rejected, left out by an unwillingness or inability to 
participate there, or a perception that they wouldn't be welcome. 
But, hey, maybe *nobody* has even a *hint* of that going on. How 
would *I* know? I was just trying to make some sense out of the  
antipathy that I personally find so disproportionate. Not the, "Oh, I 
don't like it," or the "I wish it would go away," but the "IT MUST 
DIE!" sentiment I've heard about and thought I was sensing here.

I *really* don't understand. I am and have been trying to. 
(Negotiation is about figuring out what each side wants and what part 
of what each side wants is paramount to them, and then trying to move 
the available resources in such a way that enough people get enough 
of what they want to satisfy them. And although I was *not* trying to 
negotiate, I was trying to figure out the stakes.)

Shaun is getting a second ADMIN opinion on the post he spent so much 
time doing astrological research on and I think that's a very good 
thing. <I respectfully salute Shaun: it's very cool that he knew and 
could even say (and this is a paraphrase), "Hey, at least part of how 
I feel about this issue can be traced back to this particular 
personal thing."> Go, Shaun!

Considering the obvious emotional (and otherwise) investment that 
*some* list members have in TBAY (not to mention the enjoyment of 
those who just like having it on the main list), I cannot help but 
think that any intense antipathy towards it *which manifests in any 
actual attempt remove it and/or do it damage* has to be based on 
something beyond anything I've read here. It just doesn't make sense 
(to me, yes, my opinion again), otherwise. Note: I *know* people 
often don't like being told that sort of thing; it can make them 
angry, or uncomfortable, or both. (So I refrain from stopping 
strangers on street corners and demanding that they consider their 
innermost secrets, in spite of the fact that *I* am deliberately and 
painfully introspective...and yes, you can rewrite that as self-
absorbed--with my permission). But when something hidden behind the 
scenes (again, *if* this is even the case) seems to be a motivating 
force behind an assault on someone or something I care about, then 
yes, I'm going to say that I think something is going on back there 
and even try to get to the bottom of it. And this does not mean that 
I think anyone lacks a sense of humor (which word I hadn't even 
mentioned) or has anything "wrong" with them.

Note: if it's a matter of, "Yes, I think my hatred of the thing, 
regardless of its basis, is enough reason to pull it apart (or at 
least risk it) regardless of how many people disagree or try to tell 
me that would hurt them," anyone who is willing to just come out and 
say so (that *is* a valid viewpoint, BTW) will stop me dead in my 
tracks, end of debate...on my part, anyway.

Sandy




From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 23:13:51 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 15:13:51 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
References: <bqr32r+3hk5@...>
Message-ID: <012f01c3bb85$732bca40$f837d7aa@net>

You want me to say it, fine, Yes I think my hatred of tbay is enough reason
to try to get it pulled from the list regardless of who disagrees with me.
I. Don't. Like. It.

Yes that probably doesn't amount to much and TBAY will remain on the list as
this is what the admins have voted on.  There is not a chance of it being
moved at this time but I can still hate it all I want and say so at every
opportunity.  Maybe if I keep saying it enough eventually it'll happen but
at this time, it's a non issue.

Saitain




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 07:27:08 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 23:27:08 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
References: <bqr32r+3hk5@...>
Message-ID: <005a01c3bbca$5b7889c0$a6706751@kathryn>

(I've snipped Sandy quite heavily because she wrote an awful lot - I *think*
I've managed to keep the points I want to respond to, as she intended them
and not changed the meaning by the editing, but you never know - feel free
to yell at me if I changed your meaning Sandy)

Sandy

(Personal note: the issue of whether or not TBAY is "resilient"
enough to handle a move to its own area: is this a trick question?
It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" for those wanting to move it:
whether it survives or not, they win; even if it survives, its
supporters can hardly do more than break even. As there seems to be
little actual impetus for moving it, its ostensible resilience is
moot. Again, strictly my opinion.)

K

That's a little unfair - at least two people, Shaun and one of the
pro-TBAYers (I apologise to whoever it was but I didn't feel the need to
reply to your message so I didn't make a note) thave suggested that TBAY
might *benefit* from the suggestion of an independent list, in which case
both the people who don't like TBAY *and* the TBAYers would win. TBAY does,
in my totally uninformed opinion, seem to be dying of late anyway - I don't
seem to be deleting as many meesages as usual anyway - so maybe it does need
something drastic done to revitalise it.

Sandy again
I was just trying to make some sense out of the
antipathy that I personally find so disproportionate. Not the, "Oh, I
don't like it," or the "I wish it would go away," but the "IT MUST
DIE!" sentiment I've heard about and thought I was sensing here.

I *really* don't understand. I am and have been trying to.

K

I haven't seen that attitude anywhere so I don't really see a need to try an
understand it - no one has expressed a wish to destroy or damage it in
anyway.

Sandy once more
Considering the obvious emotional (and otherwise) investment that
*some* list members have in TBAY (not to mention the enjoyment of
those who just like having it on the main list), I cannot help but
think that any intense antipathy towards it *which manifests in any
actual attempt remove it and/or do it damage* has to be based on
something beyond anything I've read here.

K

I'm beginning to understand your earlier comment - you're trying to ascribe
deeper darker motives to people who don't seem to exist on this list. No
wonder we were confused - since there doesn't seem to be anyone who wished
to destroy TBAY those of us who are simply irritated by it and would be
perfectly happy if it vanished assumed you were talking to us. While there
are a few people who would like it to be removed, most of us who've said we
couild live with that idea don't really care all that much, the proposer
suggested it as an offhand suggestion to benefit TBAY and at least one
TBAYer thinks it's a good ide - I think you need to seperate the idea of
removing it and trying to damage it in your mind as they are not the same
thing at all.

Yes I agree - were someone expessing that kind of opinion I too would have
to wonder why they were getting so worked up over it - still no one has so I
guess there's no problem.


On reflection, unless the TBAYers decide to try a seperate list to see if
they can get more interest in the format, I don't think that this problem is
going to exist in a few months anyway. If the TBAYers really want it to
continue then I think they might need to try and revamp the format somewhat
anyway because, from an outsiders pov, it seems to be petering out anyway.
(does anyone know if the number of TBAY posts is actually decreasing out of
interest, or does it just seem that way?)

K
(reading this back I sound sarcastic in a couple of places, I really don't
mean too but it's been a long week and I can't think how to rephrase it to
make it sound more sincere - maybe it's just that my inner voice is
permanently in sarcastic mode and not the post *shrugs*)
"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."





From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec  5 23:59:50 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 23:59:50 -0000
Subject: The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
In-Reply-To: <012f01c3bb85$732bca40$f837d7aa@net>
Message-ID: <bqr65m+njo5@...>

Saitaina:

> You want me to say it, fine, Yes I think my hatred of tbay is 
enough reason
> to try to get it pulled from the list regardless of who disagrees 
with me.
> I. Don't. Like. It.
> 
> Yes that probably doesn't amount to much and TBAY will remain on 
the list as
> this is what the admins have voted on.  There is not a chance of it 
being
> moved at this time but I can still hate it all I want and say so at 
every
> opportunity.  Maybe if I keep saying it enough eventually it'll 
happen but
> at this time, it's a non issue.

*ahem*

I just want everyone to know that we *have* contacted an 
assertiveness training center, and have arranged for Sait to be 
checked in at the earliest possible opening. All this internalization 
isn't healthy for her and we feel she should learn to let her 
feelings out more openly.

~Amanda (ducking and running)






From saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 00:06:14 2003
From: saitaina at saitaina.yahoo.invalid (Saitaina)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:06:14 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
References: <bqr65m+njo5@...>
Message-ID: <01a601c3bb8c$c4a3f1c0$f837d7aa@net>

<Amanda (ducking and running)>

*chases after Amanda* get back here!  I'm assertive enough little missy!

By the way, I realized my slightly hilarious typo on my last email...I am
not, despite my own typing, Satan (or Saitain)

Saitaina




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 00:35:27 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 00:35:27 -0000
Subject: The Debate Around TBAY, Etc.
In-Reply-To: <bqr65m+njo5@...>
Message-ID: <bqr88f+imfi@...>

> Saitaina:
> You want me to say it, fine, Yes I think my hatred of tbay is 
> enough reason to try to get it pulled from the list regardless of 
> who disagrees with me. I. Don't. Like. It.
<snip>
> Maybe if I keep saying it enough eventually it'll happen but at 
> this time, it's a non issue.

>Amanda:
> I just want everyone to know that we *have* contacted an 
> assertiveness training center, and have arranged for Sait to be 
> checked in at the earliest possible opening. All this 
> internalization isn't healthy for her and we feel she should learn 
> to let her feelings out more openly.

Ah, is this official, from the ADMIN team? KIDDING! WAY KIDDING!

Sandy

P.S. Thank you, Saitaina. (Not kidding.) That helps.




From fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 01:01:27 2003
From: fc26det at sehandel.yahoo.invalid (Potterfanme)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 01:01:27 -0000
Subject: Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar
Message-ID: <bqr9p7+f1ha@...>

Hi all,

I have just spent 3 1/2 hours reading all the TBay discussions (?) 
and I have to say that there is an awful lot of reading between the 
lines going on which is causing undue stress *IMHO*.

I will not respond to the original question of what I think of TBay 
as I already stated my feelings when this list started and people 
were talking about the post volume.

Each and everyone of you have posted on the various lists with 
admirable ideas and styles.  It amazes me that, although intelligence 
and proper writing style are urged over and over and over to the 
point of intimidating those of us who have not gone to college or 
majored in literature or are actual authors, several of you have 
forgotten that sometimes what someone has posted is simply what they 
think.  Period.  No hidden meanings.  Nothing implied.

"Even Freud said, Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..."

Susan

P.S. to Sandy:  Glad to see you posting again. 




From mariaalena at maria_kirilenko.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 04:37:30 2003
From: mariaalena at maria_kirilenko.yahoo.invalid (Maria Kirilenko)
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 23:37:30 -0500
Subject: ADMIN: About that TBAY question...
Message-ID: <010401c3bbb2$abc8c420$7353fea9@OAK>

Hi, everyone! Can I have your attention please?

In my official capacity, I'd like to remind everyone to continue to be
respectful and courteous of others in your messages to the list. As Amanda
already pointed out unofficially, it seems that TBAY is a subject about
which many people have strong opinions one way or the other, and discussions
of TBAY often erupt into unpleasantness.

Also, at the moment we are not considering removing TBAY from the main list.
What we *really* want to do, however, is to provide newbies (and
not-so-newbies) with a TBAY primer. We've had some excellent suggestions,
and we'd really like to hear more.

So, does anyone have ideas for how we could create a document that will help
people to understand TBAY, and get "up to speed" a bit more quickly, should
they desire to participate?

Thank you!

Maria Alena,
for the List Elves.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 05:52:19 2003
From: erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid (erinellii)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 05:52:19 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: About that TBAY question...
In-Reply-To: <010401c3bbb2$abc8c420$7353fea9@OAK>
Message-ID: <bqrqqj+n2sc@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Maria Kirilenko" 
<mariaalena at y...> wrote:

> 
> Also, at the moment we are not considering removing TBAY from the 
main list. What we *really* want to do, however, is to provide 
newbies (and not-so-newbies) with a TBAY primer. We've had some 
excellent suggestions,
> and we'd really like to hear more.
> 
> So, does anyone have ideas for how we could create a document that 
will help people to understand TBAY, and get "up to speed" a bit more 
quickly, should they desire to participate?


Erin:
  
Not a document, no.  But all this talk about a separate list has got 
me thinking... What "would" be great to have would be an archive for 
old TBAYs.  Not another list-- TBAYs would still have to be posted on 
the main list so that everyone could see them-- but a group that 
contained only the TBAY posts, eliminating the need to search for old 
ones on the main list.  

People would join solely for the purpose of looking up the old 
posts.  No one would be able to post to the group except the group 
owner, who would only do so to copy new TBAYs from HPfGU.

Would there be any kind of legal issue if a group member wanted to do 
this on their own?  Copy and paste all the old TBAYs from this list 
onto a group?  Just curious.

And, also, I was on the old archive group the other day looking up 
something, and noticed no mod had posted there since March.  I got 
kind of worried about that, because you supposedly lose your group if 
no one posts there for a long period of time.

Erin




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 11:46:10 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 11:46:10 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqo994+uni2@...>
Message-ID: <bqsfi2+ni5g@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:

> I can't speak for all filkers, but  my filks usually do have a 
canon 
> point  and sometimes I've found that a filk can actually convey a 
> theory better than a straightforward  exposition. 
> 
> For example I observed some similarities between the plight of 
> Dorothy's companions in the Wizard of Oz and the characters of 
> Sirius, Lupin and Snape. Nobody seemed to get it until I filked "If 
> I Only Had a Brain."
> (snip)
> Pippin
> posting on her own behalf

Carolyn:

As the person who queried FILKS in the first place I thought I should 
just say that the arguments that have raged here about TBays have 
persuaded me that there is no case to argue for excluding FILKS and I 
withdraw my objection unreservedly. 

This is not because I have suddenly decided I like them after all - 
in fact, I made a point of trying to read a couple of recent ones, 
but my eyes glazed over with boredom before I finished the first 
verses - so no, they are not for me and never will be. However, they 
obviously have meaning for their writers and readers, and its no real 
problem to skip them (although it is not quite true that they don't 
generate threads - sometimes responses are actively invited & 
submitted). As I don't want to have to read them, I'll leave it to 
others to judge the extent to which they contribute to canon 
discussion. 

My real concern is that if there was any serious move made to exclude 
FILKS, that could be the thin end of the wedge to get Tbay off the 
main list, and that really would upset me. 

On the issue of having to pay a lot to download unwanted, and perhaps 
very long posts, personally, I pay a flat rate of ?17.00 (US$26.00?)
per month (all phone charges included) for continuous 24hour internet 
access, because I need it for work. There are much cheaper packages 
available for less heavy users, and many completely free ones. 
Broadband packages in particular enable very rapid download of even 
the largest files. It does not seem a huge amount to me, and surely 
people should accept that joining an Internet-based discussion group 
will involve some charges of this sort? And they are surely using 
their Internet connection for a lot of other things as well ?

Would it be worth doing a poll to find out if the cost of downloading 
large, unwanted posts is a big issue for members generally ? This 
would seem to be a quick and easy fact to establish, and the response 
may help to take (some !) of the heat out of the argument, although 
obviously will never persuade those that hate Tbays of their right to 
exist on the main list.

Because of the package I have I choose to read everything online 
anyway, and I find the The SHIP, TBay, FILK headers etc are fine, and 
I can see the whole head on the message index, and pick what I want 
to read. 

One thing that seems clear to me, however, from all these posts is 
that there is a big need for better explanation of the theories, the 
characters etc, just for anyone to refer to, whether they will post 
on Tbay or not. I rest my case for re-indexing and sorting out all 
those past posts ..

Carolyn





From arrowsmithbt at arrowsmithbt.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 14:09:59 2003
From: arrowsmithbt at arrowsmithbt.yahoo.invalid (B Arrowsmith)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 14:09:59 +0000
Subject: TBAY debate
Message-ID: <E08AE567-27F5-11D8-9224-000A9577CB94@...>

I fear I may be adding to your difficulties with this post (if you 
think that
the contents are worthy of any consideration, that is).

We have a sort of 'problem' on HPfGU that other sites, dedicated to 
other
books don't have.

HP is a work in progress; the canon is incomplete. This leads to 
theoretical
speculation of all qualities and probabilities. TBAY, IMO falls, for 
the most
part, within the realms of speculation. TBAY as such will probably die 
when
the series is completed (assuming that JKR does not leave the way open 
for
sequels), along with SHIPS. From then on they will be sub-sets of Fan 
Fiction
and that is where they will find their final resting place.

So far as I can trace it, speculation has been rife ever since the site 
was
founded. Good. Splendid, in fact. That was one of the main reasons why I
joined. I love to speculate. (This can cause problems too; I have ideas,
indeed written posts, that do not comfortably fit into general post, 
TBAY or
Fan Fiction. What do I do with them? Over the past  few days I've been
working on a new FLOOZY, but given the discussion on this board I feel
reluctant to post. I'm loth to send off a tongue-in-cheek, hopefully
humorous piece, "fluff" by the standards of some,  when it looks likely
it will probably  fall outside some guideline or other and produce a 
terse
note from an Elf.)

There's a broad spread of tastes on the site stretching from LOONs to
anarchic wishful thinkers. From strict analysts, through "maybe it will 
go
this way" across to "wouldn't it be lovely if..." Few of us have tastes 
broad
enough to savour every style. I  certainly don't. My hackles rise at 
what I
think of as the "fluffy bunny brigade," but that's just me. These too 
will die
when the canon is complete. The site will become a very different place.
Analysis will rule. What else will be left? Especially if categories 
that  are
reckoned to be only loosely tied to canon are hived off.

Expect many fewer posts and posters; there will not be the scope for fun
and games that there is now. There is even a faint possibility that the 
site
may fail; I hope not, but it will if you can't attract posters. Some 
may  consider
a  worse possibility could be in store -  a self-selected, 
same-thinking group
who sit, having received the true gospel, canon in hand, freezing out 
anyone
they don't approve of. We've probably all seen sites like this. There's 
no risk
of that happening here -  yet. There's too much goodwill and relaxed 
give-and-take
among the members, even in discussions such as this that highlight 
personal
niggles and irritations. But fragmentation can lead down this road - to 
the
'them  and us' scenario.

A long way off, you may say. No, just two books.

My advice is to plan for these times now. Take into consideration the 
likely
arc of the site and probably of fandom too. Do you want a group of 
small,
fragmented specialty sites or do you want a kaleidoscopic 
cross-pollinating
bunch of free-thinkers who may annoy each and every one of us every now
and again but have the virtues of diversity?

Personally, I  prefer  the latter.

Kneasy




From coriolan_cmc at coriolan_cmc2001.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 15:38:40 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at coriolan_cmc2001.yahoo.invalid (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 15:38:40 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqo994+uni2@...>
Message-ID: <bqst60+ehnc@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
wrote:
> Carolyn:
> > > I suppose they are easy to spot, like Tbay, so equally easy to 
> > > ignore if you want to. However, I'd still like to understand 
the 
> > > rationale for them being on the main list. They seem to me to 
> be 
> > > somewhere between fanfic and OTC.
> 
> Richard 
> > Ahh... I was wondering when this subject would crop up, and 
> although  I was going to raise it elsewhere, this is perhaps an 
> opportunity to  get my thoughts out of the way.
> > 
 
> I can't speak for all filkers, but  my filks usually do have a 
canon 
> point  and sometimes I've found that a filk can actually convey a 
> theory better than a straightforward  exposition. 

To expand on Pippin's point, not only do many HP filks bear some sort 
of Canonic argument, many others were inspired by the fertile and 
active discussions that are always taking place on HP4GU. During the 
long wait for OOP, many filkers joined in with their speculations and 
predictions. For example, speculations over future causualties 
prompted filks by Gail B and myself (both based on Tom Lehrer's Who's 
Next?). Kirstini's brilliant filk The Death Row Tango indulged in 
similar speculation on the eve of OOP's release. A suggestion by one 
listee that the end of Book Seven would reveal the entire HP-saga as 
nothing more than Harry's dream prompted two filks by Pip and 
myself.  None of these filks would have been written at all if 
filkers were not permitted to make their musical responses.

Out of respect for those listees who are sorting threads 
alphabatically, I will henceforth put "FILK" in the beginning of my 
posts.

   - CMC

THEORY BAY AT HARRY POTTER FILKS
http://home.att.net/~coriolan/places/theorybay.htm





From pengolodh_sc at ...  Sat Dec  6 15:55:43 2003
From: pengolodh_sc at ... (=?iso-8859-1?q?Christian=20Stub=F8?=)
Date: Sat, 6 Dec 2003 16:55:43 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: About that TBAY question...
In-Reply-To: <bqrqqj+n2sc@...>
Message-ID: <20031206155543.24658.qmail@...>

 --- erinellii skrev: 
[snip]
> People would join solely for the purpose of looking up the old 
> posts.  No one would be able to post to the group except the group 
> owner, who would only do so to copy new TBAYs from HPfGU.
[snip]

Actually, it is entirely possible to set up a Yahoo!Group in such a way that people do
not need to join to look at the archives.



=====
Best regards
Christian Stub
------------------------
It has come to the attention of the management that you exist. Please cease and desist. Thank you.



From erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 16:10:17 2003
From: erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid (erinellii)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 16:10:17 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: About that TBAY question...
In-Reply-To: <20031206155543.24658.qmail@...>
Message-ID: <bqsv19+gkuo@...>


>  --- erinellii skrev: 
> [snip]
> > People would join solely for the purpose of looking up the old 
> > posts.  No one would be able to post to the group except the 
group owner, who would only do so to copy new TBAYs from HPfGU.

Christian Stubs:  
> Actually, it is entirely possible to set up a Yahoo!Group in such a 
way that people do not need to join to look at the archives.



Erin:
Yeah, but I think Yahoo Groups need at least 5 members for Yahoo to 
keep them intact.  Besides, I would be interested in seeing how many 
people wanted to look up old TBAY messages.

Erin




From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 16:20:39 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 16:20:39 -0000
Subject: Two Questions on TBAY/Archives
Message-ID: <bqsvkn+ps82@...>

Two things I'm curious about, having to do with the recent threads 
on TBAY and Searching/Archives:

1) What if you and several other people are on a thread and
the issue seems to be heading toward a possible theory. Each of you
have contributed thoughts, but one person decides to make it into a
TBAY unilaterally (they include other posters in the TBAY). Is that 
pretty much accepted practice? 

2) David said we have most of the messages prior to OOTP archived, 
thanks to Paul Kippes. Is the plan to take those posts off the main 
list now (up to post 58,999) and if so, would it serve to speed up 
the search process on the main list (and in the archives) or not? 

Thanks,
Jen Reese




From coriolan_cmc at coriolan_cmc2001.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 17:45:40 2003
From: coriolan_cmc at coriolan_cmc2001.yahoo.invalid (Caius Marcius)
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2003 17:45:40 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: About that TBAY question...
In-Reply-To: <010401c3bbb2$abc8c420$7353fea9@OAK>
Message-ID: <bqt4k4+v0gn@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Maria Kirilenko" 
<mariaalena at y...> wrote:
> Hi, everyone! Can I have your attention please?

> 
> Also, at the moment we are not considering removing TBAY from the 
main list.
> What we *really* want to do, however, is to provide newbies (and
> not-so-newbies) with a TBAY primer. We've had some excellent 
suggestions,
> and we'd really like to hear more.

I love TBAY and I'm glad it will not be removed. As far as a TBAY 
primer, what about Hypothetic Alley? 

http://www.hpfgu.org.uk/faq/hypotheticalley.html

It seems to me that still well serves an as excellent intro to pre-
OOP TBAY.

  - CMC




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec  6 21:00:48 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 08:00:48 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqsfi2+ni5g@...>
References: <bqo994+uni2@...>
Message-ID: <3FD2DE30.31542.1F9A62@localhost>

On 6 Dec 2003 at 11:46, a_reader2003 wrote:

> On the issue of having to pay a lot to download unwanted, and perhaps 
> very long posts, personally, I pay a flat rate of ?17.00 (US$26.00?)
> per month (all phone charges included) for continuous 24hour internet 
> access, because I need it for work. There are much cheaper packages 
> available for less heavy users, and many completely free ones. 
> Broadband packages in particular enable very rapid download of even 
> the largest files. It does not seem a huge amount to me, and surely 
> people should accept that joining an Internet-based discussion group 
> will involve some charges of this sort? And they are surely using 
> their Internet connection for a lot of other things as well ?

Where you are this may be a valid option. But please understand that the 
availability and cost of internet access differs markedly in different locations. If I 
wanted 'always on, always available' 24 hours access where I am, I'd be looking 
at roughly $65 Australian a month - that's about $48 US or ?28. And I actually live 
in an area where internet access is relatively cheap in world terms.

There are no free packages in my area (people tried setting up a couple, they 
didn't work out).

For some people, internet access still costs a lot of money - please understand 
that just because you have cheap access does not mean the other 11,000 people 
on the list have equal access to cheap services. In fact, on a list with that many 
members, they almost certainly do not. Quite a few are probably using things like 
university services, some of which place significant download limits on people - 
mine does. I don't use it for mailing lists though.

Even if you use a free web based e-mail service - I do for some things - if you're 
on a dial up connection, things like TBAY posts do make life awkward if you're not 
interested in them. I'll explain why.

There's two basic ways of using a web based e-mail service - you can read 
messages by clicking on them on the 'inbox' page read and then go back to the 
inbox page, and read the next message. If you use this method, you can fairly 
easily skip something that has a subject header that you don't like - for example 
TBAY. However, on a dial up connection, a delay of 30 seconds on each click is 
not uncommon (and BTW adds a lot of dead bandwidth for anyone who has to 
pay volume charges) - so click in, read, click out - could easily add a minute to the 
time it takes you to read e-mails. HPFGU gets approximately 60-70 messages a 
day - a person who reads every message in this way, only avoiding say, TBAY, 
could end up wasting a hour a day. Even if the net is running as a decent speed, 
it may be 15 minutes.

The alternative which is a bit quicker is to enter the mail section and use the next 
message button to move through every message. This tends to save both time 
and bandwidth - but it means you can't avoid reading messages you're not 
interested in.

Is any of this a reason to move TBAY? Probably not - but there seem to be a lot of 
people on this list who assume that just because their mail system would make 
filtering TBAY simple, everyone must have access to such systems. That's not 
true. One clear example is anyone receiving the list via digest doesn't get a 
choice in what they download. And people seem to assume that because they live 
in an area with cheap net access, everybody is likely to have such access. And, 
again, that isn't true.
 
> Would it be worth doing a poll to find out if the cost of downloading 
> large, unwanted posts is a big issue for members generally ? This 
> would seem to be a quick and easy fact to establish, and the response 
> may help to take (some !) of the heat out of the argument, although 
> obviously will never persuade those that hate Tbays of their right to 
> exist on the main list.

One *slight* problem with such a poll (-8

Those who have e-mail access only to the net (and there's actually quite a few 
people in that situation - about 10% in most western countries, higher in other 
countries) cannot participate in most internet polls. Those who are concerned 
about download charges or time charges, etc, are less likely to, because it could 
cost them money.
 
> Because of the package I have I choose to read everything online 
> anyway, and I find the The SHIP, TBay, FILK headers etc are fine, and 
> I can see the whole head on the message index, and pick what I want 
> to read. 

And that's fine for you with your package - with mine it would be an absolute 
disaster.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 01:00:14 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 01:00:14 -0000
Subject: A small point about accessibility
Message-ID: <bqtu2u+8m31@...>

I just wanted to point out that one type of posting we have on HPFGU 
is the complex speculative theory.  The world-building and mystery 
aspects of the Harry Potter series lend themselves to that (though 
not, IMO, JKR's known resolutions of mysteries to date).

Complex theories in their nature take time and effort to explain, 
and more time and effort to understand.  They also tend to spawn 
similar variants of themselves.

Once a theory has been around for a while, those who have been 
discussing it will want to use shorthand, even jargon, to refer to 
its features, and others who are new, or have not been following so 
closely, will then find recent discussion somewhat inaccessible.  
The only way to get into it is to invest the necessary time and 
effort.

Because of the variant versions of theories, the shorthand is best 
given mnemonic properties, and made visual and humorous.  
Personifications and jokey acronyms fit in with this.

TBAY is certainly not the only way that complex speculative theories 
can be discussed; however, its features lend themselves to making 
that discussion easier for those who have made their investment in a 
theory, and, conversely, *any* chosen style or format for discussion 
of these theories would leave the casual reader with a sense that 
they have to struggle to keep up and join in.

David




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 01:07:28 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 01:07:28 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
Message-ID: <bqtugh+e2ji@...>

I want in this post to expose what I see as an intersting issue in 
the debate that has emerged here.  This is the sense of social 
exclusion that has been expressed on both sides.

I want to approach it via the idea of a social metaphor for list 
participation.  I believe most of us have some 'real life' analogue 
in mind when we participate in list discussion (I know that the 
internet is just as real as any other part of life but that's what 
we seem to be stuck with calling it).  In the analogue, some social 
situations are experienced as uncomfortable or discomforting, and it 
becomes part of etiquette for others to try to relieve that 
discomfort, and rudeness to persist in not relieving it once 
revealed, or to knowingly create it.

The problem most of us have is that an internet forum is not 
precisely parallel to *any* physical social situation, and so we 
(the human race, not just HPFGU) are still learning what forms of 
discomfort are unavoidable, what have to be balanced against one 
another, and what are always unacceptable.  As part of that learning 
process we bring along our largely preconceived social metaphors and 
start to judge behaviour by them.

What I want to do is to eamine a couple of specific social metaphors 
and show how they lead to different expectations of what is polite 
behaviour, and therefore mismatched perceptions of politeness and 
rudeness by list members.  Unfortunately, I cannot offer any 
solution that will despatch this problem, but I hope that I can help 
list members become more able to accept the behaviour of others by 
increasing understanding, and so reduce tension.

The first metaphor is that of the party.  This has been put forward 
in discussions before, certainly within the admin team but I think 
also on OTC.  In this metaphor, we imagine groups of people holding 
conversations.  People may join or leave a particular group, or 
participate in more than one conversation at once.  A conversation 
corresponds to a thread on HPFGU.  In this metaphor, each person 
knows more or less who is in the group (on HPFGU there is an unknown 
number of lurkers but this does not affect the argument), and 
addresses their remarks to that group.  In list posting terms that 
may lead to in-jokes and other forms of behaviour that may seem 
excluding to other people not in that group at that time.  In the 
metaphor, that's acceptable, because those people aren't there - 
they are on the other side of the room, having their own 
conversation, or sitting quietly in a corner.  On a list, though, 
there is no definition of who is 'in' a thread: potentially any list 
member may be trying to join in by reading posts.

Now let's amend the party metaphor slightly.  We now have a group 
holding a conversation, but they are native speakers of two 
different languages, say English and French.  Some of the group are 
fluent in both languages, but not all, and poor speakers of both 
languages are present.  Suppose the conversation has been going on 
in English, when suddenly one of the French speakers who can't 
manage English very well turns to a fellow francophone and continues 
the conversation in French.  How does that make the English-speakers 
whose French ability is poor feel?  How did the fact that the 
conversation was formerly English-only make the French speakers 
feel? Do the fluently bilingual have any special duties in the 
situation?  To some extent I think something like this lies behind 
Eileen's coment that TBAY allows things to be said that can't be 
said (by her?) in any other way, and Shaun's complaint about people 
moving threads into TBAY.  I have been in real-life (there it is 
again) situations precisely like that, in all the roles, and it's 
just tough - somewhere along the line someone will feel 
disadvantaged, or excluded, or fed up at having to carry the 
translation load. However, they don't degenerate into fights and 
rancour, because everyone understands it's difficult and makes 
allowances.  (I see that since I wrote the above Shaun has raised 
the parallel of the foreign language.)

My second metaphor is that of the academic seminar.  (I personally 
have always felt uneasy about the party metaphor, largely because 
the seminar metaphor was the one that I naturally assumed when I 
started here.  In fact, so strong was its grip on me that I had 
difficulty understanding some of the impulses for a 
conference/convention.  Why wait to get a load of people into a room 
to give a paper and discuss it when we are in a room 24/7 and can 
discuss anything put forward by anyone all the time?  Sure, it's 
great to get together, but couldn't we major on the casual things we 
*can't* do online, like just hanging?  But I digress.)  In this 
metaphor, someone has the floor, and makes a more formal comment or 
even something approximating a short speech.  Everyone else in the 
room is expected to keep quiet while that person speaks, and in 
return the person is expected to speak up, enunciate clearly, and so 
on.  It's rude, in this metaphor, to mumble, or insist on addressing 
only some of the group.  In discussion list terms, posters would be 
required to make their posts accessible to the known weaknesses of 
their audience.  In the context of TBAY, I should add that, in this 
metaphor, there is no requirement to take account of the possibility 
that people don't *like* TBAY, only that they find it hard to read, 
or that, like Eileen's brother, they find aspects baffling or 
meaningless.

You can see how, in an academic seminar, it would be rude for a 
group of people to hold a private conversation (even supposing it 
not to be disruptive to listening to the floor), and at a party, for 
someone to insist that people in the far corner speak up so everyone 
can hear.  And you can see how, in the context of an internet 
discussion group, these metaphors begin to break down: offlist 
continuations of a thread are not necessarily rude, nor is a post 
from a newbie requesting clarification of another post.

What obligation do we as posters have to our readers?  I don't mean 
under list rules, but in common humanity.  Should TBAYers consider 
the 'Eileen's brothers' who populate the list?  Should academically 
inclined people like me (I have additionally honed my writing skills 
with many years of writing cases that are supposed to survive 
rigorous scrutiny) do more to put at ease those we intimidate?  I 
don't know - I don't think anyone knows.

I think in the long run we should try to leave these metaphors 
behind, and consider how our actions as posters affect readers of 
all kinds.  That's an easy ideal to aim for, and a hard one to 
achieve, if only because we know so little of the contexts into 
which our words are going.  Even simple rules of thumb for 
politeness are more local than we realise, and fool us on the global 
internet.

I suppose the main conclusion is that all this is a matter for list 
members, not list administrators.

David




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 02:11:27 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 02:11:27 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqi758+687q@...>
Message-ID: <bqu28f+cuai@...>

Abigail wrote:
> members of the list
> admin have been putting together a TBAY primer, which will answer
> new members' questions about the format.
>  
> Trouble is, we're not entirely certain what those questions are.
>  
> We can guess some of them, and no doubt we can thing of a few that
> a person with no familiarity with TBAY might never think to ask, 
but
> there are surely questions that we would never consider. Which is 
why
> it's great that we have you to do our work for us. :-)

I realise I committed the cardinal sin of not answering the exam 
question.  I don't know if I'm qualified to sit, as I'm not a 'newer 
member', at least, not newer than TBAY.  I'll answer them anyway, 
and the examiners can always throw my paper in the bin.

> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages?

Messages in which the poster role plays, and introduces persons or 
objects to represent theories or aspects of theories.

 What do you feel is the most important aspect of a TBAY
> message?

I'm not sure I'm qualified to answer this.  I thought it was the 
role play element, but Eileen's comments (as well as off-lists with 
Elkins several months back) make plain that there is more going on 
in these posts than I can see.  (I used to worry that when, say, 
people attacked each other in these posts, they possibly really were 
expressing anger and a desire to attack.)

> What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? 

To be honest, it means to me that the speaker has the wrong end of 
the stick.  Theories are just theories.  TBAY is how they are 
expressed.  The theory known as MAGIC DISHWASHER was originally 
expressed in a straight essay by Pip entitled 'The Spying Game'.

What, if any, is
> the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?

None; see above. 
>  
> 2. Do you read TBAY messages?

Yes.  I read them very rarely, but no more so, I think than other 
main list posts.

 Have you ever posted a TBAY message? If
> you have, what prompted you to do so?

Taking these two together.  Yes.  I wanted to give it a try, just 
as, one day, I hope to manage to write a filk.  Again, bearing in 
mind Eileen's comments, it may not really have been a good example, 
as what appeared to be fluff probably was fluff.

 Have you ever wanted to respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format?

No.  To be precise, I have always been happy to respond regardless 
of format.  I do have the advantage, however, of having been around 
when TBAY posting started and so knowing that it was an organic part 
of the list.

 What about the
> TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

Not applicable.
>  
> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format?

I do find it takes longer to understand a TBAY post than 
a 'straight' post of equal length.  I find the role play aspect 
quite accessible; I find the need to refer to HA to remind myself of 
what is being discussed does slow me down.

As I implied in a previous post I find it hard to keep straight in 
my mind a complex speculation, and the feeling that I'm not fully in 
control of the mental furniture, so to speak, creates unease and 
discomfort in me.

The issue of time to understand is an important one for me as, 
realistically, I can keep up roughly with OT-Chatter plus one other 
list of equivalent volume.  I dislike joining in on anything unless 
I have read everything of relevance (I do do it though).  Like 
Shaun, I spend a fair bit of time waiting for pages to load (I don't 
like digests or expanded webview because I lose the identity of the 
posters).

 Do you find discussions
> of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts 
(such as
> Evil!Lupin)?

I think they're about equal for me.

 Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY theories)
> and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible?

HA: very much so.  I haven't tried using the other FPs to understand 
current posts.

 What can
> veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

Why, that's simple!  Just write offlist to all the people who felt 
alienated and so never replied!  Just as you would with any other 
post <eg>.

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY?

George, because it is the name of a canon character.  Acronyms that 
bear little relation to the theory thus 'nymed.

 What would you like to know
> before posting?

I'm probably disqualified by list-age from answering this one, but 
like a number of others I'm reluctant to put words into another 
poster's mouth.  I also feel very nervous of the etiquette of the 
more colourful behaviour - I could never have written a scene like 
the one Elkins wrote in the Neville symposium where she smashed a 
desk because I would be frightened that it would seem offensive to 
others, though that scene was not offensive to me.

> What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY style?

For my employer to free me of all responsibility to do any work, 
while continually allowing me broadband net access.  There's a 
serious point there: that if I had lots of time to devote to HPFGU, 
I would probably find myself swimming much more in the bay.  As it 
is, I have much more in common with those who want to jump on to the 
list, hoover up as much info as possible in as little time as 
possible, and jump off again.

I doubt if there's anything the list administration can do to change 
this likelihood, though.

David




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 12:36:49 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 12:36:49 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <3FD2DE30.31542.1F9A62@localhost>
Message-ID: <bqv6t1+288l@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Shaun Hately" <drednort at a...> 
wrote:
Carolyn suggested:  
> > Would it be worth doing a poll to find out if the cost of 
downloading 
> > large, unwanted posts is a big issue for members generally ? > 

Shaun replied:
> One *slight* problem with such a poll (-8
> 
> Those who have e-mail access only to the net (and there's actually 
quite a few 
> people in that situation - about 10% in most western countries, 
higher in other 
> countries) cannot participate in most internet polls. Those who are 
concerned 
> about download charges or time charges, etc, are less likely to, 
because it could 
> cost them money.

Carolyn again:

Well, if this is the case, couldn't the Admin team just send an email 
to all list members asking them a couple of short, to-the-point 
questions about their internet access and any difficulties people may 
be having with downloading or replying to posts ?

This would only require a quick, cheap email response from everyone, 
and although that would take some analysing, it would provide a 
comprehensive list of all known problems.

Also, as it should attract replies from both lurkers and regular 
posters alike, it might give Admin a better idea of how many people 
were actually still 'live' on the site. I would be surprised if it 
was as many as 11000.






From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 15:43:41 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 15:43:41 -0000
Subject: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqst60+ehnc@...>
Message-ID: <bqvhrd+pej6@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Caius Marcius" 
<coriolan_cmc at h...> wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> 
> wrote:
  
> > I can't speak for all filkers, but  my filks usually do have a 
> canon 
> > point  and sometimes I've found that a filk can actually convey 
a 
> > theory better than a straightforward  exposition. 
>


Caius Marcius: 
> To expand on Pippin's point, not only do many HP filks bear some 
sort 
> of Canonic argument, many others were inspired by the fertile and 
> active discussions that are always taking place on HP4GU. During 
the 
> long wait for OOP, many filkers joined in with their speculations 
and 
> predictions. For example, speculations over future causualties 
> prompted filks by Gail B and myself (both based on Tom Lehrer's 
Who's 
> Next?). Kirstini's brilliant filk The Death Row Tango indulged in 
> similar speculation on the eve of OOP's release. A suggestion by 
one 
> listee that the end of Book Seven would reveal the entire HP-saga 
as 
> nothing more than Harry's dream prompted two filks by Pip and 
> myself.  None of these filks would have been written at all if 
> filkers were not permitted to make their musical responses.
> 

Me (Haggridd):
Human written communication is not limited to that subsection of 
prose we call essays.  Those who would ban TBAY or filks from the 
list would so limit our range of communication on the list.  Essays 
alone are simply inadequate to communicate some of the concepts 
passed on by poetry, song, or visions (I put TBAY in this category, 
myself, along with the quattrains of Nostradamus).  Do not confuse 
form with function.  The pattern of thought that akes a slight 
detour through the dimension of song can return with a very pithy, 
very on-point obsvation about the Wizarding World that would not 
have been conveyed so elegantly by an essay.  I don't doubt it could 
also be achieved by an essay, but it would take many paragraphs to 
communicate what is contained in one well constructed stanza.

Pippin and CMC have given examples of canon in filks.  I would like 
to add that I for one, and certainly CMC, for I have remarked on it, 
also construct some of our better filks to capture the particular 
sense of humor or point of view that JKR is employing when she 
writes about an event in the books. It is not a simple matter of 
plugging in alternate rhymes to a song.

So, skip reading them, if they aren't for you.  I skippepd TBAYs as 
incomprehensible, until I understood my first one, and then marveled 
at the genius in some of them.  But never think that filks are some 
effete masturbatory self-pleasuring not appropriate for the main 
list.  They are just as valid as the essay posts-- in some ways, as 
I pointed out, more appropriate.

CMC:
> Out of respect for those listees who are sorting threads 
> alphabatically, I will henceforth put "FILK" in the beginning of 
my 
> posts.
> 

Me (Haggridd):
Me too!
>    - CMC
> 
Haggridd





From strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 16:09:56 2003
From: strom5150 at strom5150.yahoo.invalid (strom5150)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:09:56 -0000
Subject: Questions about TBAY, FILK Discussion
Message-ID: <bqvjck+6sba@...>

Hi all,

I've been following (and occasionally posting to) this list, and just 
have some questions regarding the TBAY wars. I'm certainly curious as 
to what everyone thinks of these questions, but I'm very interested 
in the Admins' responses.

First, here is my own simplistic summary of what we have learned from 
the TBAY (and FILK) discussion:

1. Some people hate TBAY.

2. Some people love TBAY.

3. Some people have no strong opinions on TBAY.

4. Even this list, which is comprised of a small percentage of main-
listers, contains posters and lurkers of many diverse opinions, 
backgrounds, etc., who will defend their own opinions to the end.

5. There are relevant Internet access issues for many listees, which 
does have a direct bearing on what they want to receive in their 
email boxes and what they can do online.

Very simplistic summary of the many well-stated opinions, I admit.

Now, my questions:

1. Besides getting the issue about Shaun's post out in the open, and 
allowing him to resubmit it, has anything productive come out of the 
TBAY discussion? Has anything been stated that will make it easier 
for Admins to run the group, and make as many listees happy as 
possible? 

2. If not, how can this discussion be redirected to allow that to 
happen? I'm assuming that the original TBAY questions were asked by 
the Admins in order to get feedback that will help them run the lists 
in a more effective and efficient way. I don't think they just wanted 
to hear about how we all love or hate TBAY, period. (Or did you?)

That's it, thanks!

Danielle




From abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 16:12:24 2003
From: abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid (abigailnus)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:12:24 -0000
Subject: Two Questions on TBAY/Archives
In-Reply-To: <bqsvkn+ps82@...>
Message-ID: <bqvjh8+mlh1@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...> 
wrote:
> Two things I'm curious about, having to do with the recent threads 
> on TBAY and Searching/Archives:
> 
> 1) What if you and several other people are on a thread and
> the issue seems to be heading toward a possible theory. Each of you
> have contributed thoughts, but one person decides to make it into a
> TBAY unilaterally (they include other posters in the TBAY). Is 
that 
> pretty much accepted practice? 

I'm not sure how appropriate the term 'unilaterally' is in this 
context, but there's nothing wrong with moving a discussion in or 
out of TBAY.  If a person with whom you've been discussing a theory 
responds in TBAY style, you can follow him into the 'Bay or respond 
in non-TBAY style to his TBAY.  Either one is perfectly acceptable, 
as long as you remember to add or remove the TBAY prefix as 
appropriate.

Abigail
Who was AWK all weekend, and had quite a bit of catching up to do!




From stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 16:42:46 2003
From: stevejjen at ariadnemajic.yahoo.invalid (Jen Reese)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 16:42:46 -0000
Subject: Two Questions on TBAY/Archives
In-Reply-To: <bqvjh8+mlh1@...>
Message-ID: <bqvla6+rgol@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "abigailnus" 
<abigailnus at y...> wrote:
> I'm not sure how appropriate the term 'unilaterally' is in this 
> context, but there's nothing wrong with moving a discussion in or 
> out of TBAY.  If a person with whom you've been discussing a 
theory 
> responds in TBAY style, you can follow him into the 'Bay or 
respond 
> in non-TBAY style to his TBAY.  Either one is perfectly 
acceptable, 
> as long as you remember to add or remove the TBAY prefix as 
> appropriate.


Jen R: I've always assumed creating a TBAY is equal to "Originating" 
a theory, becoming an author of a theory. That's what I meant by 
unilaterally, in the case that all the people on the thread don't 
work off-list together to author the TBAY. But maybe my assumption 
is off-base, and most people see TBAY as just a different style 
rather than "claiming" a theory?

Jen, still trying to understand this elusive TBAY thing..




From abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 17:59:48 2003
From: abigailnus at abigailnus.yahoo.invalid (abigailnus)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 17:59:48 -0000
Subject: Two Questions on TBAY/Archives
In-Reply-To: <bqvla6+rgol@...>
Message-ID: <bqvpqk+thf1@...>


> Jen R: I've always assumed creating a TBAY is equal 
to "Originating" 
> a theory, becoming an author of a theory. 

Oh, not hardly.  As David so astutely pointed out in an earlier 
message, there's no such thing as a TBAY theory.  Some theories have 
been brought (taken, dragged) into the TBAY format, but that doesn't 
mean that they are the sole property of TBAY.  In fact, many, if not 
most, of the theories that are today almost universally associated 
with TBAY posts originated outside of TBAY (George, MAGIC 
DISHWASHER, Imperius!Arthur, to name but a few), and are still 
discussed outside of TBAY (see Pip's recent addition to the MD 
canon, which had a brief TBAY intro but generally kept its feet dry).

TBAY is a mode of discussion.  A stylistic choice.  It does not 
affect the theory, except inasmuch as any discussion of a theory 
affects it and helps it to grow.

That's what I meant by 
> unilaterally, in the case that all the people on the thread don't 
> work off-list together to author the TBAY. But maybe my assumption 
> is off-base, and most people see TBAY as just a different style 
> rather than "claiming" a theory?

I don't think anyone can 'claim' a theory.  At best, we have people 
who are the most prolific defenders of a particular theory, but this 
isn't the same thing.  Take my example.  I didn't come up with 
Imperius!Arthur.  It was Elkins' idea, and when she first came up 
with it I had a lukewarm reaction to it and used the theory as a 
springboard for my own Auror!Arhtur (I call it my own because I came 
up with it and to the best of my knowledge no one else before me had 
ever suggested such a theory, but that is the extent of 
my 'ownership' of it, as I will illustrate).  A few months later, 
Veronica came upon Elkins' I!A posts and moved the theory into TBAY, 
requesting a ship for it.  Elkins obliged and created the Imperius!
Arthur Trimaran.  At this point, I became completely sold on I!A, 
but only posted TBAY about my own Auror!Arthur as a sub-theory of 
the trimaran theory.

After OOP was published, I wanted to address the affects the new 
canon had on I!A, but neither Veronica nor Elkins were around.  So I 
posted my own TBAY about I!A.  A few months later, Erin asked if she 
could come aboard, and offered her own new canon to the theory.  So, 
at this point, my TBAY incarnation is captain of the I!A trimaran, 
but that doesn't make the theory mine.  On the other hand, Imperius!
Arthur is as much mine as it is Elkins', and as much Erin's as it is 
mine.  Basically, a theory is yours if you believe in it, promote 
it, and defend it, although I would hope that anyone taking up the 
mantle of a preexisting theory would have the good grace to mention 
the names of the people who came before them (in your hypothetical, 
Jen, the person moving into TBAY might bring the other members of 
the thread with them). 

> 
> Jen, still trying to understand this elusive TBAY thing..

Well, I'm hoping that the primer will address this confusion.  
Thanks for all the great feedback, but most especially all the 
constructive suggestions.  I'd like to see more of that and less 
discussion of whehter or not TBAY has a right to exist. :-)

Abigail




From drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 22:18:26 2003
From: drednort at drednort.geo.yahoo.invalid (Shaun Hately)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 09:18:26 +1100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Never mind Tbay, what about FILKS ?
In-Reply-To: <bqv6t1+288l@...>
References: <3FD2DE30.31542.1F9A62@localhost>
Message-ID: <3FD441E2.27404.60F46D@localhost>

On 7 Dec 2003 at 12:36, a_reader2003 wrote:

> Carolyn again:
> 
> Well, if this is the case, couldn't the Admin team just send an email 
> to all list members asking them a couple of short, to-the-point 
> questions about their internet access and any difficulties people may 
> be having with downloading or replying to posts ?
> 
> This would only require a quick, cheap email response from everyone, 
> and although that would take some analysing, it would provide a 
> comprehensive list of all known problems.

That'd be fairer - but I suspect it'd be a lot of work for a rather limited return - I've 
run polls like that on other lists - a 10% response rate seems exceptional.
 
> Also, as it should attract replies from both lurkers and regular 
> posters alike, it might give Admin a better idea of how many people 
> were actually still 'live' on the site. I would be surprised if it 
> was as many as 11000.

Even a poll is only going to give a limited idea (a minimum). Working with smaller 
yahoogroups, I've typically found that on any group more than a year old, at most 
25% are still active. I suspect you'd be right that a lot less than 11,000 people are 
still active but I'm not sure what the number would be.


Yours Without Wax, Dreadnought
Shaun Hately | www.alphalink.com.au/~drednort/thelab.html
(ISTJ)       | drednort at ... | ICQ: 6898200 
"You know the very powerful and the very stupid have one
thing in common. They don't alter their views to fit the 
facts. They alter the facts to fit the views. Which can be 
uncomfortable if you happen to be one of the facts that 
need altering." The Doctor - Doctor Who: The Face of Evil
Where am I: Frankston, Victoria, Australia




From constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec  7 22:52:42 2003
From: constancevigilance at constancevigilance.yahoo.invalid (constancevigilance)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2003 22:52:42 -0000
Subject: Paying too much for long downloads
In-Reply-To: <bqsfi2+ni5g@...>
Message-ID: <br0avq+jil3@...>

Carolyn wrote:
> 
> On the issue of having to pay a lot to download unwanted, and 
perhaps 
> very long posts ... <snip>
> 
> Would it be worth doing a poll to find out if the cost of 
downloading 
> large, unwanted posts is a big issue for members generally ? 

I have a speedy always-on connection and I wouldn't DREAM of getting 
individual emails on the mail list. I used to get digests, but even 
that got to be too much. Webview is perfect for me - I can set my 
view to expand messages, then skim through 25 messages at a time 
pretty quickly, immediately skipping any that have obnoxious (to me) 
prefixes. This would include any SHIP posts, which I hate but would 
argue strenuously to keep on the list. Using this technique, I 
actually managed to keep up even in the frantic post-OOP days.

Maybe the list could be reminded that this is an alternative to an 
unweildy and expensive Internet experience? Maybe this would relieve 
some of the pressure on the list subgroups?


Constance Vigilance, who was on the list for over a year before 
discovering the expanded messages feature of the webview format.




From hpfgumoderator at hpfgumoderator.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 00:44:24 2003
From: hpfgumoderator at hpfgumoderator.yahoo.invalid (hpfgumoderator)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 00:44:24 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
Message-ID: <br0hh8+vi30@...>

Dear Members of the Harry Potter for Grownups Family of Lists, 

We regret the need to interrupt with a post of this nature. 

For the past several months, we (the List Administration Team) have 
been handling the disruption of several of the HP lists by an 
individual or individuals, and it has gotten to a point which we 
feel to be harassment. In addition, a threat has been made offlist 
to at least one member of the current admin team, and we are 
concerned that harassment of list members may have extended to 
others beyond admin team members. 

Until now, we have been handling this within the admin team, and 
have done our best to avoid burdening the lists with this situation -
 we felt it was an administrative problem, and so should be dealt 
with internally. Recently, however, we received a message which made 
it much more than just a list admin problem. 

We were contacted via the owners address with a frank threat against 
the lists, indicating that, unless certain demands are met, an 
irreversible action will be taken that will damage the HPFGU list 
community. 

The action was not specified; however, one of our auxiliary HPFGU 
lists was recently deleted by Yahoo, and the sender of this e-mail 
apparently took credit for that action, implying that "Terms of Use 
violations" were reported. Other owner messages have made reference 
to "holes" in our security. 

This threat may be as innocuous as the formation of an alternate 
list. However, we cannot ignore the possibility that serious harm 
may be intended to the HPFGU family of lists, and we felt it only 
fair that you should be alerted. This is your list community too. 

Some of us are concerned that we are being manipulated into 
complaining on the public HPFGU lists, or forwarding the emails, so 
a complaint for a violation of Yahoo's Terms of Use could be made. 
For that reason, we are not providing any names in this email. 

As our experience with the auxiliary group showed, Yahoo does not 
give notice before they delete a group. While it might seem 
incredible that they would delete a group with nearly 90,000 posts 
and three-plus years of history without investigating the details of 
an accusation, we have to be cautious, and beg Yahoo to listen to 
both sides of the story if a complaint is made. 

We are doing whatever we can to improve security on the lists. We 
will do our best to avoid any disruption of services, and we ask 
your understanding if odd things should happen to the lists. We 
intend to do whatever we can to prevent any damage to the HPFGU 
family of lists, including deletion of any other lists, should that 
be the form this threat takes.

However, should any HPFGU list(s) become inaccessible, you can visit 
The Lexicon at 
http://www.hp-lexicon.org for status updates and, if necessary, 
relocation information. 

Finally, in closing, we wish to apologize. We know the 
unresponsiveness of the admin team has been a source of frustration 
to many of you. It has been a source of frustration to us as well. 
We each have only so many hours to devote to HP, and over the past 
few months, most of them have been devoted to dealing with this 
situation. It has taken our time, energy, and enthusiasm away from 
our proper tasks: the fostering and running of these lists. And 
until this situation is resolved, some of our time must continue to 
be devoted to dealing with it. So we ask your continuing patience 
and understanding, while we do everything we can to protect this 
family of lists. 

Sincerely, 

The HPforGrownups List Administration Team









From siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 02:20:11 2003
From: siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid (Susanne)
Date: Sun, 7 Dec 2003 18:20:11 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Paying too much for long downloads
In-Reply-To: <br0avq+jil3@...>
References: <br0avq+jil3@...>
Message-ID: <13767557772.20031207182011@...>



Hi,

Sunday, December 07, 2003, 2:52:42 PM, constancevigilance at ... wrote:

> Webview is perfect for me - I can set my
> view to expand messages, then skim through 25 messages at a time 
> pretty quickly, immediately skipping any that have obnoxious (to me) 
> prefixes.

snip

> Maybe the list could be reminded that this is an alternative to an 
> unweildy and expensive Internet experience? Maybe this would relieve 
> some of the pressure on the list subgroups?

But you have to be online to read the messages in webview,
right?

And on a 56K dial-up connection, it can take a while to jump
to the next page (I've done this, before getting dsl just a
month ago).

In general, it was much faster for me to download all the
messages individually (I can't stand digests), and have them
filtered into folders for different lists.

Then I could read them at my leasure, offline, without
missing phone calls.

In other countries many people still have to pay by the minute on top
of the internet fee, if I'm not mistaken, and reading the
list in webview wouldn't cut down on time, and might even
add to it.

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at ...

Visit our pet rabbits: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From frantyck at frantyck.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 05:15:14 2003
From: frantyck at frantyck.yahoo.invalid (frantyck)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 05:15:14 -0000
Subject: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br0hh8+vi30@...>
Message-ID: <br11d2+5rcc@...>

What awful news.

I don't know if this is possible or even legal (does Yahoo have 
rights to the messages that users post on Yahoo groups?), but would 
it be possible to periodically backup all the messages and files 
from each Hpfgu group offsite? This way it would be harder for some 
bored and resentful computer whiz to cause major damage.

And Yahoo really ought to do better by our lists. There are 
thousands of us, and we are consumers of Yahoo's advertising, after 
all. No members, no money. Is it possible to use the 'the customer 
is always right' card with Yahoo? It likely would be noticed by the 
news media if Hpfgu were no longer able to function on Yahoo.

Are there any other options in terms of websites capable of hosting 
groups like ours? I'd like to point out that Yahoo groups were 
blocked for several months this year by the government in India 
(where I live) because a small insurgent group in the northeast 
occasionally used a Yahoo group to communicate. Yahoo refused to 
block this group and thus the government in a fit of illiterate 
petulance blocked off all of Yahoo groups. Yahoo may not have caved 
that time, but in the past (with China, for instance) they have 
shown themselves willing to yield. What I mean is -- Yahoo is 
probably the biggest provider of egroup facilities anywhere on the 
Internet, so it is among the most political and visible. Can we 
think of somewhere safer?

Rrishi





From pengolodh_sc at ...  Mon Dec  8 08:06:54 2003
From: pengolodh_sc at ... (=?iso-8859-1?q?Christian=20Stub=F8?=)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 09:06:54 +0100 (CET)
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br11d2+5rcc@...>
Message-ID: <20031208080654.77782.qmail@...>

 --- frantyck <frantyck at ...> skrev: > What awful news.
> 
> I don't know if this is possible or even legal (does Yahoo have 
> rights to the messages that users post on Yahoo groups?), but would 
> it be possible to periodically backup all the messages and files 
> from each Hpfgu group offsite? 
[snip]

This is being done already - they have done this for, I think, two years.

> Are there any other options in terms of websites capable of hosting 
> groups like ours? [...] What I mean is -- Yahoo is probably the 
> biggest provider of egroup facilities anywhere on the Internet, so
> it is among the most political and visible. Can we think of 
> somewhere safer?

The one alternative I can think of for now, is topica, but I do not know a whole lot
about Topica at all.  Immediately running off to another list-service may or may not be a
good diea, but is somewhat difficult to handle when we are all of 11,000 people on the list.

=====
Best regards
Christian Stub
------------------------
It has come to the attention of the management that you exist. Please cease and desist. Thank you.



From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 10:23:55 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 10:23:55 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <bqtugh+e2ji@...>
Message-ID: <br1jfr+ti7e@...>


David, I love you !! LOL !! Seriously, your post helped me understand 
what was bothering me so much. You've stated my opinion quite nicely, 
and you've also opened my eyes to other people's opinion quite 
widely. A truly enlightening post as far as I am concerned. I had to 
snip a lot of it, but I still want you to know that I absolutely 
loved all of it.

Dave Witley wrote :

> The first metaphor is that of the party. (...) In this metaphor, we 
> imagine groups of people holding conversations.  People may join or 
> leave a particular group, or participate in more than one 
> conversation at once.  (...) each person knows more or less who is 
> in the group (...), and addresses their remarks to that group.  
> (...) On a list, though, there is no definition of who is 'in' a 
> thread: potentially any list member may be trying to join in by 
> reading posts.

Del answers :

Yup, that's how I feel some people are seeing the list : as a big 
party where different groups have different conversations. And they 
don't understand me when I tell them that I'd like to participate in 
their particular conversation but I don't understand them. I guess 
for them it's simple : if I don't understand, I can simply choose not 
to participate. But for me, it's different : I want to at least know 
*what* each group is talking about, because I'm interested in a lot 
of different topics. So when I come accross a group that's talking 
garble to me, I feel rejected. Especially when I catch words that 
seem to promise a highly interesting discussion. It then gets 
horribly frustrating to me. And it gets only more frustrating if they 
look at me with wide eyes and say "If you don't understand us, just 
go and talk to people you understand, that's simple". But I want to 
talk to YOU, guys, because you seem to be talking about very 
interesting stuff !

Dave Witley wrote : 

> Now let's amend the party metaphor slightly.  We now have a group 
> holding a conversation, but they are native speakers of two 
> different languages, say English and French.

Del answers :

LOL ! My native language is French, and English is a learned language 
for me. So I *have* been thinking of that metaphor for days, but I 
didn't dare bring it up. I was afraid people might misunderstand my 
point.

Dave Witley wrote : 

> Some of the group are fluent in both languages, but not all, and 
> poor speakers of both languages are present.  Suppose the 
> conversation has been going on in English, when suddenly one of the 
> French speakers who can't manage English very well turns to a 
> fellow francophone and continues the conversation in French.  How 
> does that make the English-speakers whose French ability is poor 
> feel?  How did the fact that the conversation was formerly English-
> only make the French speakers feel? Do the fluently bilingual have 
> any special duties in the situation?

Del answers :

YO !! You got my problem down pretty well.
When I got on the list, I knew English was its language, so I know 
that if the language gets me lost sometimes, it's my problem and 
noone else's.
But TBAY is also like another language to me, and this time I feel 
cheated, because I wasn't forewarned about it. Basically, I feel like 
the TBAYers are telling me : "Ha, sorry you don't speak TBAY, too bad 
for you, because we've decided it's the language we'll speak among 
ourselves from now on. If you want to join, learn the language".
Now of course, if their approach is that of the party, I understand 
their point of view. But it had never clearly occurred to me that 
some people saw it that way (and that doesn't mean I think they are 
wrong, okay ?).

Dave Witley wrote : 

> My second metaphor is that of the academic seminar.  (I personally 
> have always felt uneasy about the party metaphor, largely because 
> the seminar metaphor was the one that I naturally assumed when I 
> started here. 

Del answers :

Same for me. It's only when I got on Feedback that I started to 
realise that maybe some people didn't see it that way.

Dave Witley wrote : 

> In fact, so strong was its grip on me that I had 
> difficulty understanding some of the impulses for a 
> conference/convention.  Why wait to get a load of people into a 
> room to give a paper and discuss it when we are in a room 24/7 and 
> can discuss anything put forward by anyone all the time?
> (...)
> In this metaphor, someone has the floor, and makes a more formal 
> comment or even something approximating a short speech.  Everyone 
> else in the room is expected to keep quiet while that person 
> speaks, and in return the person is expected to speak up, enunciate 
> clearly, and so on.  It's rude, in this metaphor, to mumble, or 
> insist on addressing only some of the group.

Del answers :

Yup yup yup, my ideas exactly !
 
(Okay, I know I should have snipped those parts if I had nothing more 
to say but "me too", but I *really* wanted to say it :-)

Dave Witley wrote : 

> In discussion list terms, posters would be required to make their 
> posts accessible to the known weaknesses of their audience.  In the 
> context of TBAY, I should add that, in this metaphor, there is no 
> requirement to take account of the possibility that people don't 
> *like* TBAY, only that they find it hard to read, or that, like 
> Eileen's brother, they find aspects baffling or meaningless.

Del answers :

Yes, exactly ! As I said, I happen to sometimes like some TBAY posts. 
But that's not the point to me. The point *to me* is that I simply 
don't understand them most of the time. And since I've come on this 
list (or is it that list ? I never know. Well I mean Feedback 
anyway), I've discovered that some TBAYers see even more in their 
posts that I thought there was and I already couldn't see ! In other 
words : it seems that I understand the TBAY posts even less than I 
previously thought. Which, as you can guess, doesn't exactly make me 
feel overjoyed...

Dave Witley wrote : 

> You can see how, in an academic seminar, it would be rude for a 
> group of people to hold a private conversation (even supposing it 
> not to be disruptive to listening to the floor),

Del answers :

It's particularly hard for me when it comes to TBAY posts, because 
some of the greatest theories out there have come straight out of 
TBAY. So I feel like either I keep out of some enthralling threads, 
or I have to figure out what *ever* the original post (and the TBAY 
responses, if there are any) say and mean (which is not the same 
thing).
To make my own metaphor, I find myself receiving a letter from a 
fellow French friend about an interesting new idea. Only problem : 
that letter is written in English, because my friend has decided it 
would better convey his ideas. All very good, but it so happens that 
*I* am not fluent in English. So I have to decipher the letter and 
make sense of it, hopefully without misunderstanding any crucial 
part. And then I have to write my response, which I'll do in French, 
of course, even though that will make me feel bad and slightly afraid 
of making a mistake in the translation and looking like a perfect 
idiot. So in conclusion : I'll have to put up extra work to 
understand the letter, then additional extra work to translate the 
original terms in French, and in the end I'll still feel like a jerk 
because I can't keep up the quality level my friend set up to start 
with. Tp say I feel bad is an uderstatement.
Now of course, the TBAYers will tell me that if I don't speak 
English, I simply shouldn't bother with the letter at all. Bah yes, 
but my friend gave a title to his letter, and that title tickled me 
badly, so I want to know what he has to say about it. Or even worse : 
let's say I don't read that letter, and then another friend writes to 
me, in French, about what my first friend said, and I find myself 
very much interested by what that second friend is saying. Can I 
really avoid reading that first letter then ?

Dave Witley wrote : 

>  And you can see how, in the context of an internet 
> discussion group, these metaphors begin to break down: offlist 
> continuations of a thread are not necessarily rude, nor is a post 
> from a newbie requesting clarification of another post.

Del answers :

I personally am not against offlist continuations of a thread. I'm 
saddened that people won't share their point of view with me (and 
others) on the list, but I am also aware that threads are often 
carried on offlist because they have become seriously off topic. 
Moreover, offlist discussions sometimes lead to interesting onlist 
threads. Wherever a discussion takes place, I'm for it, because it 
will ultimately promote onlist discussion, one way or another.

Dave Witley wrote : 

> What obligation do we as posters have to our readers?  I don't mean 
> under list rules, but in common humanity.  Should TBAYers consider 
> the 'Eileen's brothers' who populate the list?

Del answers :

I must admit I'd love it if they did, and I'd feel put down if they 
didn't. But this isn't my list, so I don't expect it to cater to all 
my needs.

Del




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 10:44:05 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 10:44:05 -0000
Subject: Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar
In-Reply-To: <bqr9p7+f1ha@...>
Message-ID: <br1kll+hmdi@...>

Susan wrote : 

> I have to say that there is an awful lot of reading between the 
> lines going on which is causing undue stress *IMHO*.
> (...)
> several of you have forgotten that sometimes what someone has 
> posted is simply what they think.  Period.  No hidden meanings.  
> Nothing implied.
> 
> "Even Freud said, Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..."

Del answers :

I couldn't agree more. Please people, let's not get into a "hidden 
meanings game". I live it every day, and it's not fun. French people 
*revel* in irony and hidden meanings, we call it "humour" 
and "piques". But when it's *all the time*, when you can't know 
anymore if people mean just what they say or if they mean more 
(sometimes even the opposite of what they actually say), when you 
can't even stand receiving a compliment anymore because you're not 
sure the person is not actually making fun of you, the game isn't fun 
anymore.

I lived in Western Canada for a year. At first, I thought they were 
naive, and they could learn some irony from us French. But after a 
while, I started to cherish their lack of irony. It is so restful to 
know people mean what they say. No more mind games, no more worries, 
no more tension. And I had a VERY HARD time going back to France...

I don't want this kind of atmosphere to develop here. Please.

Del




From lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 14:17:57 2003
From: lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid (Amy Z)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 14:17:57 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture (amy's REAL post)
In-Reply-To: <bqtugh+e2ji@...>
Message-ID: <br216l+96lt@...>

(Whoops, I hit send before I was done.  Individual-emails-receivers, 
delete the previous; digest-receivers, ignore the previous.  AZ)



David, thanks for the fantastic essay, which may not have been
accessible to everyone but was extremely clarifying for me. ;-) I
think the duelling metaphors explain a lot of what is going on.

> I think in the long run we should try to leave these metaphors
> behind, and consider how our actions as posters affect readers of
> all kinds. That's an easy ideal to aim for, and a hard one to
> achieve, if only because we know so little of the contexts into
> which our words are going. Even simple rules of thumb for
> politeness are more local than we realise, and fool us on the
global
> internet.

Yes, so what I am about to say is deliberately naive:

I would like to see politeness be the deciding factor in decisions
about what is and is not acceptable on the list.

David has explicated how it is that people may legitimately reach
opposite conclusions about TBAY's politeness. One conclusion is that
it's polite to allow it because it's some people's best way to
explain their theories, and after all, we're all at a party and
expected to wander to whatever discussion we find interesting and 
accessible.  Another is that it's polite to exclude it because it's 
impenetrable to some people, and after all, we're all at a seminar 
and the speaker's supposed to be addressing us all. So appeals to 
politeness will not resolve the Gordian knot of TBAY.

However, they may resolve the meta-issue of how to talk about TBAY.
One way to form some common ground of politeness even when very
different metaphors shape people's assumptions is to *assume
goodwill.* What dismays me in the current conversation is not the
conflict of needs on the list, nor the conflict in interpretations of
what happens with TBAY, but the quickness to assume that others are
trying to exclude one. No social situation can remain friendly
without a basic assumption, on the part of most participants, that
most participants are acting out of good intentions. Please, if
someone is posting in a style you find inaccessible, or if someone is
pressing you to stop posting in a style you like, consider before you
raise an angry protest that his/her motivation is probably not to 
persecute you, but just to have things on the list go a way that is 
comfortable and enjoyable for him/her. (Probably. It's just possible 
that he/she is an utter bastard who's here at the party/seminar 
purely to make your life miserable. :P )

> I suppose the main conclusion is that all this is a matter for list
> members, not list administrators.

Now, this I don't follow. It *might* be something that is best left
to the natural evolutions of culture, or then again it *might* be
best if the administrators make the call. Or there could be a vote
by the entire membership of the list; or the members could give their
2 Knuts 'til they're tired of it and then the admins could weigh the
points raised and make the decision; or we could declare that anarchy
will be the new policy, erase the Humongous Bigfile, and let the list
turn into all-TBAY-all-the-time, a group for annotated scholarly
essays, a shipping channel, a general discussion group that's allowed
to drift off the topic of HP and never return, you name it.

Whoever makes any such decision, there will be a certain
arbitrariness to the final ruling. English has been deemed the
language of the list and those who cannot comfortably carry on a
conversation in English are urged to find a list in a different
language. Netspeak (of the "hahahhaha, ur the graetest, Davew@!
hey, im a lunarulz fan, ru12?" variety) has been disallowed. Off-
topic chatter has been moved to OTChatter. These decisions don't
mean that English is the best language in the world, that you can't
have a good discussion in netspeak, or that a list can't thrive with
a high percentage of OT posts. Rather, they mean that a list can't be 
all things at once, and so HPfGU is (for now) a list for people who 
know English, prefer to converse with standard grammar and spelling, 
and want to carry on their HP-related conversation in one place and 
their other conversations in another.  Those who want a different 
kind of list are free to go elsewhere.  (IOW, this may be a party, a 
seminar, or something completely different, but it is not a gulag.  
Furthermore, it exists within a larger community in which anyone can 
form a list about almost anything and guided by almost any set of 
rules.  So the ultimate answer to "I hate the rules on this list," 
after due discussion of said rules, is "okay, form another list, and 
vaya con dios."  This isn't a kissoff--it's just an acknowledgement 
that no list can please everyone.)

Or, to expand somewhat on one such decision: Filks have been deemed
permissible, fanfiction not. It seems to me that that is a logical
division, based on bandwidth (filkers can be allowed to run wild and
they'll still take up only a fraction of a percent of list volume)
and the overall resources of the fandom (there are 5,012,366 HP
fanfiction websites, so why turn HPfGU, which has its own useful
niche, into a general fanfic group?). One could easily argue that
filks should be banned from the list ("it's a discussion group, damn
it!") or that fanfic should be allowed ("it's a legitimate way to
explore theories about HP, damn it!"), and people have argued both,
and the admins have wrestled with the questions and finally
said, "Right, you can argue for all different approaches, but you
can't use them all in one place and so here on HPfGU it's gonna go
like this."

So, anyway, could you say more about what you mean by "a matter for
list members, not administrators"?

Amy Z
who speaks American and therefore doesn't know what the verb "major" 
means, outside of "I majored in Harry Potter Studies, with a minor in 
Lord of the Rings"




From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 14:27:07 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 14:27:07 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br0hh8+vi30@...>
Message-ID: <br21nr+cq3g@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "hpfgumoderator" 
<hpfgumoderator at h...> wrote:
> Dear Members of the Harry Potter for Grownups Family of Lists, 
> 
> We regret the need to interrupt with a post of this nature. 
> 
Carolyn:
Its like a scenario from the books themselves. Some power-mad 
wizards/witches gone bad and threatening the whole community with 
destruction. Lets hope our own OotP squad get the upper hand..




From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 15:49:16 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:49:16 -0000
Subject: Lets run with the metaphors: WAS: Re: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <bqtugh+e2ji@...>
Message-ID: <br26hs+v5gd@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:

> The first metaphor is that of the party.  This has been put 
forward 
> in discussions before, certainly within the admin team but I think 
> also on OTC.  In this metaphor, we imagine groups of people 
holding 
> conversations.  People may join or leave a particular group, or 
> participate in more than one conversation at once.  A conversation 
> corresponds to a thread on HPFGU.  In this metaphor, each person 
> knows more or less who is in the group (on HPFGU there is an 
unknown 
> number of lurkers but this does not affect the argument), and 
> addresses their remarks to that group.  In list posting terms that 
> may lead to in-jokes and other forms of behaviour that may seem 
> excluding to other people not in that group at that time.  In the 
> metaphor, that's acceptable, because those people aren't there - 
> they are on the other side of the room, having their own 
> conversation, or sitting quietly in a corner.  On a list, though, 
> there is no definition of who is 'in' a thread: potentially any 
list 
> member may be trying to join in by reading posts.
> 
Me (Haggridd):
Your metaphor of a party seems more closely descriptive of the 
dynamics of the list than that of the seminar.  You yourself admit 
that the seminar was an assumption on your part.  Anyay, back to the 
party.  It is a big party, with many groups carrying on 
conversations, playing party games, or having sing-alongs.  This 
party is also a long party, where party-goers break for sleep, or to 
eat from the buffet, and have little one o one conversations with 
persons who had previously been in said conversations, playing said 
party games, or singing along said songs.  Where your analysis of 
the mtaphor breaks down is that these little groups within the party 
are not exclusionary, and having posts and threads that do not admit 
others to join in.  Even at the physical party, it would be rude, or 
at best maladroit for a party goer to ask all thjose playing the 
game to stop and explain all the rules and strategy of the game 
right there during the game.  But during those tete-a-tetes at the 
buffet table (offline emails to friends, Sunday chats, etc.) the 
party-goer can learn what the game is about, how to play basicallh, 
and then he can play to the best of his ability later in the night, 
learning strategy as he plays.  I woun't spell out a similar process 
for the sing-alongs, but leave it as an exercise for the interested.

The alternative to this is one of thise parties where they 
determinedly try to keep everything general.  These are quite often 
boring, with everybody forced willy nilly to play charades, or Simon 
Says.  Give me a freewheeling toga party anytime.


David:
> 
> My second metaphor is that of the academic seminar.  (I personally 
> have always felt uneasy about the party metaphor, largely because 
> the seminar metaphor was the one that I naturally assumed when I 
> started here.


Haggridd:
Even ranting your admitted assumption, I contend that the seminar 
metaphor breaks down because there is no moderator of the seminar, 
either of each thread, or one who decides when it is time to move 
from one thread to another.  Perhaps a bull session, with its 
relative informality, is more descriptive of the frank discussion 
portions of list intercourse, than that of the seminar.  I still 
prefer the party metaphor, though, where the gameplayers can play 
TBAY all they want, and the filkers can sing along at the top of 
their lungs, and everybody is having fun in the process

Haggridd.
> 
> I suppose the main conclusion is that all this is a matter for 
list 
> members, not list administrators.
> 
> David

Amen.  H.




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 17:42:06 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 17:42:06 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br21nr+cq3g@...>
Message-ID: <br2d5e+lpdf@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "a_reader2003" 
<carolynwhite2 at a...> wrote:
> Carolyn:
> Its like a scenario from the books themselves. Some power-mad 
> wizards/witches gone bad and threatening the whole community with 
> destruction. Lets hope our own OotP squad get the upper hand...

I was a precocious and spoiled (as well as undersocialized) only 
child for many years. It took years for me to figure out that MAKING 
people play MY game MY way was not an option. (Countless times, I was 
the kid who ended up feeling misunderstood and crying in the corner.) 
While I still screw up, I have learned some lessons. One is that even 
if nobody in the playground will play with you, working the system 
and getting the playground shut down isn't actually very satisfying. 
(Making sure NOBODY gets to play is not the same as being a player.) 
The other is that you only have to threaten to shut down the 
playground ONCE for most people to decide that you are pretty self-
absorbed and disinterested beyond what you want out of them.

I've only been around for four months or so (feels like forever); and 
while I came on like gangbusters at first, I've become less present 
as things outside of cyberspace have sucked up my time and 
energy...so I'm not sure how relevant my opinion is here. But--while 
I have faith that ADMIN will manage to keep it (us) together somehow 
(I'd like to help somehow and am open to suggestions), even if the 
worst happens, I think ADMIN was right in the decisions which seem to 
have triggered what is happening now. I love HPfGU and its sidekicks, 
and part of me is hysterical with fear and grief at the very idea 
that it could go away. Yet...I am not willing to have my love for it 
held hostage. If it died, that would HURT. (Oh, God, please, no.) But 
if the only thing that could save it was giving in, I'd give it up. 
The ransom is (I'm guessing) too high, and the kidnapper(s) too 
certain (I'm sure) to become bolder with success (and what'll it be 
NEXT time?).

Sandy




From silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 11:26:05 2003
From: silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid (silverdragon at naryis.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 21:26:05 +1000
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
References: <br11d2+5rcc@...>
Message-ID: <000201c3bdca$92c39300$64984cca@Monteith>


Rrishi wrote
>>Are there any other options in terms of websites capable of hosting 
groups like ours? I'd like to point out that Yahoo groups were 
blocked for several months this year by the government in India 
(where I live) because a small insurgent group in the northeast 
occasionally used a Yahoo group to communicate. Yahoo refused to 
block this group and thus the government in a fit of illiterate 
petulance blocked off all of Yahoo groups. Yahoo may not have caved 
that time, but in the past (with China, for instance) they have 
shown themselves willing to yield. What I mean is -- Yahoo is 
probably the biggest provider of egroup facilities anywhere on the 
Internet, so it is among the most political and visible. Can we 
think of somewhere safer?<<


Smartgroups is quite hospitable. Another list I belonged to was deleted by Yahoo (no explanation); we moved all ops to smartgroups. They have (or at least had) a zip. function for uploading files too (five at once), so it's much quicker to get the job done. It's worth a look if anyone is worried.

Nox




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 21:55:35 2003
From: thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid (Tom Wall)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 21:55:35 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br0hh8+vi30@...>
Message-ID: <br2s0n+s19g@...>

This is obviously a touchy situation, so please feel free to chide 
me for what I'm about to do, but naturally...

I have a few questions about this message, and the, er, situation 
that we seem to have here.


Admin Team:
> For the past several months, we (the List Administration Team) 
have 
> been handling the disruption of several of the HP lists by an 
> individual or individuals, and it has gotten to a point which we 
> feel to be harassment. 

Tom:
Now, I could be wrong, but I feel confident that the ADMIN team has 
an idea as to the identity of this/these person/persons, since you 
guys take pains to point out that you aren't going to mention names.

Is there any *reason* that he/she/they could be irritated with the 
lists? Is this an irritation with the HPfGU family of lists, or is 
it an irritation with a subset of that group, like, say, the MDDT or 
the Moderator team?

In other words, what is the nature of the problem? Can it be solved? 
And has this person or people tried to solve the problem in other 
ways? Do you think that this is a 'last resort' kind of threat, or 
are we talking about something that will be ongoing?

Is it possible to satisfy this person by meeting the demands? I 
mean, what are the demands? Are they demands to be annointed High 
HPfGU Overlord, or something a little more moderate? What does this 
person want?


ADMIN:
> In addition, a threat has been made offlist 
> to at least one member of the current admin team, and we are 
> concerned that harassment of list members may have extended to 
> others beyond admin team members. 

Tom:
I understand that posting a person's *name* here might not be such a 
good idea, but I don't see why we couldn't know more about the 
nature of this threat.

What was the threat? I mean, are we talking a second attempt to 
delete the main lists? Are we talking about attempts to *ruin* the 
community? 

Or is it something more pithy, like, a threat to change the color-
scheme to something horrid? Have any members or Moderators been 
*personally* threatened? Have there been threats of hacking into 
accounts and so forth?


ADMIN:
> The action was not specified; however, one of our auxiliary HPFGU 
> lists was recently deleted by Yahoo, and the sender of this e-mail 
> apparently took credit for that action, implying that "Terms of 
Use 
> violations" were reported. 

Tom:
Well, er, was that group, um, that is to say, is it the case that 
the group was in violation of anything?

I mean, I don't think that Yahoo would do anything without first 
checking to see if the group was in some sort of violation, right? 
So, somehow, a cursory examination of said group must've proved some 
violation, at least so that there wasn't too much room for doubt. I 
understand that you guys didn't get anything before hand, but did 
Yahoo send an after-the-fact explanation of their actions?

Is there a dialogue ongoing?

Obviously the group that was deleted wasn't any of the main lists, 
or the FAQ list (which I'm on and naturally checked immediately) or, 
I'm assuming, was it the Mods' own private discussion list for Mod-
type-stuff. Right? I mean, all of these groups seem to adhere to the 
criteria quite handily.

So, er, what's an *auxiliary* list, anyways? Why did we have it in 
the first place? What was it for? Since it was affiliated with 
HPfGU, who were/are the members of that list?

The Yahoo Terms of Service and Guidelines are fairly clear, and I 
know that you guys have some serious legal expertise - which you've 
applied to these documents before. So, *if* the group that was 
deleted was actually in violation, perhaps it would be appropriate 
to ask...

Why did the Mod Team have an "auxiliary" list - that might've been 
in violation of Yahoo's terms of service - affiliated with HPfGU at 
all?

I mean, that is to say that now Yahoo might be watching HPfGU a 
little more carefully, right? 

Are there any *other* guidelines or Terms of Service that we're in 
violation of somehow? If so, can we fix that? That is to say that if 
HPfGU *was* in violation somehow, then I think that it's of 
paramount importance to correct this oversight by making *totally* 
sure that we're not in violation of anything else.

Admin Team:
> As our experience with the auxiliary group showed, Yahoo does not 
> give notice before they delete a group. While it might seem 
> incredible that they would delete a group with nearly 90,000 posts 
> and three-plus years of history without investigating the details 
of 
> an accusation, we have to be cautious, and beg Yahoo to listen to 
> both sides of the story if a complaint is made.

Tom:
Again, what was that group for, if it had 90,000 posts? Who's on 
that group? What was the group's URL?


Admin Team:
> It has taken our time, energy, and enthusiasm away from 
> our proper tasks: the fostering and running of these lists. And 
> until this situation is resolved, some of our time must continue 
to 
> be devoted to dealing with it. So we ask your continuing patience 
> and understanding, while we do everything we can to protect this 
> family of lists.

You got it.

-Tom





From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 22:23:42 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:23:42 -0000
Subject: Lets run with the metaphors: WAS: Re: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <br26hs+v5gd@...>
Message-ID: <br2tle+10453@...>

(I started out quoting David and Haggridd but it wasn't working.) 

For more than ten years, whenever anyone said "party," I went in the 
opposite direction--because I expected music too loud to talk over, 
people too stupid (or Mundane/Muggle) to talk to, rude and intrusive 
random flirting/groping, ubiquitous drunkenness, bad food, and 
crowded, soggy, crunchy floor space. Parties in SF fandom (which I 
have enjoyed since 1984 whether local, regional, or national) are 
places where you might find just about anything: a bardic circle, a 
table of gamers, someone giving free massages, or a pizza-making 
contest in the kitchen; the one thing you know is that there will 
always be conversation, often in the form of very loose discussion 
groups.

On the other hand, I have been to many seminars: I have helped run 
professional conferences where scientific papers were presented, I 
have attended things paid for me to go and learn, and I have 
attended, help run, volunteered at, and been an exhibitor at literary 
SF conventions. I also went through a series of (at the time, years 
ago) trendy self-help and awareness seminars. And there is no doubt 
in my mind that HPfGU is at least 95% party. Seminars, conferences, 
and conventions have invited or arranged presenters, and each has an 
assigned venue. There is a definite separation between "speaker/s" 
(often a panel) and "audience." (Although those who are "speakers" 
for one program may be "audience" for the next.) Roles are assigned; 
although the audience generally has a chance to ask questions, they 
don't become the program.

The very best parties our group ever had were those where everyone 
showed up and the filkers sang and played away in one room, the mad 
scientists took over the garage or basement to talk and sketch (hell, 
even *build*) robotics or Tesla coils, at least one table or section 
of floor was appropriated by gamers, some people arrived in costume 
or garb (no one looked twice, except to admire), writers discussed 
the business, folks wandered around the house examining the host's SF 
art or book collection, and every room, sofa, nook and cranny 
attracted at least a couple of people who wanted to discuss 
*something*: philosophy, politics, religion, warfare, history, art, 
sex, music, movies (oh, and books, too <g>) ... our  name for our 
monthly post-meeting party is "Dead Dog," inspired back in the days 
when the end of the party for a lingering few (dead dogs) was over 
breakfast in a restaurant somewhere, long after the sun was well and 
truly up, because they just still weren't quite ready to stop 
talking, or belonging.

You can rent a hall, book a band, put up decorations, and send out 
invitations, but the people who show up are the ones who make the 
party. Or HPfGU. I have assumed since I showed up four months ago 
that ADMIN was there to facilitate, to the best of its ability, what 
members (by consensus, majority, or occasional special request) of 
the list wanted. I still think so. What's more, that's what I think 
ADMIN thinks, too.

Note: the more fractured the whole, the less healthy any of the parts 
will eventually grow. Because although no one likes everything 
equally, most people like more than one part ... and the more the 
whole is carved up, the less value it will have--to more people.

Sandy




From tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 22:36:56 2003
From: tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid (tiggersong)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:36:56 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br0hh8+vi30@...>
Message-ID: <br2ue8+8ljf@...>

Dear Admin Team,

I am very sorry that this sort of abuse has been sent your way.  I 
don't know how I could help, but if you have any thing you can think 
of that I might be able to help with, please let me know.

 
I mainly lurk on the main list, but do try to keep up with the 
posts.  If it would make the list safer and less prone to 
abuse/attack, I'd be willing pay a membership fee (or somethink like 
that) for private server space.  (I don't have tons of money, but I 
have paid for my Live Journal because I like to pay back for good 
service.)

No matter what, I hope this vile attacker goes away soon.
 
Stasia






From risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 22:38:45 2003
From: risako at otaku_risako.yahoo.invalid (Melissa McCarthy)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 18:38:45 -0400
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of
 Lists
References: <br2s0n+s19g@...>
Message-ID: <003d01c3bddc$0a907540$6401a8c0@vaio>

> ADMIN:
> > The action was not specified; however, one of our auxiliary HPFGU
> > lists was recently deleted by Yahoo, and the sender of this e-mail
> > apparently took credit for that action, implying that "Terms of
> Use
> > violations" were reported.
>
> Tom:
> Well, er, was that group, um, that is to say, is it the case that
> the group was in violation of anything?
>
> I mean, I don't think that Yahoo would do anything without first
> checking to see if the group was in some sort of violation, right?

Melissa:
Actually, a bunch of lists that I was on were deleted just last week.  The
owner was told that her groups were in violation of Something, but Yahoo
won't tell her what.  There was no investigation.  One complaint about a
violation leads to the group being shut down.  (I seem to have bad luck with
the lists I join.  I hope I'm not bringing HPFGU bad luck!)

> Admin Team:
> > It has taken our time, energy, and enthusiasm away from
> > our proper tasks: the fostering and running of these lists. And
> > until this situation is resolved, some of our time must continue
> to
> > be devoted to dealing with it. So we ask your continuing patience
> > and understanding, while we do everything we can to protect this
> > family of lists.

Of course!

Melissa, hoping this will all work out somehow





From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 06:49:20 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:49:20 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
References: <br2s0n+s19g@...> <003d01c3bddc$0a907540$6401a8c0@vaio>
Message-ID: <00db01c3be20$939062d0$a6706751@kathryn>



Melissa:
Actually, a bunch of lists that I was on were deleted just last week.  The
owner was told that her groups were in violation of Something, but Yahoo
won't tell her what.  There was no investigation.  One complaint about a
violation leads to the group being shut down.  (I seem to have bad luck with
the lists I join.  I hope I'm not bringing HPFGU bad luck!)

K

Yeah Yahoo has a record of deleting without checking. They deleted a slash
list I was on because they were told it featured underaged sex (which it
didn't). That list and all others owned by the same person were deleted
without warning. Yahoo don't even bother to *look* at the lists as far as I
can tell - just zap 'em.

K

"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 22:47:13 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (gulplum)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:47:13 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <bqtugh+e2ji@...>
Message-ID: <br2v1h+v3n7@...>

I've always had a problem with people trying to equate mailing lists 
with parties or academic seminars. Over the (eek!) almost ten years 
of my presence online, people have always been trying to come up with 
analogies. I want to offer (as I have in the past) an alternative.

My main issue with those analogies is that they focus on the least 
important element, namely the immediacy of reply. Yet at the same 
time, the two most important elements (in respect of 
discussion/conversation analogies) of being at a party or seminar 
fall completely flat, namely the possibility of interrupting (or 
being interrupted), or perhaps worse, the possibility of being 
pointedly ignored. The analogy is also fallacious by the absence of 
the opportunity for off-the-cuff rejoinders which might get a smile 
but are otherwise lost in the ether. 

Without those, the analogy simply makes no sense, and there is no 
point in being at the party or seminar. You may as well rely on a 
report of the event (including, in the case of the seminar, the full 
text of the proceedings).

Let's therefore take a step back. We have a community, the members of 
which are communicating with each other.

My own "real-world" analogy for mailing lists and usenet groups is 
that of the "letter to the editor" page of a local (or other 
community) newspaper (or professional magazine), or indeed a 
newspaper which contains only unsolicited reader-submitted material 
of all kinds, of interest to that community. The only element the 
internet introduces is the fact that the publication is continuously 
updated. 

Heck, in the case of HPFGU the analogy even goes as far as the fact 
that an "editorial team" (i.e. the Mods) determine whether posts are 
worthy of inclusion for whatever reason. Of course, for the benefit 
of the mods' sanity and time, once someone has shown that their posts 
(generally) meet the basic criteria, they are left to self-edit. 

Take as an example the famous "letters to the editor" page of the 
London Times. Every day, there will be a mixture of items, some 
intellectually challenging, some not. Some will be reactions to news 
items in previous editions, some will highlight items of concern 
whether political or otherwise, some will be written in verse (!) and 
some will just be humorous anecdotes or observations. But all of them 
will have been deemed of interest to the Times-reading "community" 
(consisting of people who are, are perceived to be, or perceive 
themselves to be, the movers and shakers in British and world 
society). 

Nobody is expected to read *every* letter published, and letters 
occasionally include in-jokes of some kind or another, which 
frequently can only be fully understood by regular readers of the 
paper. New readers might scratch their heads at some of the antics 
that go on, but they don't complain that topic X is above their heads 
and thus should not be debated. Actually, that's an assumption on my 
part; I don't know that the Times editorial team don't get letters 
that letter X should NOT have been published. Similarly, we, the 
general readership of HPFGU, are not aware what complaints the Mod 
team get about posts, and this list is the first opportunity we have 
of seeing some element of what might cause frustration in some 
members of our community.

The party analogy is further incorrect because if two or more people 
go off to have a private conversation, they generally miss out on the 
rest of what's going on. Similarly, attempts at one-to-one 
conversations with the keynote speaker at a seminar occur after the 
main business has been concluded, and cannot have an impact on the 
conference as a whole. Yet here, as with "letters to the editor" one 
has the opportunity to make contact with authors away from the 
published page, and occasionally (by mutual consent) report back, all 
the while not missing what's been going on in the community as a 
whole.

By juxtaposing "party" and "seminar" as analogies, one is focusing on 
the level of formality of the (mutual?) communication. I don't see 
any reason to force any such juxtaposition. Serious or important 
points of interest can be made equally well either formally or 
informally, depending solely on the intent and ability of the author, 
as well as the context. 

Incidentally, if one wants an internet equivalent of the "party", I'd 
say that one should look at IRC or chat rooms. Several conversations 
going on at once, people talking over each other, a complete 
informality, the option of going off to "private areas", etc, etc. We 
have the mixture of informality, (un)limited chaos and free-for-all, 
not to mention the ephemeral nature (until one is confronted with 
logs...). :-)

I think it's helpful on a day-to-day basis to think of a mailing list 
as a "letters to the editor". Not in terms of style, but more in 
terms of general content (is anyone going to *want* to read this?), 
legibility (am I making my point?), general  comprehensibility (is 
the point I'm trying to make clear), courtesy (would a reasonable 
person be offended by what I'm saying or the way I'm saying it?) and 
originality (has someone else already said what I'm trying to say? 
Recently?). 

There is no need to descend to a lowest common denominator in all or 
any of these elements, but ultimately it comes down to understanding 
your audience (which is why it's generally considered appropriate to 
lurk for a while). Your audience doesn't have to be the *whole* 
community, but you have to be fairly confident that some significant 
proportion of the community *might* be interested in what you have to 
say.

-- 
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's beginning to ramble, so will shut up. 




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 06:50:52 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 22:50:52 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
References: <br2s0n+s19g@...>
Message-ID: <00e201c3be20$c9e058e0$a6706751@kathryn>

."

Tom:

Is it possible to satisfy this person by meeting the demands? I
mean, what are the demands? Are they demands to be annointed High
HPfGU Overlord, or something a little more moderate? What does this
person want?

K

Doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Whatever the demands are, no matter
how reasonable, this is blackmail plain and simple. If the admin give in
this time then what will the blackmailer demand next time?

K

"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva




From tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 22:48:15 2003
From: tiggersong at tiggersong.yahoo.invalid (tiggersong)
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2003 22:48:15 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat ; List removal
In-Reply-To: <br2s0n+s19g@...>
Message-ID: <br2v3f+dglj@...>

Tom Wall said:

> I mean, I don't think that Yahoo would do anything without first 
> checking to see if the group was in some sort of violation, right? 

Now me:

Unfortunatly, Tom, Yahoo has a history of just shutting lists down.  
They either shut down permanently a list and then refuse to tell 
anyone why or how to get it re-instated or they refuse to shut down 
lists which are in direct violation of their own Terms of Use and 
Service no matter how strongly the case is made to them of the 
illegality of that list or how strongly it's violating the Terms of 
Use and Service.

At it's best, Yahoo seems to be capricious.  When I'm feeling very 
confused, Yahoo seems just plain arbitrary and sinister.

I'm interested in knowing what the other list is, but as I can't keep 
up with the lists I'm on now, I don't think it's something I NEED to 
know.

Stasia




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 23:08:56 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:08:56 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
Message-ID: <1070925155.94ABCCF@...>

> Tom:
>
> Is it possible to satisfy this person by meeting the demands? I
> mean, what are the demands? Are they demands to be annointed High
> HPfGU Overlord, or something a little more moderate? What does this
> person want?

Not speaking on behalf of anyone, as I haven't been on meg in almost 6 
months, but the lists' admins have a history of not negotiating with 
those who make threats, ever since capitulating to richard abaness in 
the spring of 2001 when he incorrectly claimed copyright infringement.

And in the spring of 2002, when John walton's account's hackers were 
identified and booted from the list, one of them said that she'd do 
something terrible if she wasn't reinstated with regular posting 
privileges. The mods didn't capitulate, and within a day or so, a mod's 
account was hacked and some of the lists deleted. But Yahoo was very 
helpful about restoring them; all was well within 17 or so hours, the 
culprit was reported to her uni and, afaik, disciplined by the school 
for violations of their acceptable use policies, because of the threats 
made and attacks undertaken.


Heidi, historianically



From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec  8 23:20:20 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Mon, 8 Dec 2003 15:20:20 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <br2s0n+s19g@...>
References: <br2s0n+s19g@...>
Message-ID: <1070925629.208BE724@...>

Erm, guys, sorry I didn't combine...

Tom, I think you're a bit confused here:

>>  As our experience with the auxiliary group showed, Yahoo does not
>>  give notice before they delete a group. While it might seem
>>  incredible that they would delete a group with nearly 90,000 posts
>>  and three-plus years of history without investigating the details
> of
>>  an accusation, we have to be cautious, and beg Yahoo to listen to
>>  both sides of the story if a complaint is made.
>
> Tom:
> Again, what was that group for, if it had 90,000 posts? Who's on
> that group? What was the group's URL?

Tom, it seemed clear to me that the reference to a 90,000-post group was 
a reference to the main list and the unbelievableness was speculative, 
not actual.

All 11,000 or so of the main list members are on that group; we know the 
url well.

Heidi, personally



From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 14:10:33 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 08:10:33 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <1070925629.208BE724@...>
Message-ID: <000001c3be5e$3a99b120$99ee79a5@Einstein>

Iggy here:

Sorry for those who read this a few times because I'm posting it to all
the lists in this family of groups, but I feel that it's important
enough that I want to make sure everyone gets this letter...

I would like to point something out, folks.  

People are wondering what someone could possibly use against these
groups to have them eliminated... and it was also mentioned that
incidents such as sex with minors has been used against groups, even if
it's implied.

We need to eliminate (at least for the time being) the topic about the
sexual temptations of Harry Potter (a minor) and especially eliminate
topic titles such as "In Bed With Harry Potter."  Since we know that
Yahoo has a history of not investigating claims against groups, even the
titles have the potential to get the groups deleted if Yahoo chooses to
take them as a violation of their terms.

This is not stating that we need censorship... not by a long shot.  But
if someone is threatening the groups, common sense dictates that we try
to hold off on any topics/theories/language that can be potentially used
against the group... and the above named threads are prime examples of
ones we need to avoid for now...

Hoping everyone understands where I'm coming from here...

Iggy McSnurd







From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 15:11:34 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2003 07:11:34 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <000001c3be5e$3a99b120$99ee79a5@Einstein>
References: <000001c3be5e$3a99b120$99ee79a5@Einstein>
Message-ID: <1070982912.206379DF@...>

Iggy, I understand what you're trying to get at here, but I'm not sure 
that there's any way to make the list completely devoid of 'risky' 
topics. Apart from the fact that 16, which Harry is just after the end 
of ootp, is the age of consent in the UK, there are a number of other 
topics that could theoretically be problematic - and, of course, even 
FILKing could be seen not as commentary & criticism on the books, which 
all the filkers who've posted here on feedback have sensibly argued, but 
as copyright infringement - which they should not be under Us law, but 
given Yahoo's notoriety for not investigating, I don't think it would be 
much of a help.

Basically, if someone wanted to get the hpfgu groups tossed, even though 
we listees and the admins try *so* hard to stick to the Yahoo rules and 
the yahoogroups guidelines, those guidelines are a lot vaguer than one 
may assume.

I mean, look at tbay. We *know* it's play. We know it's fiction and 
nobody means the assaults seriously. But the first thing in Yahoo's 
guidelines says that you may not harrass, abuse, threaten or advocate 
violence against individuals or groups. What if someone complained to 
Yahoo that a Big Bang Destroyer had come after her on the main list? 
Would that violate Guideline #1?

Based on Guideline #9, discussion of sexual matters should only be 
considered proscribed if it's in a sexual or exploitative context. I 
haven't followed the whole of the threads, but I don't think those 
discussions meet either of those criteria.

I think the question is, do we want to be paranoid, or do we want to 
just make sure we have something in place to continue the community if 
Yahoo looks at something and sees a violation where one was never 
intended.

Heidi


On Tue, 9 Dec 2003 9:13am, IggyMcSnurd wrote:
> Iggy here:
>
> Sorry for those who read this a few times because I'm posting it to all
> the lists in this family of groups, but I feel that it's important
> enough that I want to make sure everyone gets this letter...
>
> I would like to point something out, folks.
>
> People are wondering what someone could possibly use against these
> groups to have them eliminated... and it was also mentioned that
> incidents such as sex with minors has been used against groups, even if
> it's implied.
>
> We need to eliminate (at least for the time being) the topic about the
> sexual temptations of Harry Potter (a minor) and especially eliminate
> topic titles such as "In Bed With Harry Potter."  Since we know that
> Yahoo has a history of not investigating claims against groups, even 
> the
> titles have the potential to get the groups deleted if Yahoo chooses to
> take them as a violation of their terms.
>
> This is not stating that we need censorship... not by a long shot.  But
> if someone is threatening the groups, common sense dictates that we try
> to hold off on any topics/theories/language that can be potentially 
> used
> against the group... and the above named threads are prime examples of
> ones we need to avoid for now...
>
> Hoping everyone understands where I'm coming from here...
>
> Iggy McSnurd
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> HPFGU-Feedback-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to 
> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



From jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 17:27:49 2003
From: jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid (jwcpgh)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 17:27:49 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <000001c3be5e$3a99b120$99ee79a5@Einstein>
Message-ID: <br50ml+ln4n@...>

> Iggy here:
> 
<snip> 
> We need to eliminate (at least for the time being) the topic about 
the sexual temptations of Harry Potter (a minor) and especially 
eliminate topic titles such as "In Bed With Harry Potter."  Since we 
know that Yahoo has a history of not investigating claims against 
groups, even the titles have the potential to get the groups deleted 
if Yahoo chooses to take them as a violation of their terms.
> 
> This is not stating that we need censorship... not by a long 
shot.  But if someone is threatening the groups, common sense 
dictates that we try to hold off on any topics/theories/language 
that can be potentially used against the group... and the above 
named threads are prime examples of ones we need to avoid for now...

Laura:

Nonsense. I'm really annoyed that you would even suggest such a
thing. This is, after all, a list for adults. I think we self-
censor quite adequately.

Moreover, if the admins have something to say to us, I think they
know how to say it. If you're talking with the authority of an
admin, please say so. Otherwise, I'd appreciate not being told what
to do by you.





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 19:01:40 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 19:01:40 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture 
In-Reply-To: <br216l+96lt@...>
Message-ID: <br566k+6v7p@...>

The real Amy Z wrote:

> David has explicated how it is that people may legitimately reach
> opposite conclusions about TBAY's politeness. One conclusion is 
that
> it's polite to allow it because it's some people's best way to
> explain their theories, and after all, we're all at a party and
> expected to wander to whatever discussion we find interesting and 
> accessible.  Another is that it's polite to exclude it because 
it's 
> impenetrable to some people, and after all, we're all at a seminar 
> and the speaker's supposed to be addressing us all. So appeals to 
> politeness will not resolve the Gordian knot of TBAY.

Just in passing, I want to register that the above conclusions would 
only apply *within the context of the metaphors* I discussed.  The 
politeness would apply to the poster, not those with the power to 
allow or disallow posting.  How the list admins *deal* with 
impoliteness is a whole different discussion of enormous but, I 
hope, temporarily deferred interest.

I, David, had written:

> > I suppose the main conclusion is that all this is a matter for 
list
> > members, not list administrators.

Amy asked:

> So, anyway, could you say more about what you mean by "a matter for
> list members, not administrators"?

I suspect there was less to my meaning than meets the eye.  I didn't 
mean that issues such as defining the bounds of acceptable posting, 
whether on grounds of tone, topic, format or even length are not 
matters for the list admins.

If the list admins are poring my runes trying to work out whether I 
had issued an obscure challenge, please relax.

All I meant was that I had introduced a new idea to the discussion, 
that of the pre-conceived and slightly inaccurate RL metaphor.  The 
natural question is, what does one do about it?  After all, if there 
isn't something for the reader to take away from my chain of 
reasoning, might I not just be using up expensive bandwidth?  I felt 
that the main benefit of my contribution to the debate was likely to 
be increased self-understanding by list members posting and reading, 
and that it wasn't going to give the admin team any useful 
guidance.  For example, I think it would be deeply unhelpful to 
declare that one type of metaphor is the correct one for HPFGU.

I think the use of metaphor shows something about the nature of the 
human mind.  We are very good at finding patterns in our experience 
that match new situations, and then using our knowledge of what 
worked in those patterns to guide our behaviour in the new 
situation.  We are not very good at reasoning our way from first 
principles to the best behaviour in a situation for which no pattern 
is known to be right.  In the case of an Internet discussion group, 
I really believe we have a new phenomenon for all of us (including 
those younger than the form), and there is no pattern from the pre-
internet age that provides a sure short-cut to good behaviour 
(though thank you Richard for the suggestion of the letters page of 
a newspaper - oddly enough that's how I see *this* list, but not the 
main list).  It is IMO an unreasonable burden on the list admins to 
expect them to reason their way to best netiquette for all of us; 
it's a collective exercise, primarily for the entire oinline 
community, and secondarily for each forum to work out in its own 
sphere.

So I think all I meant was "if you find yourself reacting against a 
post, think about the nature of the expectations you bring when you 
read a post, and consider that it may be those expectations, not the 
post, that is the source of your discomfort."  That's an admonition 
to list members, of little direct relevance, I believe, to list 
administrators.  Then again, you could just complain to Yahoo ;-)

I hope I haven't thereby lost Haggridd's hearty 'amen'.
> 
> Amy Z
> who speaks American and therefore doesn't know what the 
verb "major" 
> means, outside of "I majored in Harry Potter Studies, with a minor 
in 
> Lord of the Rings"

I, David, had written:

"couldn't we major on the casual things we *can't* do online, like 
just hanging?",

by 'major on' meaning 'concentrate on' or 'emphasise' or 'devote the 
majority of our time and effort to'.  Maybe I just made it up from 
the American usage 'major in', but I think it's essentially the same 
meaning.  I should add that it was a parenthetical remark describing 
my reaction at one time: it is not meant as advice to conference 
planners.

David




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec  9 20:40:26 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2003 15:40:26 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
Message-ID: <28B6A747.254A6D25.4B073798@...>

>Laura said:
>Nonsense. I'm really annoyed that you would even suggest >such a thing. This is, after all, a list for adults. I think >we self-censor quite adequately.
>Moreover, if the admins have something to say to us, I think >they know how to say it. If you're talking with the >authority of an admin, please say so. Otherwise, I'd >appreciate not being told what to do by you.

Oryomai:
Not to personally attack or anything, but if this is a list for adults, then why can't we handle this like adults? *sigh* Now that that is out of the way ... I agree with Laura on the fact that we censor ourselves very well.  There have been far worse things said in my AP English II class, and we're still in high school (under those arbitrary rules...).  I understand what Iggy is saying though.  Yahoo *could* view threads like that more negatively because they might think HPFGU is just for kids, it's like a year or so back when there was an article about how slash fanfiction was bad because children might read it.  (And I won't say anything more on the topic because discussion of said topic was what got me kicked off Slytherins_Severus_Snape).  Is this one of those lists that your birthdate has to make you over 18 to join?  I can't quite remember...

Oryomai



From LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 06:43:09 2003
From: LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid (thelinnealand)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 06:43:09 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
Message-ID: <br6f9t+p3qk@...>

 --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jwcpgh" <jwcpgh at y...> wrote:
 Iggy here: <snip>
  We need to eliminate (at least for the time being) the topic about
 the sexual temptations of Harry Potter (a minor)
  
Laura:
 Nonsense.  I'm really annoyed that you would even suggest such a
  thing.  This is, after all, a list for adults.  I think we self-
  censor quite adequately.

Moreover, if the admins have something to say to us, I think they know
how to say it.  If you're talking with the authority of an  admin,
please say so.  Otherwise, I'd appreciate not being told
what to do by you.

Linnea:

 I didn't feel he was "telling us what to do" but voicing a concern
for the preservation of the group. 

If the group is in danger of being summarily deleted for references to
the seduction of a minor by an adult, then we need to pause and think
again about our need to read and write about it.

While it is a little less fun for some it's better for us all if,
under the circumstances, we leave such sexual implications for private
conversations. 

And certainly more noble.

 Linnea: 
 Who would like to be a kinder person.





From jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 13:32:16 2003
From: jwcpgh at jwcpgh.yahoo.invalid (jwcpgh)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 13:32:16 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <br6f9t+p3qk@...>
Message-ID: <br7790+ql7o@...>

> Linnea:
<snip> If the group is in danger of being summarily deleted for 
references to the seduction of a minor by an adult, then we need to 
pause and think again about our need to read and write about it.
> 
> While it is a little less fun for some it's better for us all if,
> under the circumstances, we leave such sexual implications for 
private conversations. 

Laura:

I emphatically disagree.

Sexuality and its ramifications are time-honored topics of literary 
analysis.  The sexual subtexts of the HP books are many and varied, 
and that's one of the elements of the books that makes them real and 
compelling.  Writing truthfully about adolescence without some 
reference to sexuality, either overt or between the lines, is 
impossible.  Ask an adolescent.  There's a reason why young adult 
fiction is different from juvenile fiction. We'd worry about a 
teenager who wasn't wrestling with his or her sexuality-that's part 
of the job of growing up.  Harry and friends are doing just that in 
a very normal and healthy way.  

As for the Bellatrix/Harry ship, there's a long literary tradition 
of the older, more worldly, experienced woman initiating a younger 
male into the ways of sexuality.  Sometimes it's a gentle, kind 
initiation and sometimes it's stormy and wild.  But it's hardly 
unheard of.  

When the admins posted the original message about the threat to the 
lists, I understood the point to be that someone was acting 
maliciously.  That implies that there is no good reason behind their 
actions.  What we do or don't do on the main list has no bearing on 
whatever that person's grudges may be.   We have a volatile 
situation in which some person has the capacity to do a lot of 
damage via an ISP which, according to many posts, is arbitrary and 
unresponsive.  Avoiding certain topics on the list isn't going to 
make the problem go away, because that's not the problem in the 
first place.  

We all know that HP is susceptible to attacks from all kinds of 
closed-minded people for all kinds of spurious reasons.  If the 
American Library Association is prepared to defend the books, I 
think we should be as well.  Defending the books includes defending 
our right to discuss them fully.  If it can't be on Yahoo, we'll 
find somewhere else.  But the discussion shouldn't stop.  And 
listees shouldn't feel that we have to tiptoe around certain 
topics.  It's bad enough that enemies of these books want to crush 
discussion about them.  Let's not encourage its friends to do the 
same thing.

Laura




From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 14:22:58 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 14:22:58 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <br566k+6v7p@...>
Message-ID: <br7a82+h61m@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:

> I suspect there was less to my meaning than meets the eye.  I 
didn't 
> mean that issues such as defining the bounds of acceptable 
posting, 
> whether on grounds of tone, topic, format or even length are not 
> matters for the list admins.
> 

> 
> All I meant was that I had introduced a new idea to the 
discussion, 
> that of the pre-conceived and slightly inaccurate RL metaphor.  


 I think it would be deeply unhelpful to 
> declare that one type of metaphor is the correct one for HPFGU.
> 
> I think the use of metaphor shows something about the nature of 
the 
> human mind.  We are very good at finding patterns in our 
experience 
> that match new situations, and then using our knowledge of what 
> worked in those patterns to guide our behaviour in the new 
> situation.  We are not very good at reasoning our way from first 
> principles to the best behaviour in a situation for which no 
pattern 
> is known to be right. 

 
> I hope I haven't thereby lost Haggridd's hearty 'amen'.

> 
> David


Correct me if I'm wrong, but was it not you who introduced the 
metphors of the party and the seminar to "explain" the behavior 
appropriate for listees?  I find it disconcerting at best to accept 
these as a framework for analysis and discussion, only to have their 
initial proponent now say "oh, I hink another metaphor is the real 
deal-- it's a newspaper," or "this is something new under the sun, 
analogies need not apply."  There is an Americanism you may not be 
aware of, "You keep moving the goalposts," which has some 
appplicability here.

I took your comment on this being a matter for the members to mean 
that the consensus of the members would drive the development of the 
list no matter what any current group of mods desired.  How did TBAY 
become a feature of the main list in the first place?  I wasn't 
there, but I seriously doubt some admin type proclaimed "Let there 
be TBAY!" and TBAY sprang forth fully formed from his/her brow (How 
is that for a mixed metaphor?).  I think the future evolution of 
list practice will be similarly consensus driven, not imposed from 
on high.  Is that still a "me too"?

Haggridd




From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 15:35:48 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:35:48 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <br6f9t+p3qk@...>
Message-ID: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>

> Linnea:
>  
> If the group is in danger of being summarily deleted for references to
> the seduction of a minor by an adult, then we need to pause and think
> again about our need to read and write about it.


Iggy here:

This comment made something click in my mind...  And this is also
directed at those who say that the HPfGU has some great legal minds that
have looked over the terms of use, in addition to being mainly aimed at
those who comment that 16 is the UK age of consent.

It doesn't matter if 16 is the age of consent in the UK.

Yahoo is based in the US, and is bound by the laws of the US with regard
to issues relating to sex with minors.  

To give an example:  If a group of people who are 16 make a series of
adult movies and sell them in the UK... well, that's ok there, since
they're of the age of consent.  If someone from the US goes to the UK,
buys copies of those tapes and takes them back to the US, they are in
violation of laws regarding child pornography and can be charges with
possession of such within the US.

The best rule for any group on a service such as Yahoo is not to go by
the laws of their own country, but by the laws of the country the server
is housed at.  Those laws will be the ones that take precedence.

Which is the main reason for concern about the topics and nature of some
of the discussion... and also renders the argument that "Harry Potter is
16, and in the UK that's the age of consent.  It's written in the UK,
and he can do whatever he wants there..." invalid.  (I will also point
out that the minute JKR ever decides to put in any scene of overt
sexuality and/or depiction of an actual intimate intercourse, not only
will the readership drop drastically for school kids and the complaints
from outraged parents rise, but if the characters are under 18, then it
risks not being picked up in the US at all.)


Just my two centaurs worth...

Iggy McSnurd







From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 15:49:42 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:49:42 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <br7790+ql7o@...>
Message-ID: <000901c3bf35$3e85e4c0$df85aec7@Einstein>

> Laura:
> 
> We all know that HP is susceptible to attacks from all kinds of
> closed-minded people for all kinds of spurious reasons.  If the
> American Library Association is prepared to defend the books, I
> think we should be as well.  Defending the books includes defending
> our right to discuss them fully.  If it can't be on Yahoo, we'll
> find somewhere else.  But the discussion shouldn't stop.  And
> listees shouldn't feel that we have to tiptoe around certain
> topics.  It's bad enough that enemies of these books want to crush
> discussion about them.  Let's not encourage its friends to do the
> same thing.

Iggy here:

And, if you notice, it has been suggested that the discussions don't
need to stop, but it might be better to move them to another group or
location.

I would also like to point out that these friends of the list aren't
encouraging crushing discussion about certain themes.  We are simply
trying to make people aware that such discussions could be problematic
for the group and might want to be moved elsewhere.

Some people try to be friends to the list by seeing the grander effect
of what's being discussed and the effect it could possibly have on the
group as a whole.  I believe in freedom of expression just as much as
anyone (trust me... if you only knew...).  On the other hand, if we
ignore the fact that keeping one topic type open on this list could help
get the list as a whole shut down, then we're actually doing more damage
to the group. 

If the list itself is shut down, then where will we talk about *any*
topic, much less the more controversial ones?

Arguing against censorship on one subject that a small segment of our
population is discussing, and keeping the discussions going, is one
thing.  If it's used as evidenced to have the group shut down then, in
essence, those actions have resulted in the censorship of the entire
group about any topic at all.


Iggy McSnurd







From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 16:01:45 2003
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:01:45 -0000
Subject: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
In-Reply-To: <br7a82+h61m@...>
Message-ID: <br7g19+2f4l@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" 
<jkusalavagemd at y...> wrote:

> I took your comment on this being a matter for the members to 
mean  that the consensus of the members would drive the 
development of the  list no matter what any current group of 
mods desired.  How did TBAY  become a feature of the main list 
in the first place?  I wasn't  there, but I seriously doubt some 
admin type proclaimed "Let there be TBAY!" and TBAY sprang 
forth fully formed from his/her brow (How  is that for a mixed 
metaphor?).  I think the future evolution of  list practice will be 
similarly consensus driven, not imposed from 
 on high.  Is that still a "me too"?<

Pippin: speaking for herself

I don't think David meant to move the goal posts.  I think he was 
saying that when we try to come up with metaphors for list 
interaction we are at best re-enacting the parable of the blind 
men and the elephant. (My apologies if this is not what David 
meant.)

 That doesn't mean we shouldn't try to use metaphors, but we 
should be aware that the person who's got hold of the trunk and 
is insisting that what we have here is a like a snake, may be just 
as right, and just as wrong, as the person who has hold of the 
trunk and is saying, no, it's like a tree, and I'm *annoyed* that you 
don't grasp its essential treeness, and furthermore, I *hate *
snakes. <g>

Ultimately the list admin cannot control the way the members 
perceive the elephant, ie the list. Nor can it perceive the entire 
elephant.  What it can do, because it has the advantage of having 
heard many descriptions of the elephant, is let  people know that 
 it may be unwarranted for people to assume that  a) their 
perception is the only correct one, or b) it would be a healthier 
elephant if it didn't have parts.

To expand on that last point, my sense is there's a general 
free-floating anxiety about the existence of subcultures on the 
list. I think subcultures are a natural feature of a group where you 
have hundreds of people interacting, or rather, a group can't 
remain that size unless it has developed some strategies for 
accomodating subcultures.Otherwise it must limit its size so that 
subcultures don't develop, or else  rigidly repress them (and 
develop a subculture of enforcers, yuk!).

It's just a fact that people change the way they interact depending 
on the size of the group they're in. Everybody knows that two's 
company but  three's a crowd, and most of us have seen that a 
group of ten or so can be really close friends, but in a group of 
thirty there's bound to be some feuds going on. When you get up 
past a hundred or so, (and there are usually at least 200 active 
posters at any given time) people start to feel lost in the crowd 
and want to assert their individuality. 

Oddly enough, one of the ways that people assert their 
individuality is to group up with other individuals who are like 
them. That, IMO, is why people identify as  SHIPPers and 
TBayers and so forth. 

So, IMO, unless we are just gazing into the Mirror of Erised  
without regard for what is true or even possible, to  wish for a 
more close-knit group, I think, is really to wish for a smaller one, 
(or a more paranoid one, but I don't think anybody wants that. I 
could be wrong. <g>)


Pippin






From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 16:06:36 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda Geist)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:06:36 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
References: <000901c3bf35$3e85e4c0$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <000e01c3bf37$97f61820$c359aacf@...>

Amanda, weighing in as Amanda Listmember:

I have to say, this is one of those instances where I think both Iggy and
Laura (as representatives of these particular opposing viewpoints) are
right. Laura's right in her stance that sexuality is a valid window through
which to conduct literary analysis, and also that avoiding valid literary
topics is, to an extent, caving to the threat. Iggy's right in his thought
that there is always a chance of it being misinterpreted by the goosey to
the possible detriment of the lists.

I am actually quite enjoying the explorations of the different viewpoints,
here. I think the ultimate result may be that you agree to disagree. So many
of these sorts of discussions come down to "X is true, depending on where
you sit." Iggy and Laura, they're sitting in very different places, and it's
hard to make someone on the other side of a stadium "see" the view from your
seat.

Who said that any argument, if taken far enough, comes down to semantics?
Broadly true, but for discussions of this type on the lists--and I've seen
many--I think it's more true that any difference of opinion comes down to
perspectives. I like watching those discussions, for the meta-phenomenon of
how the parties try to communicate the perspectives.

Okay, I digress. Just wanted to toss my observations out.

~Amanda




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 15:30:41 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 07:30:41 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Thoughts on exclusion and culture
References: <1071074558.61B041D@...>
Message-ID: <1071074559.36A3141B@...>


On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 9:23am, Haggridd wrote:

>  How did TBAY
> become a feature of the main list in the first place?  I wasn't
> there, but I seriously doubt some admin type proclaimed "Let there
> be TBAY!" and TBAY sprang forth fully formed from his/her brow...

Actually, yeah, that's vaguely what happened. I've been traveling, then 
sick in bed, for pretty much all of the past three weeks, and this is my 
first chance to do the cut&paste post on this topic that I've wanted to 
do for some time.

But first, a brief history of tbay by someone who's been aware of it 
since it started, although I neither read the posts nor post in the 
format because of reasons similar to those cited by others here - 
largely it's because I find it impenetrable, and that's entirely for the 
reason that I do most of my list-participation on handheld email devices 
(first a blackberry, now a sidekick) from which I cannot access HA or 
back-posts for a handy reference guide while reading whatever current 
post there is.

But that being what it is, I also know how Tbay got started, and it got 
started because it was generated by two of the list's elves - Cindy and 
Tabouli - back in the late winter of 2002, because in the seven or so 
months that Tabouli had been on the list, she thought we'd discussed 
everything to death and needed some more creative theories, or something 
like that.

Of course, imho, the list had long encouraged the discussion of creative 
theorizing outside roleplaying style, but when the posting style was 
questioned by a confused newbie, it was then discussed on the MEG list, 
and Cindy and Tabouli convinced enough of the MEGs that the decision of 
January 2001 to ban roleplaying should be reversed (although fanfic 
remained a banned topic for almost an entire year more).

TBAY, as a prefix, name, even location (iirc) didn't exist until it 
started being disucssed as a problem on the MEG list. And I've giggled 
at a few mentions of old-timers on hpfgu playing in the bay; since I 
define old-timers here as anyone who (a) had to wait for the release of 
book 4 and (b) joined hpfgu either before we left the yahooclub for 
egroups, or within a month of it at least, I think perhaps three or four 
such people actively participate in tbay. It's more the 'middlers' - 
those who came onlist after the 2001 Great Ship Debates and the creation 
of OTC - who have played in the bay, I think.

TBAY started about a year after the otc spinoff, and also, about a year 
after discussion of fanfic was banned on the main list.

Now, weirdly enough, we avid fanficcers didn't raise a tremendous 
protest about removing fanfic discussion at the time it was banned; we 
started talking about creating an hp-specific place to put fanfics and 
have discussions that could meander from canon to movie to fanfic and 
back again - and in the summer of 2001, we created that place in 
FictionAlley.org.

But when tbay started, it seemed to me, and others, a little unbalanced 
that tbay-style posts were permissible, but talk of fanfic was not.

Now, for some historical context, here's a bit of an old post I did on 
the subject on MEG:

> I don't want the members of Theory Bay to feel unwelcome on the Main
> List, and I am sypmathetic to how you guys probably feel, reading
> posts that say that we think your posts are not completely on topic,
> but but part of me is saying in an admittedly sulky and childish
> way, "Why do you get to have your fun but I don't?"
>
> Why do you get to roleplay from bow to stern, but I don't get to cite
> to Gwen's fanfic as possible explanations for why I think Snape had a
> miserable and likely somewhat abusive childhood, and that might
> explain the lack of interest he has in his appearance? Why can't I
> use Ebony's fanfic as an example of the list of problems a
> Ron/Hermione marriage *could* have? Why can't I use Cassie's Draco
> Veritas to show that there are some things, like Lucius being
> completely fine with Voldemort killing Draco, which might be enough
> to make Draco turn against the dark side and the Dark Lord?
>
> Why is one thing not ok, and the other is? Perhaps those of us with a
> longer time on this Mods list (I've been here longer than most of the
> Mods have) have a bit more information in hand as to which things
> have been stamped out in the past over protests from some listies and
> some elves (Gwen knows a lot of this because she heard me babble
> about it last spring and in the summer when we were starting
> FictionAlley).
>
> I don't want a splinter list, I don't want more "rules" for the
> newbies or ordinary listies. And while I don't want to take away your
> fun...well... about a year ago, this list decided to take away a
> smidge of mine - the discussion of fanfic on the main list - and you
> know what? I still posted my theories, I still posted my arguments -
> I just wrote them in a factual manner instead of in prose, and while
> I may've missed that spark (clearly I did and do, otherwise this
> wouldn't be such a thing for me) and while I think there was a
> negative side effect that in banning discussion of fanfic from the
> main list, there have been many fewer new "grownup" writers who
> *might have* become interested in fanfic (like Penny and me and I
> think Barb) because people were discussing it on the main list, I was
> willing to go with the majority decision and still remain an active
> participant on the list.
>
[Edited out someone else's words about five or dix playful speculations 
a week from three or four people, as they're not mine to forward]

>  ... they're the type of roleplaying and "fanfic" discussion
> that was declared off topic on the main list over a year ago. Here's
> an example of a post from Ebony
> (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/13663) which was
> deemed offtopic:
>
> <<The real SS H/H (clarification: the one on which Hedwig is just
> Harry's courier pet and *nothing more*) appears in the distance.
>
> It is being trailed by the Good Ship R/H... a self-destructing VIP
> message has fallen into the hands of a certain vacationing Special
> Agent... all other ranking H/H officers are otherwise occupied around
> the HP Fan World, as active H/Hers tend to be busy types.
>
> On a nearby tropical island, Agent Ebony waves off the handsome
> Jamaican wizard-masseuse and sets her margarita on the beach blanket
> with a sigh. "Call that a holiday? I thought they were *done* with
> main-list shipping until the schoolbooks come out!" Sighing, she
> tosses aside the message before it explodes, zips up her wetsuit, and
> dives back into the choppy waters of the Shipping Seas.>>
>
>
> If it was off topic a year ago, then absent a discussion on it now,
> it should probably *still* be deemed off topic. And in posts like
> Eb's the role playing was a bit more discrete than it has been in
> recent weeks.
>
> So what am I saying here? No acronyms? No, I'm not saying that.
> No "wild" theories? No, I'm not saying that - if I was, I couldn't
> even consider posting my theory that the PutOuter called that because
> it came from the colonies back in the 1500's, when potatoes were
> first introduced in europe and the original models looked the same as
> a tuber.
>

Now, every time I've made requests & recommendations about tbay in the 
past, I've gotten people angry at me, so you'd think I'd learn my 
lesson.

I mean, I once suggested a moratorium on tbay for 4-6 weeks after ootp 
and was accused of trying to ban tbay. La, no.

But I haven't learned my lesson, so here goes:

I think that while tbay has built a place on the list because of the 
presence of strong tbayers among the admin team,  and that place should 
not be negated at this point, those who write long tbay pieces (say, 
over 70 kb) should take a page (pun intended) from those who write long 
fanfic chapters and either upload them to the files section on the main 
list or a separate yahoogroup created just for tbay-archival purposes, 
or spread the posting out over a few days' time. And I suggest this 
because in the past, long tbays have crashed my mail program, most 
notably Elkins' Crouch 9-parter, which made it impossible for me to get 
any mail until I'd deleted it. Shorter works could and should be posted 
as per usual, but it might be a saving grace for those like me who enjoy 
getting posts via email but can't necessarily handle a 400-kb single 
post.

And on that note, I'll duck out of the discussion again.



From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 01:44:29 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:44:29 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
References: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <005b01c3bf88$5acc1ed0$a6706751@kathryn>


"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."

Iggy here:

This comment made something click in my mind...  And this is also
directed at those who say that the HPfGU has some great legal minds that
have looked over the terms of use, in addition to being mainly aimed at
those who comment that 16 is the UK age of consent.

It doesn't matter if 16 is the age of consent in the UK.

Yahoo is based in the US, and is bound by the laws of the US with regard
to issues relating to sex with minors.


K

And if Harry were to fly to America in order to get laid that would be
relevent. However he isn't and the laws regarding sex with minors in the US
are only applicable to the act not to discussion about it. It is not against
Yahoo's rules to discuss someone doing something that is perfectly legal
where they are. And anyway as several people have pointed out the group
isn't at threat because of something it is or is not doing but rather due to
a particularly malicious individual who seems to want to use Yahoo's
notoriously unreliable enforcement proceedures against us.

I would also point out that the admin team who brought the threat to our
attention never even mentioned the idea of us discussing something that
could cause us to get shut down - that was simply a suggestion made by a
listee.


Iggy

The best rule for any group on a service such as Yahoo is not to go by
the laws of their own country, but by the laws of the country the server
is housed at.  Those laws will be the ones that take precedence.

K

Actually the best rule is to abide by their terms of service - which we are.

Iggy

 (I will also point
out that the minute JKR ever decides to put in any scene of overt
sexuality and/or depiction of an actual intimate intercourse, not only
will the readership drop drastically for school kids and the complaints
from outraged parents rise, but if the characters are under 18, then it
risks not being picked up in the US at all.)

K

Which why no one has suggested there will be any overt sexuality in the
books - they are after all aimed at children and/or teenagers and I can
hardly see JKR suddenly deciding to write Harry Potter - the Mills & Boone
edition, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist in her world (albeit
offscreen) and isn't worth discussing. (I'd use my Albus/Sev example again
as to what we're not going to see but I hear that that's an image some
people didn't want in their minds <g>)

K




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 18:14:51 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (Heidi Tandy)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:14:51 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>
References: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <1071080096.744373E@...>


On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 10:44am, IggyMcSnurd wrote:
> It doesn't matter if 16 is the age of consent in the UK.
>
> Yahoo is based in the US, and is bound by the laws of the US with 
> regard
> to issues relating to sex with minors.

True, and that's why the recent supreme court ruling that 'virtual' 
child pornography cannot be prosecuted the way child porn that actually 
involved children in the creation of said porn can.

In other words, in the US, the Supremes have barred barring novels, 
discussions, factual papers, and even art about fictional children 
engaging in sexual behaviour. I know this sounds icky to some, if not 
many, but it's just what the law says.

If we were talking about real children, Iggy, I'd be backing you up, but 
we're not, and because we're not, Yahoo can't bar us from discussing 
sexual topics as applied to characters in the HP books by any means 
other than specifically saying so in the ToU and/or guidelines, and 
actually, the Guidelines themselves simply don't go that far.

Heidi



From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 01:49:24 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 17:49:24 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
References: <000901c3bf35$3e85e4c0$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <006301c3bf89$0d7b1220$a6706751@kathryn>



Iggy McSnurd
Arguing against censorship on one subject that a small segment of our
population is discussing, and keeping the discussions going, is one
thing.  If it's used as evidenced to have the group shut down then, in
essence, those actions have resulted in the censorship of the entire
group about any topic at all.

K

But there's been no suggestion from anyone 'in the know' (so to speak) that
the thread is going to be used as evidence. In fact I'd be quite happy if I
thought that someone was going to mention it to Yahoo and they were going to
investigate since an investigation would show no breach of the rules. There
are two possible ways this could play out re Yahoo assuming someone made a
complaint - a) Yahoo believe the complaint, don't investigate and shut the
group down (in which case the thread in question isn't responsible for the
closure since Yahoo wouldn't have seen it) or b) Yahoo investigate the
complaint and see that we aren't breaking the rules (in which case the
thread is also not a danger to the group because it's within the rules)

K
who *swears* this is her last word on te topic and is now going to go back
to discussing Harry Potter and not small minded idiots who issue blackmail
threats when they don't get their own way.



"The Loudest Noise Comes From The Electric Minerva."





From przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 20:10:53 2003
From: przepla at pshemekan.yahoo.invalid (Przemyslaw Plaskowicki)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:10:53 +0100
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] RE: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>
References: <000801c3bf33$4cf49300$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <3FD77DCD.4070405@...>

On 12/10/2003 4:35 PM, IggyMcSnurd wrote :

>>Linnea:
>> 
>>If the group is in danger of being summarily deleted for references to
>>the seduction of a minor by an adult, then we need to pause and think
>>again about our need to read and write about it.
>>    
>>
>
>
>Iggy here:
>
>This comment made something click in my mind...  And this is also
>directed at those who say that the HPfGU has some great legal minds that
>have looked over the terms of use, in addition to being mainly aimed at
>those who comment that 16 is the UK age of consent.
>
>It doesn't matter if 16 is the age of consent in the UK.
>
>Yahoo is based in the US, and is bound by the laws of the US with regard
>to issues relating to sex with minors.  
>
>To give an example:  If a group of people who are 16 make a series of
>adult movies and sell them in the UK... well, that's ok there, since
>they're of the age of consent.  If someone from the US goes to the UK,
>buys copies of those tapes and takes them back to the US, they are in
>violation of laws regarding child pornography and can be charges with
>possession of such within the US.
>
>The best rule for any group on a service such as Yahoo is not to go by
>the laws of their own country, but by the laws of the country the server
>is housed at.  Those laws will be the ones that take precedence.
>
>Which is the main reason for concern about the topics and nature of some
>of the discussion... and also renders the argument that "Harry Potter is
>16, and in the UK that's the age of consent.  It's written in the UK,
>and he can do whatever he wants there..." invalid.  (I will also point
>out that the minute JKR ever decides to put in any scene of overt
>sexuality and/or depiction of an actual intimate intercourse, not only
>will the readership drop drastically for school kids and the complaints
>from outraged parents rise, but if the characters are under 18, then it
>risks not being picked up in the US at all.)
>
>
>Just my two centaurs worth...
>  
>
Hi,
As Heidi already pointed out "virtual child porn" is legal in the US -- 
decision in this case: Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition is quite an 
interesting read: http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZS.html.

Some of the quotes:
"Both themesteenage sexual activity and the sexual abuse of 
childrenhave inspired countless literary works. William Shakespeare 
created the most famous pair of teenage lovers, one of whom is just 13 
years of age. See Romeo and Juliet, act I, sc. 2, l. 9 (She hath not 
seen the change of fourteen years). In the drama, Shakespeare portrays 
the relationship as something splendid and innocent, but not juvenile. 
The work has inspired no less than 40 motion pictures, some of which 
suggest that the teenagers consummated their relationship. /E.g./, Romeo 
and/ /Juliet (B. Luhrmann director, 1996). Shakespeare may not have 
written sexually explicit scenes for the Elizabethean audience, but were 
modern directors to adopt a less conventional approach, that fact alone 
would not compel the conclusion that the work was obscene."
[...]
"The year before, American Beauty won the Academy Award for Best 
Picture. See/ /American Beauty Tops the Oscars, N. Y. Times, Mar. 27, 
2000, p. E1./ /In the course of the movie, a teenage girl engages in 
sexual relations with her teenage boyfriend, and another yields herself 
to the gratification of a middle-aged man." (Opinion by J. Kennedy)

Naturally, what we have here is by no means a 'virtual child porn', but 
since law allow broader it also allow narrower.

Age of (sexual) consent in US vary through the States. See: 
http://www.ageofconsent.com -- in most states it is 16 years of age.

Please note: I am not a US lawyer.



-- 
Przemyslaw 'Pshemekan' Plaskowicki
Fear is that little darkroom where negatives are developed. (Michael Pritchard)





From gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 20:52:44 2003
From: gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid (gwendolyngrace)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 20:52:44 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <1071074559.36A3141B@...>
Message-ID: <br812t+t0s4@...>

Hi, everyone.

It's Gwen, making a very rare guest appearance on an HPFGU list. My, 
this has been an interesting discussion, and I mean that in a very 
Chinese sense. The threads here on TBAY have been amusing, 
frustrating, gratifying, and difficult for me to read, mostly because 
I feel an overwhelming sense of d?j? vu, because you see, I was an 
Elf during both the April, 2002 and the November, 2002 TBAYcles, as 
they came to be known on the Admin (MEG) list. Yes, for those of you 
who don't know or remember me, I'm not exactly an oldbie by Heidi's 
definition, but I'm also just a little bit proto-middler, to use her 
term. I joined the list in January, 2001, and became an Elf just 
about a year later, just before TBAY made its first major appearance 
as a factor on the list. To put things in perspective for you, I'm 
the person who coined the term "CARP." (I wish that my other term for 
TBAY had caught on, too, as I think it's more intuitive: Carpe 
Theorem.)

Anyway, after catching up to everything being discussed here, and 
deciding that old habits die too hard, I'm posting on the topic. 
Those of you who do know me, relax, I'm not going to kick anyone's 
ass. Though some of you may feel I'm airing somewhat old, dirty 
laundry, I promise, no HPFGU'ers will be harmed in the delivery of 
this post.

Okay, so on the subjects of TBAY, FILK, and similar things.

First off, those folks who are on the Admin Team (whatever the heck 
you call it now): the one thing I have to say about this is, please, 
don't consider the entire existence of TBAY completely moot. I 
understand that it is more status quo now than it was even a year 
ago, and I further acknowledge that you say you are not considering 
the ultimate fate of TBAY at this time. Fair enough. But I caution 
you: TBAY has survived heretofore, IMO, because certain individuals 
on the moderator team defended it desperately, and, equally IMO, 
other mods who had no opinion decided that it would be nicer to those 
moderators to keep TBAY than to excise it for the good of the list.

So when you asked here about TBAY, and within a few posts, people 
were asking why it should be allowed, please, remember that no 
decision needs to be final forever. If there's a compelling reason to 
revisit the question, please, don't be afraid to do so.

Because I think there are still compelling reasons, the same sorts of 
reasons I and a couple others tried to argue in April and November. 

Everyone else, understand that I, too, am a role-player from long 
ago. I too, am susceptible to the lure of a good bit of fun, and in-
and-of-itself, I don't have a problem with a little bit of cyber-
action ? when it illustrates a point better than anything else.

But as a role-player and an author and a whole lot of other things, I 
ultimately agree with Richard (gulplum) and Saitaina, who both feel 
that TBAY is bad for the list. I agree with Stasia, who said (in 
message 115): "TBAY feels to me like it's performance theater; I'm 
watching theorists act out their theories. Sort of." And I agree with 
Dreadnaught (Shaun), who said (in message 109), "I feel quite 
uncomfortable with the idea of posting a non TBAY reply to a TBAY 
post - but it seems to me that TBAY posters have little problem with 
the idea of taking a thread that is being discussed in a 
straightforward fashion and TBAYing it."

Quite simply, TBAY is probably about 80% of why I don't post anymore. 
I honestly blame TBAY for much of the downward slide list quality has 
taken over the last 2 years ? from the moment people started 
inserting themselves into the action, instead of remaining observers.

When I tried to explain the co-opting of threads into TBAY, and 
especially the evolution of TBAY from simple "extended metaphor" to 
long, protruded narratives that are almost by themselves fictive 
works, I said simply that "The posts are no longer *about* the 
theories; they are about how those theories are presented." Richard 
said (in message 156): "To put it very briefly, the metaphors of TBAY 
itself are beginning to take over from the metaphors of the theories 
being discussed." Thanks, Richard! That's what I was trying to say in 
a nutshell. It's not a question of ignoring form vs. function. But 
the debate around TBAY has never been that TBAY posts don't contain 
brilliance, or that TBAY posts are more or less "clever" than regular 
posts. The debate has been that because it is a specific *style* of 
posting, at a certain point, posts are measured and/or judged by how 
well they typify or exemplify that style.

I'll give you two examples, to see if I can illustrate what I'm 
talking about here. The first is poetry. Many forms of poetry, such 
as the rhyme royal, the sestina, the villanelle, and others, 
originated because poets got bored and wanted to challenge 
themselves. Fair enough, and certainly everyone deserves to push the 
envelope of one's art. So they came up with forms of poetry ? meters, 
rhyme schemes, and so on ? that were difficult to employ while still 
creating a poem that was meaningful and effective. Other poets rose 
to the challenge, and soon poem style X was all the rage. But 
eventually, use of that particular poetic style became more "about" 
how well a poet could work within it, or how far the poet could push 
it, than it was "about" writing a poem to make a point.

Example #2 comes from theatre. In theatre, we actors are very aware 
of a phenomenon known as "upstaging." Upstaging happens when someone 
or something on stage that isn't supposed to be the center of 
attention grabs the audience and distracts them from the real point 
of the scene, be it dialogue, action, or whatever. An example-within-
an-example is if there's a set piece onstage, like let's say a sofa, 
and the actors are constantly playing with or using or moving or 
interacting with the sofa. We'd say that it's no longer a play about 
a love story; it's a play about a sofa. Here's the real example, and 
it's an object lesson on upstaging. 

The story goes that once, the great actress Tallulah Bankhead was in 
a show with an ing?nue who, with typical dramatic ego, felt she was a 
far better actress than Ms. Bankhead. In one off-stage battle, Ms. 
Bankhead was loudly heard to proclaim, "Honey, I could upstage you 
without even being on stage!" Sure enough, the next night, Ms. 
Bankhead had laid her trap. The scene arrived, where she and the 
young woman were on together. In the middle of the scene, Ms. 
Bankhead's character places her teacup and saucer on the table and 
leaves the room, whereupon the young actress continues the scene 
(whether with other actors or alone, I don't recall). Ms. Bankhead 
very deliberately placed her saucer so that it protruded from the 
edge of the table, where it was sure to crash as soon as anything 
touched it.

Ms. Bankhead was right: for the rest of the scene, no one paid the 
ing?nue the slightest attention during her big moments. All eyes kept 
returning to the teacup and saucer. When would it fall? How would it 
fall? What would happen when it did?

What no one knew is that Ms. Bankhead had obtained double-sided 
adhesive from the stagehands before the performance, and she had 
fixed the saucer to the table, so it *wouldn't* fall. But for that 
night, in that place, she made her point. She upstaged the young 
actress without even being present.

To me, TBAY posts are not about the monologue. They are about the 
teacup. They are about the use of the form, and while they may be 
inspired by having something real to say, ultimately, the nugget of 
wisdom is subsumed by how `cleverly' one can conceal it within all 
the rest of the trappings. I have no problem with cleverness, but 
being clever for the sake of being clever is
well, it's smug.

Now, the question has come up here and before as to whether or not 
TBAY should be splintered to its own list. While a few people believe 
that it might flourish there on its own, where its devotees can spin 
their webs of theory to their hearts' content, most everyone ? 
detractors and supporters alike ? feel that to move TBAY would kill 
it.

You know what? I agree.

But here's why I agree. TBAY is a futile exercise. It's superfluous, 
because it's about the teacup, not the monologue. If it were only 
about the monologue, then I think it would have no trouble thriving 
anywhere. The TBAY proponents are right when they say TBAY needs the 
list. So why, if TBAY posts are not substantive enough to survive on 
their own, should the list tolerate them? Why should we indulge a 
small percentage of people who, frankly, are fascinated by the teacup 
and want to create more situations in which a teacup might or might 
not fall? Why not return the list to straight discussion, discussion 
that can still be creative and insightful and occasionally contain a 
metaphor, but which everyone can access?

David described the French/English metaphor (mine) in Message 202. On 
other sites, the rules of engagement are clearly defined: e.g., 
English is the official language of the list. If you can't post in 
English, sorry. Why should we allow two separate languages (Post, 
TBAY post) to exist on the list?

Okay, one more thing about this and then I'll move on. Shaun (I think 
it was Shaun) brought up the question of whether TBAY posts conform 
to the rules for posting to a greater or lesser extent than regular 
posts do. In answer, David discussed the painstaking process Elves 
had of digging through pending TBAY posts to see if they "made a 
canon point." I would like to point out that this rule, and the rules 
implemented to determine whether or not TBAY (or any other) posts 
were sufficiently canonical to be allowed, was IMO nothing more than 
another attempt to keep TBAY on the list, for those members of the 
then-Moderator/Administrative team who loved it beyond measure. And, 
FWIW, I don't think that rule was applied evenly, either, because 
right after it was implemented, Heidi asked if she could include a 
quote from Jason Isaacs, in which the actor made a canon comment, 
based on his reading of the books. She was told point-blank that such 
a post belonged on ?Movie, not on the main list, because Isaacs is a 
movie actor (and therefore supposedly can't be trusted to understand 
or have anything of value to say about the books). Of course, that 
begs the question: Had the actor been Jim Dale or Stephen Fry, would 
the point have been allowed?

What am I saying here? I'm saying that TBAY was preserved because 
moderators on the mod team wanted it to stick around, and because 
they defended it maniacally, almost to the point of hysteria, when it 
was attacked. It seemed to me that the more logical our arguments 
against it became, in fact, the more emphatically those moderators 
insisted that TBAY was the be-all and end-all of posting. First it 
wasn't fictive; then it was, but it was okay because it didn't 
involve the actual characters and thus wasn't as confusing as fanfic. 
Then they acknowledged that it was confusing to anyone who didn't 
know what the acronyms meant, but here's an acronym database so now 
it's not confusing. Then they argued that it wasn't exclusive because 
anyone could TBAY, but they acknowledged that naturally, only the 
most talented posters would attempt it, and thus the quality was much 
higher than regular posts. Then suddenly well, okay, so maybe some 
people try to TBAY and don't know what they're doing, but really, 
it's more about content than format, right? Except that when it was 
pointed out that there *wasn't* a whole lot of content, then we were 
told it's just a style of posting, and people enjoy it, so why are 
some people so upset about it? And so on, ad infinitum.

Every possible objection we could raise, we raised. And lo, TBAY 
miraculously remained both welcoming and cliquish, both brilliant and 
lackluster, both entertaining and impenetrable, both narrative and 
analytical, both self-indulgent and innocuous. It's a year and a half 
later, and TBAY still has its cake and eats it, too.


I said I'd talk about FILK, so I'll talk about FILK briefly (well, 
more briefly than I did TBAY). I'm a freelance songwriter, including 
many filks, mostly for an organization called the SCA, along with a 
few other sci-fi con type songs. I have enough written and they're 
well-enough liked that I am working on putting together a CD of my 
songs for sale in that organization. I am an unembarrassed filk snob. 
Most HP filks make me break out in hives. That said, I have actually 
written four original songs, two of which are technically filk 
because the melodies were not mine, and Heidi forced me to help her 
with two filk songs while we were working on Nimbus ? 2003. If I 
*ever* write another HP filk, she has standing orders to kill me 
where I stand.

You might think that all this is leading up to another diatribe on 
why filk shouldn't be allowed. Wrong. I detest HP filk because so 
much of it, forgive me Caius, absolutely stinks. It's the same reason 
that although I help run FictionAlley, I hardly ever read fanfic. 
Most people cannot write anything worth the cyberspace it's published 
in. There are rare exceptions, but really, truly, Sturgeon's law 
applies and then some. But Caius is absolutely right, as is Pippin, 
when they point out that many FILKs are inspired by conversation on 
the list ? a crystallization of ideas put forward, as it were. And, 
having been struck by the evil filk fairy many, many times in my 
life, I can attest that it's very difficult either to predict what 
will trigger a filking episode, or to stop one once it starts. Gee, I 
make it sound like epilepsy or something. It really is ? it's a 
disease. But it's not quite the blight on the list that I personally 
view TBAY to be, and for a number of reasons:

1. Unlike TBAY, a filk doesn't hijack threads. It may comment on 
what's happening, and in some cases, it may as I said boil the 
conversation down to a more refined grade of wisdom, but at most, a 
filk is a commentary on or summation of a position or theory, not a 
statement that would be extremely difficult to discuss without the 
context of the filk around it. Example: my original song for 
Hufflepuff comes to the conclusion: "You ask what's the point in a 
house of our kind? / Well, we run the world from beneath and behind." 
It's a succinct little couplet that summarises my belief that 
Hufflepuffs are not necessarily a "load of duffers" ? after all, 
secretaries and janitors rule the world. But I could easily discuss 
that concept without filking it. It is much more difficult to parse 
out all the myriad pieces of a TBAY theory to make it accessible 
outside of its contextual environment. The creation of a FILK doesn't 
automatically present difficulty for anyone who doesn't read FILKS to 
go on discussing that topic.

2. I do believe that if it were spliced to its own list, FILK would 
thrive. The evidence of filk lists doing very well for themselves is 
all over the internet. There are entire websites, discussion groups, 
and all manner of other forums where filk is the center of 
discussion. In fact, in many ways, I think HP filk might do better on 
its own list, because people could discuss their filks with one 
another, improve their scansion based on suggestions from their 
peers, and spark each other's creativity in ways that are stifled due 
to the OT-ness of such discussion as it would be interpreted on the 
main list. But *because* I can readily see how filk is a legitimate 
and useful animal, I say it belongs in the HPFGU family. It wouldn't 
be too hard, for example, to say on the FILK list "Hey, over on main 
we've been talking about Snape's pensieve, and here's a little filk I 
wrote" or even "This was written in response to a discussion about 
why Dumbledore would ignore Harry's obvious post-traumatic stress in 
OoP," and have people understand the context. The point is, filk will 
not suffer from a lack of oxygen whether it's on its own list or 
continues on the main one.

3. A filk is, generally, a single commentary, not a running gag. 
Okay, people do write series of filks, and I think somewhere out 
there someone still plans ? I shudder to think of it ? HP: The 
Musical, where all the filks are strung together either to parallel 
the books or to illustrate some other progression of plot through 
filk (bleah!). But in general, one filk does not perpetuate more 
filks that comment on the first filk and build on it and extend it 
further and leave listies with the feeling that if they're going to 
understand the jokes in filk 357, they'd better read filks 1-356. 
Filks can stand alone.

4. I may be wrong, but I believe there are vastly more filks that 
reference the canon to a much greater degree than they reference the 
list itself. They are thus more universal and more universally 
understood than TBAY, because in order to understand or respond to 
TBAY, one *must* have a grasp of the players, as well as the rules of 
engagement. 

5. Filks, because of their nature as poetry, must be economical in 
their use of language. No one to my knowledge has tried to produce 
any epic HP poetry, rivaling the length of the Iliad or an Edda or 
Njal's Saga. Consequently, even if they do appear on the list, they 
don't take up the kind of bandwidth that TBAY habitually does.

6. Filking is canon. Dumbledore instructs everyone in the first book 
to pick a favourite tune to sing the Hogwarts school song. Hermione 
has never, to my knowledge, presented Harry and Ron with a syllogism 
by personifying herself vis-?-vis her theory.

Okay, that last one was silly. But I think you get the point.

Gwen





From lanibird96 at lanibird96.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 22:21:50 2003
From: lanibird96 at lanibird96.yahoo.invalid (Leilani Sian)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 22:21:50 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <000901c3bf35$3e85e4c0$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <br869u+skta@...>

 
> Iggy here:
> 
> And, if you notice, it has been suggested that the discussions don't
> need to stop, but it might be better to move them to another group 
or
> location.

>  <snip>

> I would also like to point out that these friends of the list aren't
> encouraging crushing discussion about certain themes.  We are simply
> trying to make people aware that such discussions could be 
problematic
> for the group and might want to be moved elsewhere.

>  <snip>

  On the other hand, if we
> ignore the fact that keeping one topic type open on this list could 
help
> get the list as a whole shut down, then we're actually doing more 
damage
> to the group.
 
Leilani:

I understand what you are saying, and do agree to an extent, however 
I personally do not feel this action pertains to the problem.  It 
seems we are dealing with a malicious person(s) whose goal is to 
disrupt the HPfGU community, and a Yahoo! with a history of not 
investigating claims.  All it would take would be for Yahoo! to 
believe a complaint.  The complaint could be a complete fabrication, 
but since there would be no investigation the list would still be 
deleted no matter what the topics actually are on the thread. It 
wouldn't matter if the entire list was make up of threads disscussing 
the regulation of cauldron thickness, a lie would end it all.  I 
think the best we can do for the time is to go on as usual, and give 
the elves all the support we can.

Leilani - who would happy send Yahoo! an e-mail an hour to plead for 
an investigation into complaints should one be made.  She just needs 
an address.. 





From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 23:00:30 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:00:30 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br812t+t0s4@...>
Message-ID: <br88if+lt3i@...>

I've been seriously ill the last bit, which explains my sudden absence
from the fray, but could I resist answering this? 

Gwen wrote:
> To me, TBAY posts are not about the monologue. They are about the 
> teacup. They are about the use of the form, and while they may be 
> inspired by having something real to say, ultimately, the nugget of 
> wisdom is subsumed by how `cleverly' one can conceal it within all 
> the rest of the trappings. I have no problem with cleverness, but 
> being clever for the sake of being clever is
well, it's smug

I think the operative word here is "to me." You see them as a nugget
of wisdom hidden by the trappings. I'd suggest that you are misreading
them. What you call the trappings are the whole point to me. Which is,
of course, why we're having this discussion in the first place. 

> What am I saying here? I'm saying that TBAY was preserved because 
> moderators on the mod team wanted it to stick around, and because 
> they defended it maniacally, almost to the point of hysteria, when it 
> was attacked.

Hey! Let's put our cards on the table here. 

Moderator_s_?

You're referring to Elkins, for one.

And the fact that you can say that Elkins argued maniacally, to the
point of hysteria, well, that rather strains your credibility in my
opinion, Gwen. Anyone who could come up with that characterization of
Elkins, the soul of impartiality and rationality, the person who sees
nineteen sides to every argument, well, I might wonder if this whole
thing was - you know - *personal.* 

Eileen




From frantyck at frantyck.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 18:57:41 2003
From: frantyck at frantyck.yahoo.invalid (frantyck)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 18:57:41 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to the HPFGU Family of Lists
In-Reply-To: <000001c3be5e$3a99b120$99ee79a5@Einstein>
Message-ID: <br7qb5+blp1@...>

> Iggy here:
> if someone is threatening the groups, common sense dictates that 
we try to hold off on any topics/theories/language that can be 
potentially used against the group... and the above named threads 
are prime 


I see where you're coming from. But -- if we're going to hold off on 
topics that a discussion list for adults should really be able to 
handle, just because of Yahoo's capriciousness, that makes the whole 
concept of responsible discussion on these groups meaningless.

And, to reiterate a question that I asked in an earlier post -- who 
has rights to each egroup's messages and files? Does the "Copyright 
? 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved" line at the bottom of
every 
page include the text itself? I ask because: is it legal for us to 
back up messages and files in a non-Yahoo location? Will it be legal 
to shift the matter out if it ever becomes necessary to move?

Rrishi





From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 22:44:53 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 16:44:53 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <br869u+skta@...>
Message-ID: <000301c3bf6f$3dd17c80$a497aec7@Einstein>

> Leilani:
> 
> I understand what you are saying, and do agree to an extent, however
> I personally do not feel this action pertains to the problem.  It
> seems we are dealing with a malicious person(s) whose goal is to
> disrupt the HPfGU community, and a Yahoo! with a history of not
> investigating claims.  All it would take would be for Yahoo! to
> believe a complaint.  The complaint could be a complete fabrication,
> but since there would be no investigation the list would still be
> deleted no matter what the topics actually are on the thread. It
> wouldn't matter if the entire list was make up of threads disscussing
> the regulation of cauldron thickness, a lie would end it all.  I
> think the best we can do for the time is to go on as usual, and give
> the elves all the support we can.
> 
> Leilani - who would happy send Yahoo! an e-mail an hour to plead for
> an investigation into complaints should one be made.  She just needs
> an address..


Iggy here:

Here's a fun one for everyone...  I e-mailed Yahoo that a threat was
made about a list I am on (and didn't name the names, BTW.)... I got a
form letter in reply that an investigation would be made by the Yahoo
admin.  They wouldn't be able to tell me what action would be made, but
they would definitely look into it.

Here's the fun stuff:

1 - How can they investigate a claim if I didn't give them any group
names or addresses?

2 - You've gotta love that they sent out a form letter.

3 - On the good side, if they shut the groups down for some reason, I
have archived proof that they informed me that they would do a full
investigation.  Even a form letter sent from an official standpoint is
binding.  If they do shut the groups down, and cannot prove that they
actually performed the investigation they said they would (and provide
ample proof of violation of the terms of usage) then they are in breach
of contract.  *grin*  (Can you say "class action lawsuit?"  *laugh*)


Iggy McSnurd







From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 00:56:39 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 00:56:39 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <000301c3bf6f$3dd17c80$a497aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <br8fc7+kah1@...>

Iggy:

> Even a form letter sent from an official standpoint is
> binding.  If they do shut the groups down, and cannot prove that 
> they actually performed the investigation they said they would (and 
> provide ample proof of violation of the terms of usage) then they 
> are in breach of contract.  *grin*  (Can you say "class action 
> lawsuit?"  *laugh*)

Now, not to offend you or anything, but this strikes me as just plain 
silly, Iggy; not to mention being nothing but a further muddying of 
the waters. The saying goes, "The squeaky wheel gets the grease," but 
I've always wondered if it might not sometimes just help speed along 
the day when the whole dern wagon gets broken down for firewood.

Do you have *any* experience with legal definitions or procedures at 
all (and television shows don't count)? Have you actually read what 
Yahoo's terms of service and disclaimers say?

Sandy




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 01:27:53 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 01:27:53 -0000
Subject: The future of HPFGU (was TBAY debate)
In-Reply-To: <E08AE567-27F5-11D8-9224-000A9577CB94@...>
Message-ID: <br8h6p+4j0h@...>

Kneasy wrote:

> We have a sort of 'problem' on HPfGU that other sites, dedicated 
to 
> other
> books don't have.
> 
> HP is a work in progress; the canon is incomplete. This leads to 
> theoretical
> speculation of all qualities and probabilities. TBAY, IMO falls, 
for 
> the most
> part, within the realms of speculation. TBAY as such will probably 
die 
> when
> the series is completed (assuming that JKR does not leave the way 
open 
> for
> sequels), along with SHIPS. From then on they will be sub-sets of 
Fan 
> Fiction
> and that is where they will find their final resting place.
> 
> So far as I can trace it, speculation has been rife ever since the 
site 
> was
> founded. Good. Splendid, in fact. That was one of the main reasons 
why I
> joined. I love to speculate. (This can cause problems too; I have 
ideas,
> indeed written posts, that do not comfortably fit into general 
post, 
> TBAY or
> Fan Fiction. What do I do with them? 

I would, as a fellow list member, encourage you to post them.  If 
you have honestly tried to follow the list conventions, then I think 
the worst that can happen is that the admins will send you a polite 
letter pointing out something that you missed.  Honestly.  I really 
don't believe they issue howlers for posters who clearly are trying 
to keep to the rules.

> when the canon is complete. The site will become a very different 
place.
> Analysis will rule. What else will be left? Especially if 
categories 
> that  are
> reckoned to be only loosely tied to canon are hived off.

I do not share this vision, to be honest.  (I don't mean I think 
it's a bad thing, just that I don't think that's what will happen.)  
Some prominent shippers have already declared that their favoured 
SHIPs are post-canon, and will probably continue to argue their 
case.  It is true that the overwhelming likelihood is that JKR will 
tie up the major mysteries of the series at the end of Book 7, but 
so much of the appeal for posters is the world she has created that 
there will be plenty of speculation, IMO.

> Expect many fewer posts and posters; there will not be the scope 
for fun
> and games that there is now.

Again, I think the sense of fun that pervades the books (if overlain 
with a darker angst in the later ones) is infectious.  People who 
are attracted to the completed canon will still find ways to 
have 'fun and games', IMO.

 There is even a faint possibility that the 
> site
> may fail; I hope not, but it will if you can't attract posters.

Now, I see a greater likelihood of this.  HPFGU is not the fandom, 
just a part.  Other groups may arise that do what we do, but better, 
and people may simply drift away.  I am sure that social researchers 
have studied the life, growth, death and population dynamics of 
internet communities.  (Shaun?)  It may be too early to draw 
conclusions about a medium little more than ten years old, but I 
would not be surprised to hear that HPFGU likely has a natural life 
span, and may die an honourable, and honoured, death.  We the fans 
will doubtless continue with vigour.

 Some 
> may  consider
> a  worse possibility could be in store -  a self-selected, 
> same-thinking group
> who sit, having received the true gospel, canon in hand, freezing 
out 
> anyone
> they don't approve of.

That, too, could happen.  In fact, I see the factors that tend to 
produce this situation as being more influential once the canon is 
closed.  I will come back to this.

> A long way off, you may say. No, just two books.

Agreed.
 
> My advice is to plan for these times now. Take into consideration 
the 
> likely
> arc of the site and probably of fandom too. Do you want a group of 
> small,
> fragmented specialty sites or do you want a kaleidoscopic 
> cross-pollinating
> bunch of free-thinkers who may annoy each and every one of us 
every now
> and again but have the virtues of diversity?
> 
> Personally, I  prefer  the latter.

Me too, but it may be possible to have a set-up that embraces the 
best of both.  For example, if a threaded forum could be invented 
that meets Shaun's concerns about ensuring email delivery of posts, 
could that go some way to doing that?  I applaud the attempt to 
think long term and hope that this sort of envisioning will become a 
major function of the Feedback list.

There are, of course, web sites devoted to discussion of works whose 
authors are long dead: Heidi, do Jane Austen discussion groups, for 
example, have anything to show us?

I think that with time, a type of posting that we have hardly seen 
at all as yet may become more prominent.  This is posting that seeks 
to draw lessons from canon for how we live, possibly with an 
explicit religious tone.

So far, we have concentrated on elaborating our understanding of 
JKR's world, based on our understanding of our own.  There is no 
reason the traffic should not go the other way.  For example, people 
(Joywitch?) have in the past considered what the Shrieking Shack 
scene has to say about JKR's attitude to capital punishment.  In the 
future list members may start to allow their own attitude to capital 
punishment to be influenced by the Harry Potter series and their 
interpretation thereof, and may say so onlist.  Other examples will 
no doubt come to mind.

I have no doubt that this carries risk of even greater controversy 
than our current hot topics - after all, people will feel under 
pressure about other people's opinions of their own life decisions - 
but it is a risk that I personally would be happy to see us take.

What I find hard to see is whether the series has the bottom to 
carry this sort of weight.  So far only a tiny minority of posters 
have come out to say that it has.

David




From LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 10 19:58:34 2003
From: LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid (thelinnealand)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:58:34 -0000
Subject: Possible threat
Message-ID: <br7tta+5h48@...>

Could we discuss why we are not told by HPfGU Admin exactly what was
deleted? 

I mean, this sounds like "Homeland Security" or "Big Brother."

Was there a thread comparing DD to Bin Laden or something?

Seems to me that the members have a right to be in an uproar. The
vague quality of the information on the subject means we may be
jumping to unwarranted conclusions on the Bellatrix bit. 

I appreciate that the Admin doesn't want to give the perpetrator the
satisfaction but that is one person and we are the many. Don't we want
to know? Can't we figure it out?

Tender-earred as I am I have never yet found fault with the
non-graphic, sexual specificity of the postings.

Linnea   who is just a tender-foot here too





From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 02:42:59 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:42:59 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br812t+t0s4@...>
Message-ID: <br8ljj+fc75@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "gwendolyngrace" 
<gwendolyngrace at y...> wrote:
> Hi, everyone.

> 6. Filking is canon. Dumbledore instructs everyone in the first 
book 
> to pick a favourite tune to sing the Hogwarts school song. 
Hermione 
> has never, to my knowledge, presented Harry and Ron with a 
syllogism 
> by personifying herself vis-?-vis her theory.
> 
> Okay, that last one was silly. But I think you get the point.
> 
> Gwen

Thanks for a brilliant post.  I found it persuasive and compelling, 
except that I think Dumbledore's exhortation is perhaps your 
strongest point, and not at all frivolous.  I also refer you to his 
comment on the magic of music.

But, having pretty much accepted your conclusions as to the 
vialbility of TBAY and of FILKing,  I wonder if banning TBAY will 
improv the list.  As you pointed out, the TBAYers and the FILKers 
turned to thes forms either out of boredome with the then current 
essays only format, or that they realized-- as you have admitted-- 
that there are things much more elegantly conveyed through an 
alternative form.  Would either of these populations return to 
posting those boring-- to them-- essays if TBAY was banned, even 
begging the question of their natural reaction to said banning: 
resentment at best, anger and retaliation at worst.

So, however TBAY started (thank you too, Heidi) and was nurtured, 
now the little mandragora plants can flourish in the soil of the 
main list, but without detracting from the parallel essay-type 
discussions, sometimes briefly intersecting and enriching one 
another in the process?

While agreeing with you wholeheartedly that Sturgeon's law indeed 
applies to HP filks, I find my enjoyment at finding the 10% far 
outweighs my dismay at the 90%.

Give uniform, appropriate prefixes to allow for sorting, why not 
continue these now time-honored alternatives to essays?

Haggridd




From lhuntley at laura_ingalls_huntley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 00:57:17 2003
From: lhuntley at laura_ingalls_huntley.yahoo.invalid (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 19:57:17 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <000901c3bf35$3e85e4c0$df85aec7@Einstein>
Message-ID: <F77E4A34-2B74-11D8-B422-000A95E29F3E@...>

Iggy:

> And, if you notice, it has been suggested that the discussions don't
> need to stop, but it might be better to move them to another group or
> location.

Oh, so *another* list can benefit from the ideas that *our* listies 
would rather post here?

And I think you'd agree that there *is* no other place like HPfGU for 
discussing Harry.  Sure, a listie could take their discussion somewhere 
else when it got too - What? Sexual? Taboo? - but not only would that 
be artificial, that listie would also be sacrificing themselves and 
their ideas to some nebulous phantom menace.

Not acceptable, IMHO.

> I would also like to point out that these friends of the list aren't
> encouraging crushing discussion about certain themes.? We are simply
> trying to make people aware that such discussions could be problematic
> for the group and might want to be moved elsewhere.

*looks at you suspiciously* What is this "friends of the list" jargon?  
I don't understand.  We are not *friends* of the list.  We *are* the 
list.  You mess with the listies, you mess with the list.  There is no 
way to avoid it.

And, as many others have pointed out, going by Yahoomort's history, if 
a complaint is filed, they will either a) ignore it or b) delete us 
with no investigation at all.  That's *assuming* there is even a threat 
of the main list being deleted at all, which there very well may not be 
(go back and read the admin letter a little more closely).

In short, running about like Chicken Little in response to this problem 
is not going to help *anything*.  I do understand the desire to batten 
down the hatches and go on the defensive, but it *won't* help.  IMO, it 
could irreversibly damage the group itself.


> Some people try to be friends to the list by seeing the grander effect
> of what's being discussed and the effect it could possibly have on the
> group as a whole.? I believe in freedom of expression just as much as
> anyone (trust me... if you only knew...).? On the other hand, if we
> ignore the fact that keeping one topic type open on this list could 
> help
> get the list as a whole shut down, then we're actually doing more 
> damage
> to the group.

If we wanted to make the list impenetrable to assault (which would 
probably not even help if a complaint were filed against us), we would 
have to do away with a *lot* more than just sexual discussion, trust me.

Personally, I am not one for trying to preserve things under glass 
cases to the detriment of those who could benefit from them.  *If* 
censoring could save the list (which it can't), what then?  We 
basically have the *shell* of our old community intact, but not the 
community itself.  What's the worth of that, I ask you?  *If* we get 
deleted, we pick up the pieces and build everything back.  It would be 
tragic, yes, but not so much as the destruction of our community, I 
think.

What's the point of being a fox if you're never going to leave the 
foxhole?

Laura

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 02:57:00 2003
From: hp at gulplum.yahoo.invalid (GulPlum)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 02:57:00 +0000
Subject: List metaphor
In-Reply-To: <br566k+6v7p@...>
References: <br216l+96lt@...>
Message-ID: <4.2.0.58.20031211011742.00985eb0@...>

David said (inter alia, and parenthetically):

>thank you Richard for the suggestion of the letters page of a newspaper - 
>oddly enough that's how I see *this* list, but not the main list.

I'm curious about the basis on which you make that distinction. My gut 
impulse is to assume that you consider the topic of "editorial policy" to 
be the natural topic for a paper's "letters to the editor" page. (And thus, 
this list having been established for the purposes of discussing our 
perceptions of the list and how it's run, this list mirrors that function).

As it happens, a closer look at any periodical would show that this isn't 
the case. If a reader questions editorial policy, the usual course of 
action is to stop subscribing to or buying the periodical in question. Even 
if a reader writes to explain their stance, such  letters are exceptionally 
rarely published. Not only because the publishers are unlikely to want to 
draw attention to their shortcomings, but because, well, they don't really 
consider that's what the letters page is for.

As far as I'm concerned, I don't differentiate between the functions of the 
various HPFGU lists (and whenever I talk about "HPFGU", I mean the *family* 
of lists rather than the Main List. If I ever mean to refer to one list in 
particular, I specify it by name). They are, ultimately, just different 
venues for us to communicate with each other. I actually think that 
attempting to split their functions (as opposed to their subject matter) is 
unhealthy.

I'd like to add something to what I said about mailing list metaphors, 
which I'd forgotten to say. It's an unpopular attitude in general, but I 
think it needs saying, despite what the authors and creators of modern 
communications technology would have us believe. That is that there are 
fundamental differences between written and oral forms of communications. 
This community operates almost exclusively by way of the written word, and 
looking for metaphors which rely (solely or mainly) on face-to-face contact 
is dangerous.

I make part of my living as a translator and interpreter. The two skills 
are very different (even discounting the further differences between 
different kinds of translations, such as I don't, for instance, undertake 
the translation of fiction or other "literary" writing because my own 
literary skills aren't up to it) and I am conscious of those differences on 
a daily basis. I wish to dwell on only one, which I think has a MAJOR 
impact on the way any mailing list community works.

Written material *should* be deliberate and considered (in the sense of 
"considered opinion"). Too much writing on the internet (and regrettably, 
on HPFGU) doesn't get a great deal of thought put into it, and ideas and 
words are just tossed onto the electronic page without any premeditation. 
Perhaps I'm just tilting at windmills here, and the degradation of written 
communication is inevitable, but I will continue to fight for the right to 
expect that when someone writes something, they have actually put some 
thought into it.

I don't expect every written communication to be in a formal style (far 
from it!), and that's not what I'm getting at. But I find a heck of a lot 
of gut reactions on HPFGU, written in extremely poor English (and I'm 
talking about native speakers here)  which could gain a great deal from the 
authors putting a little more effort into what they're writing, and where 
necessary, understanding the post to which they're replying. (I don't deny 
that I myself am guilty of doing that on occasion.)

On that latter point, there are some people around here who appear to be 
willing to read everything anyone else says in the most abrasive and 
offensive way possible. I doubt that anyone on HPFGU *intends* to belittle 
or preach to anyone else, so I get very concerned when some people get very 
hot under the collar and write overtly abrasive messages taking offence. 
I'm sure that if some of these people took the trouble to re-read the posts 
to which they're replying, they'd realise that they're mis-reading the text 
or reading too much between the lines (or, on occasion, not reading between 
the lines enough and taking things too literally!).

I'd like to draw attention to the "GU" part of our community's name. We're 
not meant to be kids, we're meant to be adults who can behave and converse 
in an adult fashion. I fully appreciate that some people have difficulty 
communicating in written form (and in English), for whatever reason, but I 
find that the people with a genuine reason to have difficulties, and are 
aware of those difficulties, put effort into making themselves clear, and 
spend time on their contributions. It's those who seem to think that their 
abilities are adequate who cause the problems.

A separate issue is the fact that (quite understandably) there's an 
unspoken "competition" to get one's comment in first, to answer a question 
before anyone else. This results in something that's plagued Usenet since 
day one, namely multiple responses. The encouraging thing on HPFGU is that 
established members generally don't bother answering the straightforward 
queries, but the downside is that people not-long off moderated status fall 
over each other to get in first, and we end up with three or four answers 
to the same question, of which typically one will be wrong in some detail. 
(I suspect that the Mods end up discarding several responses from moderated 
members, and thanks to them for that!) There's no way to "legislate" 
against this, apart from appealing to people to think twice before clicking 
on that "send" button.

I brought up that subject deliberately, because to end this (massive?) :-) 
missive, I'd like to appeal to all members to think about their own 
postings, re-reading their contributions and spending a little more time 
crossing the 't's and dotting the 'i's, and perhaps even reconsidering the 
wisdom of posting something in the first place. I know for a fact that 
most, if not all, old-timers do this a matter of course, but perhaps it's 
worth repeating.

--
GulPlum AKA Richard, who's sure that *someone* will take umbrage at 
something said above or the way it was said.





From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 05:55:32 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 05:55:32 -0000
Subject: One correction to Heidi's history
In-Reply-To: <1071074559.36A3141B@...>
Message-ID: <br90sk+8skn@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Heidi Tandy <heidilist at t...> wrote:

> But that being what it is, I also know how Tbay got started, and it got 
> started because it was generated by two of the list's elves - Cindy and 
> Tabouli - back in the late winter of 2002

The first TBAY post was made by Tabouli. Elkins was the second poster
on the Bay. And I hold the honoured position of third. Cindy actually
didn't venture into the Bay for a bit, though she obviously cottoned
onto the style quite quickly, and is a character in some of the early
TBAY posts, using her non-TBAY posts as dialogue with TBAY!Elkins.

Eileen, who one very boring summer afternoon read a lot of old HPFGU posts




From gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 04:22:25 2003
From: gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid (gwendolyngrace)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 04:22:25 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br8ljj+fc75@...>
Message-ID: <br8re1+nl6i@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" 
<jkusalavagemd at y...> wrote:
> 
> Thanks for a brilliant post.  

Well, thank you. But it was pointed out to me offlist that I 
attributed something incorrectly: I said Richard said it was bad for 
the list. Actually, that was Shaun (message 149). Sorry, Richard, if 
I offended you through that unintentional misrepresentation. I read 
about 150 messages in one night, and I tried to take careful note of 
the posts I wanted to return to, but I guess accidents still happen.

 
> But, having pretty much accepted your conclusions as to the 
> vialbility of TBAY and of FILKing,  I wonder if banning TBAY will 
> improv the list.  As you pointed out, the TBAYers and the FILKers 
> turned to thes forms either out of boredome with the then current 
> essays only format, or that they realized-- as you have admitted-- 
> that there are things much more elegantly conveyed through an 
> alternative form.  Would either of these populations return to 
> posting those boring-- to them-- essays if TBAY was banned, even 
> begging the question of their natural reaction to said banning: 
> resentment at best, anger and retaliation at worst.
> 

Well, I think people turned to TBAY out of boredom, for the most 
part, that's true. Filk has always been around, though, and as I 
said, filk is a strange thing. It is by its nature somewhat 
reactionary, while with TBAY it appears that the pressure on the 
participant is to further discussion - or to spin the web further. 
The other thing about filk is, well, I don't know about you, but for 
me filk grabs me. My analogy to an attack is accurate for me. 
Sometimes you get the major flash of a filk and it just wants to be 
written. 

Anyway, rambling.

As to your other point about the difficulty of ousting TBAY after all 
this time, of course it would cause problems. I acknowledge that, 
just as I acknowledged that the moderators tell us they aren't 
considering it at this time. But recall that fanfic discussion was 
allowed for a long time, too, and the list adjusted when it was 
decided to ban fanfic discussion.

Gwen




From hebrideanblack at hebridean_black_dragn.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 07:28:26 2003
From: hebrideanblack at hebridean_black_dragn.yahoo.invalid (Wendy St John)
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2003 23:28:26 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Testing
Message-ID: <410-220031241172826512@...>

Gull Plum wrote:

"Huge apologies for this, but I've just noticed that two posts (here 
and to the Main list) I've sent by email in the last couple of hours 
still haven't turned up. I'm wondering if it's something wrong with 
Yahoo, or me."

Now me (Wendy):

It's not just you . . . it's Yahoo. I've been having trouble like this in
more than one of my groups for the past couple of days, and know of other
people having the same problem as well. It's random, too, because sometimes
I'l post something and it doesn't go through for hours, sometimes things go
through immediately.

So far, everything I've sent has turned up *eventually,* but it's still a
good idea to keep copies of all your posts until they turn up on the lists.
Just in case. 

:-)
Wendy






From tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 08:37:08 2003
From: tim_regan82 at dumbledad.yahoo.invalid (Tim Regan)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 08:37:08 -0000
Subject: The future of HPFGU (was TBAY debate)
In-Reply-To: <br8h6p+4j0h@...>
Message-ID: <br9abk+o9g2@...>

Hi All,

--- In HPFGU-Feedback Kneasy wrote:
>> We have a sort of 'problem' on HPfGU that other sites, 
>> dedicated to other books don't have.
>> HP is a work in progress; the canon is incomplete. 
>> This leads to theoretical speculation of all qualities and 
>> probabilities.

Exactly, that's not a problem it's a huge benefit. It makes HP 
discussions really exciting. We propose theories and models of the 
action so far, and based on those theories and models make 
predictions on what will happen next. In most literary discussions 
that process is futile because there is no `next', it's all 
hypothetical. But for Harry Potter we do have a next, we can watch 
and wait with baited breath for the next book to see if our 
predictions, and hence the theories and models on which they were 
based, were sound.

--- In HPFGU-Feedback David replied:
> I would, as a fellow list member, encourage you to post them.
> If you have honestly tried to follow the list conventions, then 
> I think the worst that can happen is that the admins will send 
> you a polite letter pointing out something that you missed.

Me too. I've had my share of wrist slapping from the elves, and I've 
always found it polite, kind, and informative. No, the worst that 
can happen is for your posts to get completely ignored.

Cheers,

Dumbledad






From LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 07:55:04 2003
From: LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid (thelinnealand)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 07:55:04 -0000
Subject: Testing
In-Reply-To: <410-220031241172826512@...>
Message-ID: <br97so+fr6l@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Wendy St John"
<hebrideanblack at e...> wrote:
> Gull Plum wrote:
> 
> "Huge apologies for this, but I've just noticed that two posts (here 
> and to the Main list) I've sent by email in the last couple of hours 
> still haven't turned up. I'm wondering if it's something wrong with 
> Yahoo, or me."
> 
> Now me (Wendy):
> 
> It's not just you . . . it's Yahoo. I've been having trouble like
this in
> more than one of my groups for the past couple of days, and know of
other
> people having the same problem as well. It's random, too, because
sometimes
> I'l post something and it doesn't go through for hours, sometimes
things go
> through immediately.
> 
> So far, everything I've sent has turned up *eventually,* but it's
still a
> good idea to keep copies of all your posts until they turn up on the
lists.
> Just in case. 
> 
> :-)
> Wendy

I am so glad you posted this as message 261 does not exist according
to my list.  I found only a blank page there when I went "up thread"
from Wendy and a message that said the message does not exist!

I posted to the main list around 2pm and still haven't seen the post.
It was a rebuttal of sorts on the Kreacher: thread that ended with 
Linnea... who has been left muttering to herself.. 
Have you seen it posted?
Of course I am still moderated and maybe things are just very busy for
the elves.

Linnea





From coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 10:22:27 2003
From: coyoteschild at iggymcsnurd.yahoo.invalid (IggyMcSnurd)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 04:22:27 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: Possible Threat to HPfGU lists
In-Reply-To: <F77E4A34-2B74-11D8-B422-000A95E29F3E@...>
Message-ID: <000201c3bfd0$b0d94e40$8ee479a5@Einstein>

Iggy here:

I am bowing out of this whole discussion, as it seems that no matter
what I say, someone out there will take it personally, take it wrong, or
twist it around to make it sound like an attack of some sort.  (Which,
incidentally, is exactly the type of thing I've been trying to caution
about...)

As a final comment, no... I do not feel that certain discussions need to
be taken to other lists... merely that they should be discussed (at
least for the time being) in other channels.  Direct e-mail to the
grouped participants of the topic, the web-sites chat function, and YM
conferencing are three examples of how this can be done without having
to move the conversation and/or participants to another list.

Also, my statement of "friends of these lists" was actually in reference
to something one of the Laura's said... not a phrase I coined myself,
and apparently has been taken completely out of context.

Enough said by me on the issue.  I will not reply to any more messages
about it on list...

Iggy McSnurd







From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 11:46:17 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:46:17 -0000
Subject: List metaphor
In-Reply-To: <4.2.0.58.20031211011742.00985eb0@...>
Message-ID: <br9le9+hcbf@...>

First, thank you to Pippin for clarifying my intent: that was fine, 
Pippin.

I, David, remarked that I had seen the Feedback list as analogous to 
the letters page of a newspaper, in repsonse to Richard's suggestion 
that all the lists are.

Richard went on to ask:
> I'm curious about the basis on which you make that distinction. My 
gut 
> impulse is to assume that you consider the topic of "editorial 
policy" to 
> be the natural topic for a paper's "letters to the editor" page. 
(And thus, 
> this list having been established for the purposes of discussing 
our 
> perceptions of the list and how it's run, this list mirrors that 
function).

Your impulse, though understandable, led you to the wrong conclusion 
about what I consider!   All I meant was that letters (at least, 
those that usually lead) deal with readers' concerns about public 
policy, etc.  In this rather loose metaphor, the HPFGU admins 
correspond to the government, not the editorial team.

> As far as I'm concerned, I don't differentiate between the 
functions of the 
> various HPFGU lists (and whenever I talk about "HPFGU", I mean the 
*family* 
> of lists rather than the Main List. If I ever mean to refer to one 
list in 
> particular, I specify it by name). They are, ultimately, just 
different 
> venues for us to communicate with each other. I actually think that 
> attempting to split their functions (as opposed to their subject 
matter) is 
> unhealthy.

I'm not altogether sure what the difference between separating 
function and subject matter is.  However, let me reassure you, my 
whole metaphor discussion was not intended as an attempt to do 
anything, in terms of list management.  It was merely an attempt to 
explain some aspects of the way we list members interact via the 
lists, in the hope that the explanation would prove helpful to list 
members who are interested in managing their own behaviour better.

I am not even suggesting that anyone should accept any of the 
metaphors put forward; in fact, the reverse, as I see all these 
metaphors as a sort of short-term crutch to help us get used to an 
unfamiliar medium, which in the longer term proves at best 
unnecessary and at worst a hindrance to listies who want to do better 
in the way they interact.  Moreover, I am not really recommending the 
*use* of this crutch, merely airing my suspicion that it is a factor 
in the way we behave.

If anyone is managing fine without recourse to conscious or 
unconscious metaphors, I commend them as an example for the rest of 
us to aspire to.

David




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 15:43:06 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (heiditandy)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 15:43:06 -0000
Subject: Counting history
In-Reply-To: <br90sk+8skn@...>
Message-ID: <bra3ab+9em9@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Eileen wrote:

> The first TBAY post was made by Tabouli. Elkins was the second 
poster
> on the Bay. And I hold the honoured position of third. Cindy 
actually
> didn't venture into the Bay for a bit, though she obviously 
cottoned
> onto the style quite quickly, and is a character in some of the 
early
> TBAY posts, using her non-TBAY posts as dialogue with TBAY!Elkins.
> 

Eileen, how are *you* counting? Because obviously, we all agree that 
the TBAY-style predated the incorporation of the prefix by at least 
two months, possibly more. And when I was looking back towards the 
start of TBAY-style posting, I was looking to posts from Cindy and 
Tabouli in mid-January, 2002 which included "role-play"-style 
narratives, like ": Person X engages in behaviour Z and Person Q 
reacts to same!" 

I know Cindy's History of HPfGU says that it was Spring 2002, but I 
don't think that's a 100% accurate date at all. as it's easy to find 
the phrase "Theory Bay" in February, and some posting-style 
precursors in a read-through of that January's posts.




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 16:24:55 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:24:55 -0000
Subject: Fanfic vs. TBAY
In-Reply-To: <br8re1+nl6i@...>
Message-ID: <bra5on+sree@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "gwendolyngrace"
<gwendolyngrace at y...> wrote:
> 
> But recall that fanfic discussion was 
> allowed for a long time, too, and the list adjusted when it was 
> decided to ban fanfic discussion.

Fanfic discussion on HPfGU is problematic for different reasons than
TBAY is problematic (assuming that it is).  

TBAY draws on past HPfGU discussions and on the HP canon -- 5 novels,
2 schoolbooks, numerous JKR interviews.  Fanfic discussion would draw
on the thousands upon thousands of fanfics that exist on the Internet.  

When fanfic discussion was eliminated from HPfGU, those who wished to
discuss fanfic went elsewhere to discuss it -- to FictionAlley,
SugarQuill, and the dozens of other sites dedicated to posting and
evaluating fanfic.  

If TBAY were taken off HPfGU, where would those who enjoy it go? 
There are no existing sites dedicated to posting and analyzing TBAY. 
To form such a site would cut TBAY off from its source: it would be
the equivalent of forbidding HP fanfic from using the Potterverse as
its starting point.

TBAY is an artifact of HPfGU: it emerged here, it thrives here.  It
also accounts for a very small percentage of total posts -- 3% at last
count.  Even if TBAY *were* a scourge and an abomination, it would be
an awfully insignificant one.  Filks occupy about the same proportion
of posts, which means that ~6% of the total posting takes on a form
that some find inappropriate, uninteresting, or loathsome.

The "decline" in posting quality that Gwen alleges is entirely in the
eye of the beholder.  Having perused the entire archive, I have not
found any stretch that was objectively better than the others.  The
tenor of the discussions changed as the membership shifted, but that's
not the same as "decline."  

It's entirely possible that we all think that the first 6-12 months of
our tenure at HPfGU was the "Golden Age" of posting because that's
when our enthusiasm and interest were at their peak.  Inevitably, you
tire of the discussions, your favorite posters wander off, and the
list seems to decline, when in fact it's only your interest that is
waning.

If we assert that "if fanfic is banned from HPfGU, TBAY should also,"
it assumes that they are roughly equivalent.  That being the case,
should TBAY move to FictionAlley?  Would the Crouch Novenna or the
Assassin!Snape threads be welcome over there?

I should hope not.  They're not fanfic.

--Dicentra, unofficially





From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 14:31:18 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:31:18 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br8re1+nl6i@...>
Message-ID: <br9v3m+93gc@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "gwendolyngrace" 
<gwendolyngrace at y...> wrote:

> As to your other point about the difficulty of ousting TBAY after 
all 
> this time, of course it would cause problems. I acknowledge that, 
> just as I acknowledged that the moderators tell us they aren't 
> considering it at this time. But recall that fanfic discussion was 
> allowed for a long time, too, and the list adjusted when it was 
> decided to ban fanfic discussion.
> 
> Gwen

Gee, Marie, that sounds an awful like "Let them eat cake."  Am I 
simply detecting lack of concern for the desires of the sans-
culottes, or is it payback time for some previous injury.  Somehow, 
this thread has descended from the theoretical to the personal-- not 
at me, but personal nonetheless.

Haggridd, who has been tackled and pinned by many a fine filk.




From gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 19:13:27 2003
From: gwendolyngrace at gwendolyngrace.yahoo.invalid (gwendolyngrace)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:13:27 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br9v3m+93gc@...>
Message-ID: <brafkn+96ao@...>

No, not personal at all, actually. I have nothing against the 
*people* who like TBAY, and I have no need for fanfic to be 
reinstated to the main list. I'm just saying, things change. People 
adjust. Life goes on.

Gwen





From erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 19:30:38 2003
From: erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid (erinellii)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 19:30:38 -0000
Subject: Counting history
In-Reply-To: <bra3ab+9em9@...>
Message-ID: <bragku+dusu@...>

 "heiditandy" :
> Eileen, how are *you* counting? Because obviously, we all agree 
that 
> the TBAY-style predated the incorporation of the prefix by at least 
> two months, possibly more. And when I was looking back towards the 
> start of TBAY-style posting, I was looking to posts from Cindy and 
> Tabouli in mid-January, 2002 which included "role-play"-style 
> narratives, like ": Person X engages in behaviour Z and Person Q 
> reacts to same!" 

Erin:
I don't know about the first, second, third thing, but I see Elkins 
in a lot of these early TBAY (Pre-Bay?) posts also.  I wasn't here 
then, but I've read back through them all and certainly consider her 
a founder.  And I think that Eileen is right in saying that for a 
long while Cindy didn't roleplay as extensively as Tabouli, Elkins 
and Eileen, though she answered all their Pre-Bay CARP posts.

Erin




From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 16:55:18 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (heiditandy)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 16:55:18 -0000
Subject: Fanfic vs. TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bra5on+sree@...>
Message-ID: <bra7hm+h4hc@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Dicey wrote: 

> TBAY draws on past HPfGU discussions and on the HP canon -- 5 
novels,
> 2 schoolbooks, numerous JKR interviews.  Fanfic discussion would 
draw
> on the thousands upon thousands of fanfics that exist on the 
Internet.  

Arguably, TBAY draws on a larger "body" of work than a discussion of 
fanfic, IMO. And here's why I think so:

TBAY draws on those past HPfGU discussions that Dicey mentions. 
Thousands of them. Pushing 90,000 posts, on the main list, plus the 
few thousand in the Archive from the Yahoo Club - but it 
particularly draws on all the prior TBAY posts. However, it is 
possible to discuss fanfic per the current list rules (it is fine to 
post "... cites to or short excerpts from derivative works or 
ficlets used to illustrate canon points, or the relationship of 
fanfiction to canon...") and draw on only, say, one story, or to 
write a brief bit of fanfic to specifically illustrate a post 
onlist. 

I don't think that there needs to be any wholesale discussion of 
fanfics in general on the Main List; it's good that people can ask 
about fanfics they may enjoy, or recommend stories on OTC, or plug 
their own stuff on Announcement. What was banned from the Main List 
for a long while (about 18 months-plus) was any use of fanfic to 
illustrate a canon point. But that's now allowable, so while I don't 
want to sound like I'm quashing a discussion if anyone wants to 
continue to engage in it, there really isn't, imho, any problem with 
the list rules' current take on fanfic. But that's just me.  

> 
> When fanfic discussion was eliminated from HPfGU, those who wished 
to
> discuss fanfic went elsewhere to discuss it -- to FictionAlley,
> SugarQuill, and the dozens of other sites dedicated to posting and
> evaluating fanfic.  

Actually, FictionAlley didn't exist then. FictionAlley was created 
to give HP fanficcers a way to have their fics hosted, and to have 
discussions about the books, the films, the fanfic, etc., outside of 
FFN, which was annoying, and HPfGU, where it was not permissible on 
the main list, and could have overwhelmed OTC. 

> 
> If TBAY were taken off HPfGU, where would those who enjoy it go? 
> There are no existing sites dedicated to posting and analyzing 
TBAY. 
> To form such a site would cut TBAY off from its source: it would be
> the equivalent of forbidding HP fanfic from using the Potterverse 
as
> its starting point.

I'm not saying that this should happen, mind, but I am saying that 
it's not quite an equivalent. First of all, I don't think anyone's 
said that it should be wholly separated from HPfGU, although there 
have been a few people saying that it should be off the main list. 
That would, I'd think, presuppose the creation of HPFGU-TBAY, which 
would be promoted on the Welcome Message, on the front page of the 
other groups, perhaps in the "sig message", even with the occasional 
ADMIN on the other lists, reminding people about the TBAY list. 
People would be able to give a summary of a canon-based reply 
without CARP on the main list and say, "and btw, I'm posting my tbay-
reply over on HPFGU-TBAY - you can find it there!" so their fellows 
would know where to find it. 

I think it would be a shame if TBAY were to be cut off from the 
ability to spark off Main List discussions, but I don't forsee that 
happening, as I don't think anyone's suggested it at all. 

> 
> If we assert that "if fanfic is banned from HPfGU, TBAY should 
also,"
> it assumes that they are roughly equivalent.  That being the case,
> should TBAY move to FictionAlley?  Would the Crouch Novenna or the
> Assassin!Snape threads be welcome over there?
> 
> I should hope not.  They're not fanfic.

What has that got to do with anything? We have over 750,000 
discussion posts on FA; some of them discuss writing, or other 
authors' books, or stuff that's 100% off topic, like Lord of the 
Rings, but there's almost 1900 threads with over 45,000 posts about 
Order of the Phoenix itself, plus over a hundred thousand character 
discussion posts in the Characters section. Those are *discussion 
posts*, not fanfic. 

However, FA doesn't allow role-playing to take place on the Park 
forums themselves, because it was becoming a bandwith problem. We've 
moved things of that style over to LiveJournal, and we're giving 
away codes to registered users and authors, who then give us one 
back, so they can have roleplaying in LJ format, which really seems 
to work better than a threaded discussion for what it is. So yeah, 
Assassin!Snape threads and the Crouch Novenna would be more than 
welcome in the FA family of sites. Why wouldn't you think it would 
be?

Heidi




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 20:10:42 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 20:10:42 -0000
Subject: Counting history
In-Reply-To: <bra3ab+9em9@...>
Message-ID: <braj03+k9fs@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "heiditandy" <heidilist at t...>
wrote:
> Eileen, how are *you* counting? Because obviously, we all agree that 
> the TBAY-style predated the incorporation of the prefix by at least 
> two months, possibly more. And when I was looking back towards the 
> start of TBAY-style posting, I was looking to posts from Cindy and 
> Tabouli in mid-January, 2002 which included "role-play"-style 
> narratives, like ": Person X engages in behaviour Z and Person Q 
> reacts to same!" 
> 
> I know Cindy's History of HPfGU says that it was Spring 2002, but I 
> don't think that's a 100% accurate date at all. as it's easy to find 
> the phrase "Theory Bay" in February, and some posting-style 
> precursors in a read-through of that January's posts.

Hey! Guess what! Your post inspired me to go digging through those
archives and I've got *long* documentation of TBAY's beginnings. It's
very long, very boring, and feel free to skip over it. Percyish as I
am, I found it fascinating to compile. 

TBAY started in February. Tabouli was definitely the first person on
the Bay, always talking about her metaphorical ship. Many of the first
Bay references are acknowledgements of this ship of Tabouli's. For
example, asides like this: 

Cindy - Message 34690 -Tabouli has already cracked the mystery of why
Snape hates
Harry. ::waves to Tabouli who is working diligently to keep the Good
Ship L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. off of the rocks::
--------------------
Here's an example of a Tabouli Bay referencing post. It's not,
however, a TBAY post, so much as it's near ancestor. The metaphor of
the Ship and Shippers is a common one in fandom and Tabouli uses it to
promote her ship, not to make any point about theory or shippers. It's
difficult to pin *exactly* when this shift is made, but I'm going to
try to pin it down eventually on a certain post of Elkins's. However,
because of the sheer quantity of Tabouli LOLLIPOPs messages, she wins
the title of Eldest One on the Bay. 
Tabouli - Message 34741 - haaaa! (Captain Tabouli beams broadly).
Congratulations, Judy - your wisdom
and sound deductive powers have just won you a free berth on the Good Ship
LOLLIPOPS (Love Of Lily Left Ire Polluting Our Poor Severus)! Welcome
aboard,
welcome aboard. We have a friendly and colourful crew on deck, and are
always
open to new recruits. However, as Captain, it is my duty to warn you that
taking the "pure speculation" line may impede your chances of
promotion. My
senior crew members and I hold that there is, in fact, quite a bit of
canon
evidence keeping us afloat. Refer to my 6th of November post "Severus
Snape: The
grudge and the very long LOLLIPOPS biography" (and, for that matter,
my 12th of
January post "Survivor Snape: LOLLIPOPS sails again!" which you may
not have
recognised as supporting this theory at the time...)
-------------------------------
Anyone who's spent a little time on the Bay has met George. He appears
in a completely un-TBAY like message which Marina signs in this manner. 
Marina - Message 34747 -  True. My theory does not fit in either with
your theory, or with
Cindy's. It is my own, my very own, and I will love it and hug it and
call it George.
___________
Cindy's offhand reference here is not TBAY but it helps personalize
George and sets the direction for the development of his
personalization later on. 
Cindy - Message 34766 - OK, now that we have met George, I suppose we
have to flirt with him,
seduce him, make him ours, and then . . . change him, right? :-)
_______________
Marina replies, giving George the push that will make him a TBAY
character. 
Marina - Message 34776  - Well, you're welcome to go ahead and try...
I suspect George is a
slut. <G>
_______________
And here's Cindy replying to Tabouli's ship metaphor. Not TBAY yet,
though. It's the sign off on a very non-TBAY post and is pretty
standard shorthand for whether one supports a ship or not, which isn't
really a new thing. Definitely has proto-TBAY elements, though. TBAY
approaches. 
Cindy - Message 34798 - Oh, no. I haven't reached "Snape is a
genuinely decent guy" yet.
In fact, I can't even see "Snape is a genuinely decent guy" from my
low-slung perch on the deck of the Good Ship L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S.,
sipping a marguerita and occasionally heckling Captain Tabouli
with, "Are we there yet?" And yes, I have a seat on the Ship because
I believe L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S. neatly explains why Snape hates
Harry. ::waves boarding pass to prove it::
_________
Well, this isn't TBAY, but it signifies the way a certain person's
mind works. Soon to have list-reaching consequences. 

Elkins - Message 34811 -Although Mrs. Lestrange sure was *sexy,*
wasn't she? I...er...

<blinks nervously around room, then retreats behind coffee mug>

Well...er, yes. Um...never mind.

<clears throat>
_____________
And Tabouli continues to sail about. 
Tabouli - Message 34823  - Under assault from all sides, the Good
Battleship LOLLIPOPS sails on, can(n)ons
gleaming...

Orrrrright (Tabouli dons her sailor's hat and polishes her captain's
badge). I
can see we have a war on our hands here. Time to start addressing the
two main
objections to the LOLLIPOPS way of life.
---------------------
And Jo is just one of the few people who use the metaphor of joining
the ship. 
Jo Serenadust - Message 34847  - Ok, Tabouli, you win. I'm horribly
prone to seasickness and as a
result steadfastly avoid ships like the plague, but I can't find
anything in canon or even suggested by canon to undermine this
theory....
Bring on the dramamine!

Jo Serenadust, who is hoping for a quiet cabin near the center of
the ship
__________________
Marina personifies George a little more in a quite non-TBAYish sort post. 
Marina - Message 34850 - George is helpless to resist. He is smitten.
He know maintains that
Snape's gradual disillusionment with the DEs finally culminated in
active resistance when Voldemort threatened James.
_______________
Cindy uses some more ship metaphor. And then mixes her metaphors. 
Cindy - Message 34866  -In this entertaining showdown of
ever-escalating theories, I suppose
I have to ramp up Prince/Mercy even to stay in the same stadium. I
must admit that my enthusiasm has begun to flag, however, because
Prince/Mercy appears to have no followers at all, and even George
seems to be brazenly flirting with the LOLLIPOPS crew, right under my
nose. No SHIP for me; I have a small stall on the dock selling
overpriced trinkets.
____________
Devin gets into the spirit of the Ship metaphor.
Devin - Message 34874 - Devin, up in the crow's nest of LOLLIPOPS just
waiting to shout "Land
ho!" when the time is right
_________________
This one is right on the line. Is it TBAY or proto-TBAY? It's
definitely set on the  Bay and it's the biggest description of the Bay
yet, implying that every theory has a ship and they're all in some
alternate reality where the theorists live. But the setting is still
not essential to the points. It's still just a metaphor of joining a
ship whose points are outlined in ordinary form. 
Tabouli -   Message 34877 - What can I say, I like my SHIPs off the
beaten waterways...

(Tabouli glances affectionately over the railings of the Good Ship
LOLLIPOPS at
the little FLIRTIAC dinghy bobbing nearby.)


>Cindy (crestfallen that Tabouli's LOLLIPOPS explanation did not
>contain the word "ambush")

(Captain Tabouli croons a soothing sea shanty at the bloodthirsty
Cindy). OK,
OK, we can wangle one in. Never let it be said that the crew don't
look after
the lower deck. I can fall in happily enough with the idea that
trapping all
his old Slytherin friends in an ambush was the task Snape had to
accomplish to
prove his loyalty to Dumbledore, though I find it a bit hard to
imagine Snape
ever having a close and cuddly circle of friends, even his "high
school gang".
____________
This I would mark as the first absolute TBAY post. Here, the setting
*is* the point. Elkins is a fictional construct, selling badges,
affecting a persona a little more sycophantical and weak than RL
Elkins, but a persona which she thinks reflects deeper truths about
herself, her reader response, and sycophants in HP and general
literature. 
Elkins - Message 34911 - <Elkins whips out her shiny new
S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S badge and pins it
to her chest with an ill-concealed grimace of self-loathing. Having
thus assumed her role as the founder of the Society for Yes-men,
Cowards, Ostriches, Passive-Aggressives, Hysterics, Abject Neurotics
and Toadying SYCOPHANTS, she prepares to pontificate.>

Now, I do realize that to many people all Grovelling Coward types
look exactly alike, but I assure you that we members of
S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S recognize a great range of diversity within our
ranks, and while such distinctions may seem insignificant to others,
they matter a great deal to *us.* So.

Avery is *not* a toady. *Nott* is a "Toady." What Avery is is
a "Nerveless Hysteric."

When you obsequiously declare yourself to be prostrating yourself at
someone's feet -- while all the while remaining in a steadfastly
upright position -- *that* is being a Toady.

When you *literally* prostrate yourself at someone's feet, while
simultaneously shrieking for forgiveness at the top of your lungs and
shaking so violently that even a tightly-bound fourteen-year-old boy
with some rather serious problems of his own to contend with can
still detect the motion from all the way across a darkened graveyard,
on the other hand...

Well, that's not "toadying," precisely. That's...er...

<winces delicately>

That's what we here in S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S. prefer to refer to as
a "crisis of nerves."

A minor point, perhaps. But one to bear in mind, particularly should
you ever find yourself invited to our annual Minions' Ball, where
ignoring such niceties can *really* set off the Whining Neurotics --
and that's just no fun for anyone, not even for the Sociopathic
Sadists seated at the next table down.

<Nodding with satisfaction at having cleared *that* matter up, Elkins
unpins her S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S badge and thrusts it back into her
pocket.>
-------------
Cindy writes back, engaging with Elkins's little venture into TBAY,
but not wetting her toes that much herself. 
Cindy -Message 34924  - ::smirk:: Uh, would it be a fair assumption
that S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S.
members are not Tough? Do they watch a great deal of daytime
television and read a lot of self-help books while they eat pint
after pint of high-fat ice cream? :-)
------------------
Another on-the-line post from Tabouli. 
Tabouli - Message 34932 -WHAT? (Tabouli sits up indignantly). HUH!!
This is a gross libel! Just
yesterday in my message "Filch/Mrs Norris (FLIRTIAC) & still more
LOLLIPOPS" I
specifically sang a soothing sea shanty at you (Cindy) and wrote a
Personalised
LOLLIPOPS-friendly Ambush Scenario! I even covered a lot of things which
cropped up in digests over the last couple of days in it, such as why
Lily need
not have been a "war trophy" and why V need not have known about
Snape's crush.

Grrrr.
--------------
Cindy is still mostly sticking to personifying George very slightly in
otherwise straightforward posts. 
Cindy - Message 34938  - Sorry 'bout that, mate. I think I have
developed something of a
crush on George, mostly because he doesn't seem to want me and
therefore is a challenge. 
______________
And here is TBAY again. With almost all its elements in place. 
Elkins - Message 34986- So that does it. I'm inviting Igor out for a
few drinks and to pick
up his S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S. membership packet. We'll go far over our
limits, and sing old songs loudly and off-key, and then get all weepy
and bathetic and sentimental before staggering home at dawn.

I'd invite Cindy to join us, but... Well, I fear that the weepy
bathetic stuff might prove too much for her. I wouldn't want her to
snap and...well, you know. Kill us.
_____________
And here we are again. The extended metaphor is setting in. Elkins as
the Siren voice. Hey, she warned us! In an extended metaphor, of course. 
Elkins -Message 35015 - Outlandish? Subversive? Nonsense! FLIRTIAC is
*overwhelmingly*
implied by canon. Indeed, were I ever to abandon the liminal
pleasures of the shoreline for the absolutism of the wide-open sea,
FLIRTIAC would be my vessel of choice. It is the only ship on which
I have ever so much as considered booking passage.

For now, though, I am content to sit here on my rock at the tideline,
singing merrily to myself and luring only the occasional sailor to
his doom.
and
-- Elkins, thinking she might just hear some human voices out there,
and so hastily assembling the scuba gear...
_________________
TBAY is here to stay. This one's long and has quite a few ideas sunk
into the setting. I've snipped the most typical TBAY parts. 

Elkins - Message -Message 35062 - Good lord, woman. Suck it up, won't
you? Think of your *reputation!*

I wouldn't trust that George guy as far as I could throw him, by the
way. Every time I see him, he's changed his clothing, or his hair
style, or his glasses have new frames... You ask me, he's still
trying to find himself. I wouldn't commit myself to anything until
he's grown up a bit, if I were you.

> Elkins, can I offer you a few cheap trinkets that probably won't
> give you a bad skin rash if you remember to take them off at night?

Welllll...I don't know. You're selling those things from off of the
deck of that <supreme distaste> *ship* these days, aren't you?

I'm not getting on board that thing. You bring those trinkets of
yours down here onto the beach, then maybe we can talk about it.
and

> Yes, Avery is a difficult case to sort out. Still such a blank
> slate, and only three books to go.

Right now I imagine he's hanging out in the Green Room, preening
himself and bouncing excitedly in his chair and lording it over all
of the other guys who spend their time down there -- you know,
Mundungus Fletcher and Arabella Figg and the Longbottom family and
that lot, all of whom are beginning to finger their wands and squint
speculatively at him -- but he hasn't even noticed that yet, not our
Avery, nope, he's still far too wound up, he's all smug and gloating
and babbling uncontrollably: "*I* had an appearance. *I* had a line
of *dialogue!* Seven whole *words!* And Harry was *watching* me --
not even in a dream sequence or anything like that, no, in *real
life!* And the Dark Lord even *spoke* to me, he addressed me by
*name,* he said, 'Avery,' he said, he...well, er, actually what
happened there was that he, er, sort of, well, you know. Tortured
me. A bit. Which wasn't really all that enjoyable, now that you
mention it, I really can't say that I was all that terribly *keen* on
that part, to tell you the truth, and...well, I *do* rather wish that
I had been able to take that wretched mask off. I mean, it's all
rather *awkward,* isn't it, not even knowing what you look like? And
I still don't have a, well, a, you know. A first name. Not, at any
rate, *yet.* Not as *such.* But! Still! I've had an
*appearance!* *And* a line of dialogue!"


<Elkins pauses for a moment to contemplate the notion of young
Severus Snape forced to share living quarters for an entire seven
years with *that* version of Avery, shudders, then shakes her head
and moves on>
and

> Uh, would it be a fair assumption that S.Y.C.O.P.H.A.N.T.S. members
> are not Tough?

Er...not as a general *rule,* no. But some are. In fact, a few of
our members have even been known to do things like sever their own
body parts, although they are generally only able to manage such
feats of Toughness when the plot demands it.

As I've said before, though, there really is a great deal of
diversity within our ranks. We are, after all, an umbrella
organization of sorts for those members of the fictive world who are
what we like to call, er..."reader sympathy challenged." So while it
is indeed true that our Abject Neurotics are, almost without
exception, Not Tough, quite a number of our Yes-Men are very Tough
Indeed. Young Crabbe and Goyle, for example, currently show every
sign of growing up to be Reasonably Tough Yes-Men.

It is a sad truth, however, that our Toughest members are also often
our very least articulate. As a result, they do often find
themselves shockingly marginalized, even within the ranks of our own
organization. We hope to address this problem in the future.

> Do they watch a great deal of daytime television and read a lot of
> self-help books while they eat pint after pint of high-fat ice
> cream? :-)

Well, many of our members currently hold 24/7 positions as Minions to
various Evil Overlords, which doesn't leave them very much time at all
for daytime television and the like. Really, you know, it's very hard
work being a SYCOPHANT. It takes a lot of time, and a lot of mental
and physical energy...it can be *draining,* you know, it really can
be... and all too often it leaves you with nothing left over for such
frivolities as self-help books and the like.

No, at the end of the day, most of our members really just want
nothing more than to go home and take their anti-anxiety medications,
and their sedatives, and their anti-depressants, and their antacids,
and their many *many* pain-relievers, and then go to bed, secure in
the comforting knowledge that Tomorrow Is Another Day -- And Quite
Likely To Be Your Last.

And as for the ice cream...well, minions rarely get very much of
that. Evil Overlords are *notorious* for bogarting the high-fat ice
cream.

Damn them.
_____________________
More simple TBAY from Tabouli. Still the metaphor of ships and
supporters. 
Tabouli -Message 35054  - At last! (Tabouli dabs at happy tears).
Spurned and smiled at indulgently for
all these months, FLIRTIAC finally has a genuine supporter! I agree that
there's got to be something in it myself, but I have my hands full of
LOLLIPOPS
and rarely have the time to sneak into the FLIRTIAC dinghy and polish
the oars.
_______________
And Tabouli, using the metaphor to make a point about LOLLIPOP's
status as a theory. This one is definitely TBAY. 
Tabouli - Message 35134-Contrary to the assumptions of many, the only
initiation dish on the LOLLIPOPS
menu required to gain a boarding pass for this stately SHIP is to
believe that
Love Of Lily Left Ire Polluting Our Poor Severus. If you believe that a
contributing factor to Snape's bitter, cranky behaviour was the fact
that he was
in love with Harry's mother, you are welcome aboard.
Beyond that, the Ship has an a la carte menu. Put together any dishes
you like
from the ingredients JKR has supplied, and the chefs will cater to
your tastes!
________________
Charis launches herself on to the Bay. Though I think this is still
the proto-Bay, in the same sense as Tabouli's posts. 
Charis - Message 35144- Now this brand new SHIP of mine will naturally
need a
name. Inspired by Tabouli's acronym expertise I've hit on
C.U.P.I.D.'S.B.L.U.D.G.E.R.: Contrary to Unrequited Passion
Infelicitously Devouring Severus, Black's Love of Unknown Damsel Gets
Expected Response!!!


And, now, after breaking a big bottle of Butterbeer on
her side, I am at last ready to take a deep breath (Ahhhhhh!) and
send her off into the dangerous seas of cyberspace no doubt to get
bashed to pieces by piratical L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S.! And her plight
becomes all the more desperate as her Captain must now desert her
(permissible as Captain must be last to abandon SHIP and whole crew
of C.U.P.I.D.'S.B.L.U.D.G.E.R. consists of ,errr,...1!) and throw
herself into the dark waters of the Principles of American
Constitutional Law where she will indubitably drown overwhelmed be
incomprehensible theories...sigh...Anyone care to take over?
_______________
And this is more TBAY foreshadowing. This is getting quite common
around now in a lot of people's posts. But the metaphor's not the
story here. These are just thrown out in the context of longer
ordinary posts and aren't really any different in form than offhand
references to simple metaphor you might find in any internet
discussion. The fact that these employ what has become the TBAY
vocabulary doesn't make them TBAY posts in the current sense of the
word. Again, proto-TBAY and not as proto as Tabouli's posts, for example. 
Cindy - Message 35156  - I would like to serve as tugboat and see if I
can help push this
Sirius & Snape SHIP theory out into the open water. ::looks around
on deck for canon, finds mostly speculation:: This version veers a
bit from Charis Julia's original, but here it is anyway.
___________________________
More TBAY from Elkins. She really invented the rules of the genre,
it's becoming clear. 
Elkins -   Message 35187  - <bounces up and down excitedly in chair>

Ambushambushambush!!
and 
<Elkins grins and tosses a seashell lazily -- if with no real malice -
- out to sea in the general direction of the Good Ship
L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S.>
and 
<Elkins, beside herself with excitement, jumps up and down in her
seat, shrieking happily>

YAY!!!!!!!!!!! Bloody ambush! Bloody ambush! Bloody ambush!

> Then Travers, Mulciber and Dolohov put up a fierce struggle against
> Frank Longbottom, who eventually subdues all three in a glorious
> firefight.

YAY!!!!!!!!!! Glorious firefight! Glorious firefight! Glorious
firefi--

<Elkins stops abruptly. Her expression of bloodthirsty satisfaction
slowly dissolves into one of stark horror>

Oh, good Lord. When precisely did I *get* like this?

Cindy? Are you *sure* there was nothing in that brandy
________________
Cindy ventures into the Bay proper. Wow. Earlier than I thought.
Though she doesn't actually set up permanent residence for a bit. 
Cindy -Message 35194 - However, I can see through my binoculars that
all is not well in the
Fourth Man two-person kayak. Indeed, it appears that the Fourth Man
has fallen overboard and is flailing helplessly, unable to haul his
ample backside to the beach. All is not lost, however. I have
tossed my pricey sunglasses into the sand and kicked off my sandals,
and I am about to do what I hope is a powerful and impressive
backstoke out to save the Fourth Man. With a little support, the
Fourth Man may be able to tread water until this summer when OoP can
complete the rescue.
and 
*Swallowed* the Fourth Man theory? I darn near gave it Mouth-to-
Mouth Resuscitation! OK, you have yourself a deal. Now move over,
because cramming three people into a two-person kayak is a bit tight.
________________
And Tabouli makes a point about certain listies and their reader
reaction by entering TBAY. And also has some fun. TBAY is obviously
continuously evolving and shifting. Things won't completely firm out
till the Header comes. 
Tabouli -Message 35200 -The peaceful Tabouli (the odd can(n)on on
behalf of LOLLIPOPS aside) eyes her
recent digests with alarm...

> Eileen, Officially bloodthirsty

Cindy and now Elkins (slathering and bouncing in their chairs):
> Ambushambushambush!!

Elkins (further into her increasingly vicious post):
> YAY!!!!!!!!!!! Bloody ambush! Bloody ambush! Bloody ambush!


The three HPFGU warmongers bounce menacingly in their chairs, chanting
their
battle slogan, plotting murder and mayhem in the Potterverse. Their
eyes are
wild, their mouths are frothing, their chants grow ever more menacing,
and the
future of the Potterverse slides behind a dark cloud. Fortunately for the
Potterverse, heroic Captain Tabouli espies their sinister festivities
through
her ship's telescope, and makes her stealthy way inland to the Owlery,
in the
hope of saving Wizardkind. A mere hour later she has managed to convince
Pigwidgeon, Errol and Hedwig to sacrifice their lives and feathers for the
cause, and is swiftly, silently closing in on the savage sofa
springers, ready
to smother and bind them all in...

F.E.A.T.H.E.R.B.O.A.S.! (Foaming Enthusiasts of Ambush, Torture, and
Hostility,
Embracing Really Bloodthirsty Operations And Savagery))

(as she leaps from her hiding place swinging her feathered lasso, it
fleetingly
occurs to Tabouli that if Pigwidgeon and Hedwig ever warmed to one
another they
could call each other Pig and Wig...)

AND
<Elkins grins and tosses a seashell lazily -- if with no real malice -
- out to sea in the general direction of the Good Ship
L.O.L.L.I.P.O.P.S.>

(the eagle eyes of the LOLLIPOPS crew members on watch immediately
spot this
disrespectful gesture, and lazily extend the daintiest of can(n)ons, known
affectionately as the Golden Peashooter. With an elegant puff of pink
smoke, a
pearl sized can(n)onball blows Elkins' seashell into fragments. The
crew grin,
and make mental notes to tell the Captain after her return from saving
the world
from the Federation of FEATHERBOAS.)
_______________
And here I am TBAYing in every sense of the word. As a side note,
reading my old posts is a painful experience. One-liners, me-toos,
off-topic posts, stupid little theories. Hey, I was only eighteen! And
I improved pretty quickly, talking with all the smart grown-ups on HPFGU! 
Eileen -   Message 35236- Arggggghhh, but this is problematic for me.
You see, your analysis
that strikes me as completely true is rather at odds with my own
attachment to LOLLIPOPS. I'll have to think about this one awhile. But
unlike Ambush theories, which can be modified and reorganized to suit
anyone, they may be unreconciliable. Captain Tabouli, help! I feel
this uncontrollable urge to jump ship, to this nice little rowboat of
Elkins's. A warm fuzzy voice is sounding in my mind. "Jump! Jump!"

You're Imperiusing me! You!
_________________________
Those confused by the Bay have always been around. Here's Eloise on
the matter. Eloise, though, overcame her confusion later to be one of
the Bay's more prominent residents. Eloise aquired a Snape theory's
sister and a castle to go with her later on. 
Eloise - Message 35266 - ow I've been here for a number of weeks
during which time a number of these
theories have come up, LOLLIPOPS being earlier (and I can just about cope
with that one, and nearly with CUPIDSBLUDGER despite never being able to
remember exactly what they stand for). I try to keep up, honestly I
do, but
it's hard and I just feel for the poor guys out there who've only just
arrived and who read these messages full of acronyms and obscure theory
names. It must be gibberish!
I know George was introduced, but somehow I missed him (I think I
assumed it
was a thread about George Weasley), which is a shame because I gather now
that he is a friend of mine. Sometimes new theories come up in posts I
haven't read (admits it) because, well, time is limited and there are
these
things called family and work and stuff and I have to select which
threads I
am most interested in. Then I find someone's said something key in a
post I
haven't read because it started life in a thread I wasn't following
and I'm
all at sea.

I know there is a site now for the acronyms (but where is it?). I just
wonder
if there isn't some way that these theories can be collected and
summarised
or whether perhaps they can be referenced to the message number where they
first appear. It's very hard to trace them back as the threads don't
necessarily have the theory name in the title.
Perhaps when a theory takes on this independent, named life, its
originator
could do a very short summary, give the original message number and
tack this
on as an addendum. Anyone taking up the thread could then just paste this
onto the end of their message so that anyone coming into the
conversation who
doesn't know for instance, what Mercy II is (me, for instance) could
come up
to speed.

Eloise. Tryng to keep her head above water but in grave danger of
drowning.
Hasn't anyone got a lifebelt....Please??
______________
More TBAY from me. 
Message 35298 - Eileen - From the brig of the Good Ship LOLLIPOPS,
where she has been put to
meditate her nearly accomplished mutiny, and to be restrained till the
madness has passed.
and 
Four in the kayak, actually.

Cindy: Move over!
Avery: I can't. (Begins to cry.)
Cindy: Toughen up, will you. I bet you eat ice-cream straight from
the carton while lying in bed
Avery: Forgive me! (shrieking) Cindy, forgive me!

Eileen

PS I still can't get over the fact that we've seriously gone into
analysing an almost non-existent character.
______________
Cindy refers to the Bay off-hand. 
Cindy - Message 35304 - Having pushed Avery overboard because his
sniveling was dancing on my
last good nerve, I must take one last shot at bringing someone --
anyone -- along on a few points:
and 
Cindy -- finding it lonely in the Ambush-On-Dumbledore's-Orders camp,
the Reverse-Memory-Charm camp, the Bagman-Is-A-DE camp, the Sirius-
Was-Having-His-Way-With-Florence camp, and the Snape-Has-A-Debt-To-
James camp, but consoling herself by eating all of the Smores
singlehandedly
_______________
And again. Though these Bay references are becoming so common on the
list, I've stopped cataloguing them. 
Cindy - Message 35318- I finally abandoned my booth on the dock to
help Charis Julia control
C.U.P.I.D'S.B.L.U.D.G.E.R. Now, I find myself bobbing in the waves
whilst clinging to a leaky inner-tube, becoming rather lightheaded as
I struggle to keep a bit of air in it, watching slack-jawed as Elkins
zips by in a souped-up jet ski.
_________________________-
Classic TBAY. The setting's the point, and I get a starring role. I
love this one. It followed off on and off-list discussions. 
Elkins -Message 35324 - She not-altogether-lacking-in-blood-thirst
herself Tabouli wrote:

> A mere hour later she has managed to convince Pigwidgeon, Errol and
> Hedwig to sacrifice their lives and feathers for the cause, and is
> swiftly, silently closing in on the savage sofa springers, ready to
> smother and bind them all in...

> F.E.A.T.H.E.R.B.O.A.S.! (Foaming Enthusiasts of Ambush, Torture, and
> Hostility, Embracing Really Bloodthirsty Operations And Savagery))

Elkins, blinking quizzically as she tries to deduce just what Cindy
might have *meant* when she just hissed "Take one for the team,
Elkins!" and shoved her off of the rock like that, catches her
balance, removes her pipe from her mouth to gesticulate, half-turns,
and has time for only the briefest of alarmed squawks before finding
herself lying on soft sand, wrapped head to toe in mangy old feather
boas. She thrashes wildly for a few moments then freezes, staring in
disbelief at the bloodied owl feathers -- the bloodied and yet
monstrously *familiar* owl feathers -- from which her bonds would
seem to be crafted.

"I--" she gasps, a look of sick horror slowly spreading across her
face. "Errol?" And then a hoarse, a disbelieving whisper: "*Pig*?"

"NO!" she screams, struggling madly to free herself from the remains
of these cruelly- and gratuitously-sacrificed minor characters.
"NO! Oh my God, Tabouli, what have you *done?* MURDERER!
MADWOMAN!! FIEND!!!!"

As she degenerates into incoherent hysteria, Elkins' alarmed
companions rush to her aid: Tough Cindy, who begins slapping her
repeatedly in the face while screaming, spit flying from the corners
of her mouth, "Suck it *up,* soldier! Suck it *up,* damn you!"; and
Amiable Eileen (looking cute as all get-out in that horned helmet she
always wears to our FEATHERBOAS meetings as a part of her blood-
thirsty "Lucky Kari" persona), who after a few futile attempts at
intervention ("Er...Cindy? I, um, don't think that that's
necessarily, um, helping. I think, you know, that the...the
*hitting* may be...well, it just might be increasing her sense of
anxiety..."), simply shrugs, sighs, shakes her head, and goes off to
brew a nice hot cup of tea.


Some time later, having restored a good deal of Elkins' equanimity
(or at the very least, her *sanguinity*) by whipping out her tattered
old cloth-bound copy of the _The Lord of the Rings_ and reading
aloud -- in a calm and soothing and unthreatening tone of voice --
that nice passage from "The Siege of Gondor" in which the forces of
Mordor demoralize their enemies by catapulting the heads of the
fallen over the walls of the city, Eileen admits:

> I said, "Crouch Jr., Lestranges, and another DE" to myself, and
> never even thought of it again. I also ask my long-suffering
> brother to explain commercials when we're watching TV. "But why was
> the guy standing there with the beer can?"

Elkins, by now only occasionally breaking into muffled sobs ("Pig...
Pig...oh, Tabouli, that wasn't necessary...it wasn't *necessary...*")
huddles shivering over her bloodied owl feathers and her nice hot cup
of tea, but still manages a watery smile for Eileen.

She wonders whether this would be a good time to admit that she
herself had to have the plot of "Star Wars" explained to her at least
seven times before she could even begin to understand what was
supposed to be happening in that film. ("But I don't understand!
What's a 'Droid?' And what's a 'Tractor Beam?' And why on earth did
they have to keep running around through all of those *corridors*?")

Before she can make a decision on this matter, however, Eileen is
snatched up by the crew of the Good Ship LOLLIPOPS and hauled off for
some Imperius-induced deprogramming below decks. Elkins contemplates
staging a rescue attempt for an entire three seconds before thinking
better of it. She finishes off her tea and stares down at the sand,
trying hard not to look out to sea.
and 
> PS I still can't get over the fact that we've seriously gone into
> analysing an almost non-existent character.

Non-existent! Non-exISTent?!?!

He has seven words of *dialogue,* Eileen! That's more than Lestrange
gets. Hell, it's even more than Arabella Figg gets, and you wouldn't
call *her* "almost non-existent," would you?

"Almost non-existent." Sheesh. Keep your voice down, will you?
You'll hurt Avery's feelings. As if it isn't bad enough that Cindy
wants to *drown* him...

Cindy:

> Having pushed Avery overboard because his sniveling was dancing on
> my last good nerve...

<Elkins gasps and leans over the side to haul Avery back in, very
nearly overbalancing the entire kayak>

Cindy! You *know* you can't do that! JKR *needs* him to -- just
cough it all up, Mr. Avery, that's right, that's super, sweetheart,
yes, you're doing fine -- *needs* him to fulfill his secondary
villain function in Book Five! You can't just -- oh, for God's sake,
Avery. Here. Take my jacket -- you can't just go *murdering* the
poor man like that. How's the poor wretch ever supposed to buy the
farm in Book Five if you've already...

Oh. Oh, dear. No, no, Mr. Avery, *please.* Please try to contain
yourself. I didn't mean it like that. I'm sure you'll survive all
the way to the end of the series. Yes, I'm *sure* of it! Honest, I
am. All I meant there was...

<exasperated sigh>

Oh, for God's sake, Cindy. Now you see what you've done?
and 
So cheer up. And give some of those Smores to Avery, will you? He's
chilled and upset; he's shivering. He needs the chocolate.
_________________
And TBAY is here. Sure, it develops much more later on. The line
between TBAY and non-TBAY creates itself. We get the Header and little
rules begin to emerge, but here it is in February and it's just about
to be taken up by quite a few listies to discuss that lovely
Snapethory: George. 

Eileen




From joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 22:05:18 2003
From: joym999 at joywitch_m_curmudgeon.yahoo.invalid (joywitch_m_curmudgeon)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 22:05:18 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
In-Reply-To: <br812t+t0s4@...>
Message-ID: <brapmu+vntj@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "gwendolyngrace" 
<gwendolyngrace at y...> wrote:
> It's Gwen, making a very rare guest appearance on an HPFGU list. 

Guest appearance?  Doesn't that imply that someone has expressly 
invited you for a particular reason?  Considering that your post 
consists of the same old prententious, elitist, self-centered blather 
you always spew, I find that hard to believe.

> My, 
> this has been an interesting discussion, and I mean that in a very 
> Chinese sense. 

Chinese sense? What does that mean?

> Okay, so on the subjects of TBAY, FILK, and similar things.
> 
> First off, those folks who are on the Admin Team (whatever the heck 
> you call it now): 

I'm pretty sure it's called the Admin Team.

> So when you asked here about TBAY, and within a few posts, people 
> were asking why it should be allowed, please, remember that no 
> decision needs to be final forever. If there's a compelling reason 
to 
> revisit the question, please, don't be afraid to do so.

> Because I think there are still compelling reasons, the same sorts 
of 
> reasons I and a couple others tried to argue in April and November. 

What you are really saying is that Gwen still doesn't like TBAY, 
therefore the admin team has a compelling reason to reconsider 
banning it.

> "I feel quite 
> uncomfortable with the idea of posting a non TBAY reply to a TBAY 
> post - but it seems to me that TBAY posters have little problem 
with 
> the idea of taking a thread that is being discussed in a 
> straightforward fashion and TBAYing it."

Why?  What could possibly happen if you took an idea you've read in a 
TBAY post and discussed it in a non-TBAY manner?  Would the list 
explode?

> I honestly blame TBAY for much of the downward slide list quality 
has 
> taken over the last 2 years ? from the moment people started 
> inserting themselves into the action, instead of remaining 
observers.

Is there any evidence at all to back this up, or any evidence that 
more than maybe 1/1000 of 1% of our membership feels that way?

> I have no problem with cleverness, but 
> being clever for the sake of being clever is
well, it's smug.

Are you sure you're not just jealous?

> Now, the question has come up here and before as to whether or not 
> TBAY should be splintered to its own list. While a few people 
believe 
> that it might flourish there on its own, where its devotees can 
spin 
> their webs of theory to their hearts' content, most everyone ? 
> detractors and supporters alike ? feel that to move TBAY would kill 
> it.
> 
> You know what? I agree.

I'm not surprised.

> What am I saying here? I'm saying that TBAY was preserved because 
> moderators on the mod team wanted it to stick around, and because 
> they defended it maniacally, almost to the point of hysteria, when 
it 
> was attacked. 

Oh, please.  Some people defended it and some didn't.  It was allowed 
to remain because a lot of people enjoy it.

 I said I'd talk about FILK, so I'll talk about FILK briefly (well, 
> more briefly than I did TBAY). I'm a freelance songwriter, 
including 
> many filks, mostly for an organization called the SCA, along with a 
> few other sci-fi con type songs. I have enough written and they're 
> well-enough liked that I am working on putting together a CD of my 
> songs for sale in that organization. I am an unembarrassed filk 
snob.

At least you admit it.
 
> Most HP filks make me break out in hives.

Gwen thinks they're bad, therefore the rest of humanity should not be 
allowed to exhibit them anywhere near Gwen.

> If I 
> *ever* write another HP filk, she has standing orders to kill me 
> where I stand.

We can only hope.

> You might think that all this is leading up to another diatribe on 
> why filk shouldn't be allowed. Wrong. I detest HP filk because so 
> much of it, forgive me Caius, absolutely stinks. 

Oh, puhleeze.  What makes you an authority?

> It's the same reason 
> that although I help run FictionAlley, I hardly ever read fanfic.

The fanfic isn't good enough for you either.  Not surprising.

> Most people cannot write anything worth the cyberspace it's 
published 
> in. 

You are such an elitist it's unbelievable.  You know what, Gwen?  
You're right that there's a lot of poor quality writing out there.  
There are a lot of bad filks and a lot of lousy fanfiction and 
probably some lousy TBAY posts, too.  But there's an easy solution to 
that problem -- don't read it.

That's what I do.  I don't read TBAY because I can't get into it.  I 
read filks sometimes; if the first few lines don't scan, I stop 
reading it.  I rarely read fanfic.  I follow that rule with other 
stuff I read.  If I buy a book and it doesn't hold my interest after 
the first few pages, I stop reading it and then I don't buy anything 
by that author again.  But what I don't do is get on a soapbox and 
rant about the poor quality of everything that I don't like and whine 
about how it should be banned, banned, banned, so I don't have to 
dirty my hands with the filthy droppings of the unwashed masses.

And yes, I know I'm being extremely rude and intolerant and I'll 
probably get howlered.  But I hate the way you prance onto center 
stage once in a blue moon, make your divisive, ill-tempered little 
pronouncements, and then flounce back into your dressing room.  Your 
diatribe against TBAY is ridiculous.  If you don't like it, don't 
read it.  End of story.

--Joywitch, grumpily




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 08:48:29 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:48:29 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Another country heard from... (was: Thoughts on exclusion and culture) LONG
References: <brapmu+vntj@...>
Message-ID: <003a01c3c08c$b6eac720$a6706751@kathryn>

Gwen
> "I feel quite
> uncomfortable with the idea of posting a non TBAY reply to a TBAY
> post - but it seems to me that TBAY posters have little problem
with
> the idea of taking a thread that is being discussed in a
> straightforward fashion and TBAYing it."

Joywitch
Why?  What could possibly happen if you took an idea you've read in a
TBAY post and discussed it in a non-TBAY manner?  Would the list
explode?

Me (K)

I agree with Gwen to a certain extent - I also would feel uncomfortable
responding to a TBAY in a 'straight' post, *but* that's mainly because I
rarely read TBAY and feel that I might have missed something in their
argument since a lot of TBAY posts refer to past events/theories etc and I
ccept that the fact I don't want to do the research necessary to make sure
I've understood what the person I'm replying to means is *my* problem and I
don't blame that on TBAY at all. The main reason there aren't over many
non-TBAY replies to TBAY arguments is because those of us who don't like it
immediately hit delete when we see the prefix.

Gwen
> I honestly blame TBAY for much of the downward slide list quality
has
> taken over the last 2 years - from the moment people started
> inserting themselves into the action, instead of remaining
observers.

Joywitch
Is there any evidence at all to back this up, or any evidence that
more than maybe 1/1000 of 1% of our membership feels that way?

K
I don't think the 'downward slide' is anything to do with TBAY - in fact I
think it's a lot more to do with the attitude of the posters rather than the
'quality' of the discussion. I find there are more people who are willing to
complain if you're discussing something they don't want you to or aren't
interested in and more people who seem to *willfully* misunderstand what
you're saying - not those people who genuinely misunderstand you, those I
can cope with, we all do it occasionally, but people who seem willing to
twist your words to suit their argument by taking things out of context or
just ignoring the bits they disagree with. And I'm also not convinced it's
been taking place over the last two years, I think it's more sudden, dating
from a ciouple of months, maybe slightly more, before the OoP release.

Does anyone think Joywitch could benefit from those assertiveness classes
Amanda suggested for Saitain earlier? ;) Really joywitch, you need to come
out of your shell and say what you think. *cough* :)

K




From LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 11 14:35:46 2003
From: LinneaLand at thelinnealand.yahoo.invalid (thelinnealand)
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2003 14:35:46 -0000
Subject: Testing
Message-ID: <br9vc2+o7b9@...>

Linnea writes:

My post to the main list has since turned up along with a note of
explanation from the elves so everything there is fine now.

Post #261 is still non-existant.

It is 8:35am cst.

Linnea, who wishes Iggy not fade away.





From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 01:47:09 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 01:47:09 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brapmu+vntj@...>
Message-ID: <brb6mt+nmmo@...>

*sighs* Okay.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about 
TBAY.  Everyone is entitled to a soap box once in a while.  Maybe we 
all don't agree with what Gwen said, but she still had the right to 
say it.  Until this thread, I actually hadn't really thought about 
the people who don't enjoy TBAY.  I hadn't thought about the 
different systems of internet access and how the payments are done.  
I had just assumed that everyone who didn't like them skipped them.  

To be "another country heard from," as an AP English student, I like 
TBAY.  It's interesting to me.  It gives the list another dimension 
that I rarely get to read (currently being bogged down by Crime and 
Punishment, which will be followed by Kafka...).  But there are 
certain things I can't deny:
1. TBAY can be hard to follow.
2. TBAY can come across as sort of an exclusive club.
3. You have to be very involved to write TBAY.
Again, no one has to agree with this, it's just my opinion.

On a more personal note: for the love of marching band, what is the 
matter with the list lately?  I mean, alot of the people posting on 
this TBAY subject are the well-known posters - people who's name and 
theories I recognize without even having to hear their post!  When I 
sit thining of posts to write and theories to bring up, I hope that 
I can express myself as well as Darrin or bboy_mn or Lexicon Steve 
or Joywitch or Amanda or Kneasy or Kirstini or Elkins or Iggy or any 
of the other numerous people who have posted great theories during 
my time on this list.  It's slightly disheartening to see that we 
can't settle anything in a more civil fashion - although I 
understand that we all get frustrated sometimes.

Oryomai
Who really hopes she didn't offend any of the listees she mentioned 
in her post, and isn't saying that all the people she mentioned are 
talking about this, but just wanted to mentioned that she admires 
the people she talked about...that's all.




From erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 06:18:56 2003
From: erinellii at erinellii.yahoo.invalid (erinellii)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 06:18:56 -0000
Subject: Counting history
In-Reply-To: <bragku+dusu@...>
Message-ID: <brbmkg+91rn@...>

Eileen, that was an extremely fascinating history!

Didn't it take *forever* to search back through the list?  It does 
for me every time I do it.  Don't you wish there was an archive just 
for TBAY?

I asked this once before, right before the outbreak of the "threat to 
the list" post, and it very understandably got overlooked.  I realize 
that the Admin Team is pretty busy with that, but I hope that someone 
can find time to answer my question.

Would it be possible for a regular listmember to create a TBAY 
archive, one not formally affiliated with HPfGU?  Or would there be 
legal issues that made it impossible?

Erin




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 07:00:03 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 07:00:03 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brb6mt+nmmo@...>
Message-ID: <brbp1j+6bj6@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Blair" <SnapesSlytherin at a...>
wrote:
> *sighs* Okay.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about 
> TBAY.  Everyone is entitled to a soap box once in a while.  Maybe we 
> all don't agree with what Gwen said, but she still had the right to 
> say it. 

Well, the problem is that Gwen's post included a nasty personal jab at
a few people, especially Elkins, who is absent from this discussion.
She may have had the right to say her piece, but I'm not going to be
particularly outraged if she gets some of it back. 

Other people like Shaun I just disagree with. Sharp debate doesn't, I
think, mean completely obnoxious debate. It just means that we
completely disagree and want to prove we're right. 

> On a more personal note: for the love of marching band, what is the 
> matter with the list lately?  

OotP exhaustion and all the nastiness that you're seeing in some of
these posts taking its toll. Hopefully, more the first. 

I'm rereading OotP, though. I have plans to dismay everyone with my
renunciation of R/Hr on the grounds that Hermione is Ever so  Evil! ;-)

Eileen




From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 13:34:37 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (davewitley)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 13:34:37 -0000
Subject: Lessons from FA (was Fanfic vs. TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <bra7hm+h4hc@...>
Message-ID: <brcg5d+cr3d@...>

Heidi wrote:

> We have over 750,000 
> discussion posts on FA; some of them discuss writing, or other 
> authors' books, or stuff that's 100% off topic, like Lord of the 
> Rings, but there's almost 1900 threads with over 45,000 posts 
about 
> Order of the Phoenix itself, plus over a hundred thousand 
character 
> discussion posts in the Characters section. Those are *discussion 
> posts*, not fanfic. 
> 
> However, FA doesn't allow role-playing to take place on the Park 
> forums themselves, because it was becoming a bandwith problem. 
We've 
> moved things of that style over to LiveJournal, and we're giving 
> away codes to registered users and authors, who then give us one 
> back, so they can have roleplaying in LJ format, which really 
seems 
> to work better than a threaded discussion for what it is. So yeah, 
> Assassin!Snape threads and the Crouch Novenna would be more than 
> welcome in the FA family of sites. Why wouldn't you think it would 
> be?

I had been meaning to ask about this.  

I had been dimly aware that FA now hosts canon discussion (I am a 
member but hardly ever visit and only have a rudimentary knowledge 
of what's there).

For the sake of HPFGU members who are not in FA, are there any 
lessons that can usefully be learnt?  (And it doesn't have to be 
Heidi who responds  - I would like to hear the user point of view 
too.)

For one thing, we have had a little discussion here of the pros and 
cons of stronger threading of the kind FA provides.  Is it, in fact, 
incompatible with email delivery of individual posts to members?  
Would people have to keep specifying which threads to receive posts 
from, or can they be categorised (for delivery/subscription 
purposes) in some way that broadly corresponds to our lists?

What about workforce implications?  Does this type of arrangement 
noticeably change the admin workload?

What about the use of LJ?  Is that practically seamless, so that 
people who want to role play can respond to non-role play and vice 
versa?  (I'm not thinking of facilities-managing TBAY from LJ here - 
just curious about the possibilities generally)  To what extent do 
people need their own LJ accounts to make use of this FA feature?  
In short, does the user feel like they have to leave FA and go into 
LJ or do they feel part of the same site?

Just a few questions: I'm sure some more will be along in a minute 
or two.

David




From lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 12 15:18:49 2003
From: lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid (Amy Z)
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 15:18:49 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brb6mt+nmmo@...>
Message-ID: <brcm8p+jk86@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Blair" <SnapesSlytherin at a...> 
wrote:
> *sighs* Okay.  Everyone is entitled to their own opinion about 
> TBAY.  Everyone is entitled to a soap box once in a while.  Maybe 
we 
> all don't agree with what Gwen said, but she still had the right to 
> say it.  

My problem is with the way she said it.  There are ways to argue 
against TBAY without being condescending, misrepresenting others' 
opinions, or characterizing others on the list as "maniacal."  
Unfortunately, Gwen didn't choose them.

Amy Z
aka "good cop"
*as she watches "bad cop" Joywitch being led off in shackles, 
unrepentant*




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 13 04:00:17 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 04:00:17 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brcm8p+jk86@...>
Message-ID: <bre2sh+l9r@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Amy Z" <lupinesque at y...> 
wrote:
> My problem is with the way she said it.  There are ways to argue 
> against TBAY without being condescending, misrepresenting others' 
> opinions, or characterizing others on the list as "maniacal."  
> Unfortunately, Gwen didn't choose them.
> 
> Amy Z
> aka "good cop"
> *as she watches "bad cop" Joywitch being led off in shackles, 
> unrepentant*

Perhaps I'm desensitized to that kind of argument.  Or it could be 
the fact that I wasn't around when TBAY War I occured, so I didn't 
take any of her post personally.  But TBAY War II is immensely 
personal because so many people have invested so much time in it.  
And people can come across as manical without meaning to.  I can't 
work the archive search for the life of me, every time I try to, it 
comes up that it's not working right now, so I can't try to find 
these arguments.

Oryomai
--I don't think the shackles could hold Joywitch :-D




From northbysouthwest50 at northbysouthwest50.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 13 19:19:40 2003
From: northbysouthwest50 at northbysouthwest50.yahoo.invalid (northbysouthwest50)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 19:19:40 -0000
Subject: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brb6mt+nmmo@...>
Message-ID: <brfooc+3urk@...>

Blair said:

"But there are
certain things I can't deny:
1. TBAY can be hard to follow.
2. TBAY can come across as sort of an exclusive club.
3. You have to be very involved to write TBAY.
Again, no one has to agree with this, it's just my opinion."


I haven't read everything everyone here says, but I know what TBAY 
is.  I don't want to repeat what everybody said already, but there is 
one solution that hasn't been suggested.

Why don't we just have a poll on TBAY?  We would ask the people here 
what should be done.  I don't know if a final decision has been made, 
but I think it would be easier to decide what to do by considering 
what most people in the group want to do.  So why not put up a poll 
that says whether people want to leave TBAY the way it is, whether it 
should be on its own list, or maybe whether it should be 
discontinued.  

Or maybe the poll shouldn't be here but should be on the list 
everyone is a member of?  That way everyone could express their 
opinion, not just the people here.

North






From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 13 21:10:33 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 21:10:33 -0000
Subject: Majority rule is not always a good thing. WAS Re: Another country heard from...
In-Reply-To: <brfooc+3urk@...>
Message-ID: <brfv89+bp86@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "northbysouthwest50" 
<northbysouthwest50 at y...> wrote:

> 
> Why don't we just have a poll on TBAY?  We would ask the people 
here 
> what should be done.  I don't know if a final decision has been 
made, 
> but I think it would be easier to decide what to do by considering 
> what most people in the group want to do.  So why not put up a 
poll 
> that says whether people want to leave TBAY the way it is, whether 
it 
> should be on its own list, or maybe whether it should be 
> discontinued.  
> 
> North

One of the problems that had to be addressed by the Framers of the 
U.S. Constitution was how to preserve the rights of the minority in 
a political struggle, which, in case you haven't noticed, is what is 
going on right now on the list vis-a-vis TBAY and Filks.  It is one 
thing for the majority to decide questions that do not threaten the 
very existence of a genre; it is quite another to exile a 
significant minority of listees.  The Framers addressed this in at 
least two ways:  First, some questions were removed from the realm 
of majority rule, e.g., no state could be deprived of its equal 
representation in the Senate.  No amendment can be adopted to change 
this  Or (to our shame)  no law could be enacted to regulate the 
slave trade until twenty years after the adoption of the U.S. 
Constitution.   Second, extraordinary majorities were required for 
some issues, like ratifying treaties or overturning a prsidential 
veto of legislation or, indeed, amending the U.S. Constitution in 
the first place.

I think that simple majority rule here would trample the 
legitimately expected rights and privileges of current listees, 
honored by list practice over time.  If we seek to change them at 
all, we should seek some kind of super-majority to ratifiy these 
removal of previous practices.

Haggridd




From boggles at omorka.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 03:07:46 2003
From: boggles at omorka.yahoo.invalid (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Sun, 14 Dec 2003 21:07:46 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About
 TBAY
In-Reply-To: <bqmd8a+493n@...>
References: <bqmd8a+493n@...>
Message-ID: <p05210602bc02d3613997@[192.168.1.100]>

Chiming in late as usual . . .

>  > 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
>>  TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a
>TBAY
>>  message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if
>any, is
>  > the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU theory?

A TBAY theory is a theory that has become sufficiently nuanced in the 
minds of its adherents and detractors to become a character, prop, or 
setting.  (Stoned!Harry, the MAGIC DISHWASHER, and the Good Ship 
LOLLIPOPS, for instance.)  A TBAY message is a post about one or more 
such theories that has become a narrative in order to accommodate the 
theory/ies.  That it is narrative rather than persuasive makes it 
different from a regular post, to me.

>  > 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message?
>If
>>  you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to
>respond
>>  to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about
>the
>  > TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

I haven't read more than a few posts a day of the main list at all 
since June, mostly because of time issues on my part, but prior to 
that I specifically sought out TBAY posts to read, especially ones by 
established posters.  I don't recall whether I've ever posted in full 
TBAY format, but I've sailed on the LOLLIPOPS and took a ride on the 
Fourth Man hovercraft before Hurricane Jo capsized it.

>  > 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find
>discussions
>>  of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY more or less
>>  accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts
>(such as
>>  Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major TBAY
>theories)
>>  and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more accessible? What
>can
>  > veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more welcome?

I don't have any accessibility issues, but I do agree that some 
topics are more suited to TBAY format than others.  I also was around 
before the Bay exploded, which probably helped.  I might find it far 
more confusing if I were following it closely now.

>  > 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to
>know
>>  before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY
>style?

I think I agree with GulPlum that if you have to ask, you're not 
ready yet.  I was wary about posting in TBAY style even when there 
were far fewer denizens of the bay, not because I didn't like the 
theories but because there's a certain craft in the narrative, which 
I'm not always up to.  For that reason, I also don't think there's 
anything wrong with responding to a TBAY post outside of the TBAY 
format.
-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.




From naama_gat at naamagatus.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 08:57:01 2003
From: naama_gat at naamagatus.yahoo.invalid (naamagatus)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 08:57:01 -0000
Subject: TBAY - my take
Message-ID: <brjt0t+5l0g@...>

Hi,


As I see it, TBAY is a sophisticated format for discussion of 
*cannon*. Since HPfGU is dedicated to discussion of *cannon*, I don't 
think there are legitimate grounds for banning the TBAY format. The 
difference between TBAY and fanfic is that, whereas TBAY is a format 
for discussion, fanfic posts deal with subject material that is *not* 
cannon. So, quite logically, fanfic is out and TBAY is in, and should 
be so. 

Besides the "legalistic" aspect, I have to say (going with David's 
party metaphor), that it's very rude to break off some people's 
discussion, just because you don't like it, or feel left out. 
Dicentra pointed out that TBAY posts comprise only 3% of all the 
posts, so it's not like they are monopolizing the discussion, is it? 
If you don't like it, then frankly, it's your problem. Solution? 
Don't read them. Feel left out? Well, nobody is giving you the cold 
shoulder on purpose. If it bothers you so much - make the effort to 
learn the rules and codes, and join in. If you can't or can't be 
bothered, then again, that's your problem, not theirs. 



Naama, thinking that when you give people a place to whine in, they 
will








From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 14:31:27 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 14:31:27 -0000
Subject: Language (was : TBAY - my take)
In-Reply-To: <brjt0t+5l0g@...>
Message-ID: <brkgjv+1nvi@...>

"naamagatus" wrote:

> As I see it, TBAY is a sophisticated format for discussion of 
> *cannon*. Since HPfGU is dedicated to discussion of *cannon*, I 
> don't think there are legitimate grounds for banning the TBAY 
> format.

The *subject* of the TBAY posts is not as much a problem as their 
*format*.

> Besides the "legalistic" aspect, I have to say (going with David's 
> party metaphor), that it's very rude to break off some people's 
> discussion, just because you don't like it, or feel left out. 

Yes, but according to the seminar metaphor, it's very rude to hold 
private discussions in a foreign language in the conference room. If 
you want to have private talks with a restricted number of people, go 
to a private room. As David pointed out, it's all a matter of which 
metaphor you consider.

> Dicentra pointed out that TBAY posts comprise only 3% of all the 
> posts, so it's not like they are monopolizing the discussion, is 
> it? 

No, I agree. But they make very interesting theories and points, in a 
language that many don't understand. And until someone 
else "translates" those posts, I can't understand them or participate 
in them.

> If you don't like it, then frankly, it's your problem.

You're not the empathic kind, are you ?

> Solution? Don't read them.

And what if I want to know what new exciting theory those crazy and 
brilliant people have come up with ? Or, and that happens *very* 
often, what if I come accross a "straight" comment or response to a 
TBAY post which triggers my interest and curiosity, and I want to 
know the whole of the original theory, and I get there and just don't 
understand most of it ? I have to do A LOT of guessing when it comes 
to understanding some TBAY posts...

> Feel left out? Well, nobody is giving you the cold shoulder on 
> purpose.

That's not necessarily the way it *feels* though.
How would *you* feel if I started discussing some finer point of the 
translation of "Harry Potter et l'Ordre du Phenix" with my fellow 
French listees, in French ? We might not *mean* to keep other people 
out (after all, who else but French listees would *care* about the 
French version !?), but we still would be doing just that. And you 
would be very quick to remind us that English is the official 
language on the list.

> If it bothers you so much - make the effort to 
> learn the rules and codes, and join in. If you can't or can't be 
> bothered, then again, that's your problem, not theirs. 

In other words : even though they speak a language that has NOT been 
officially approved and declared official on the list, they have a 
right to expect other listees to learn that language to communicate 
with them.

Language is a big issue for me. And considering the various 
nationalities and mother languages of the listees, not to mention all 
the different mindsets and various schoolings, I think it should also 
be a big issue on such a list as HPFGU. After all, I'm making a big 
effort to write in good enough English, and I try not to complain 
when some peculiar expression gives me trouble. So that whole TBAY 
issue is tough on me. Basically, I'm being told that I have to learn 
yet another "language" to understand and take part in some of the 
most interesting discussions on the list. And it's a language I have 
very little hope to ever master : my mind just doesn't work that way.
Well, I'm honestly trying to take it nicely, but yes I do feel 
rejected. I wouldn't have mentioned it if nobody had asked me, but 
since Admin did I feel I have a right to say so.
It's just like when I travel to my husband's home country, whose 
language I don't speak. His best friend, who speaks very good 
English, insists on speaking with my husband in their own language, 
even when I'm around with nothing else to do but listen to them, 
simply because it's easier for him (and we're talking about someone 
who can write songs and poetry in English, and does professional 
translations from English...). As a result, my husband spends all his 
time translating to me, at least until I find something else to do. 
So what happens usually is that I end up taking a book along and 
reading it each and every time we go to his place. Or rather, that's 
what *used* to happen, because now I don't even want to go there, and 
I'm not happy when he comes to see us. Instead of becoming good 
friends, which would have been best for everyone involved, we're 
turning into adversaries. And all of that just because he won't speak 
in English, even though he perfectly could. Does that remind you of 
anything ?

> Naama, thinking that when you give people a place to whine in, they 
> will

If you didn't want to hear people whine, why did you come here to 
start with ?

Del





From foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 17:17:09 2003
From: foxmoth at pippin_999.yahoo.invalid (pippin_999)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 17:17:09 -0000
Subject: Language (was : TBAY - my take)
In-Reply-To: <brkgjv+1nvi@...>
Message-ID: <brkqal+p24q@...>

Del said:
>according to the seminar metaphor, it's very rude to hold  
private discussions in a foreign language in the conference 
room. If  you want to have private talks with a restricted number of 
people, go  to a private room. As David pointed out, it's all a 
matter of which  metaphor you consider.<

I'm only a "middler" (and see how quickly jargon sprouts) and I 
could be wrong, but as far as I know there's never been a time 
when the list was like a seminar, solely devoted to  academic 
discussion. I don't find academic discussions unwelcome at all, 
OTOH I would not be offended if  those who wish to be thus 
limited want to consider sequestering themselves. 
  
Del:
> And what if I want to know what new exciting theory those crazy 
and  brilliant people have come up with ? Or, and that happens 
*very*  often, what if I come accross a "straight" comment or 
response to a TBAY post which triggers my interest and curiosity, 
and I want to  know the whole of the original theory, and I get 
there and just don't  understand most of it ? I have to do A LOT of 
guessing when it comes  to understanding some TBAY posts...<

<snip>. Basically, I'm being told that I have to learn  yet another 
"language" to understand and take part in some of the  most 
interesting discussions on the list. And it's a language I have 
 very little hope to ever master : my mind just doesn't work that 
way.<

But TBay is the way  mind works, sometimes, and I'm not sure I 
could get the ideas in the first place if I didn't Tbay them.  To me, 
symbol, allusion and metaphor are as much a part of the books 
as Quidditch. 

Consider the end of CoS.  Diary!Tom, a man of letters, literally 
literal-minded and prosaic, can not be defeated by the sword of 
Gryffindor.  The pen is mightier. But he underestimates the 
power of symbols, and so  he is destroyed by a songbird (faith), 
a sleeping virgin(hope) and old clothes (charity).

Your mileage may vary. But if you don't understand something in 
a TBay post, just ask. IMO, most of us would be delighted to 
explain ourselves.

Pippin 




From msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 18:52:38 2003
From: msbeadsley at msbeadsley.yahoo.invalid (msbeadsley)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 18:52:38 -0000
Subject: Fandom, HP Fandom, HPfGU, Love, Language, and TBAY (long)
In-Reply-To: <brkgjv+1nvi@...>
Message-ID: <brkvtm+imfj@...>

> "naamagatus" wrote:
> > Besides the "legalistic" aspect, I have to say (going with 
> > David's party metaphor), that it's very rude to break off some 
> > people's discussion, just because you don't like it, or feel left 
> > out.

Del wrote:
> Yes, but according to the seminar metaphor, it's very rude to hold 
> private discussions in a foreign language in the conference room. 
> If you want to have private talks with a restricted number of 
> people, go to a private room. As David pointed out, it's all a 
> matter of which metaphor you consider.

I find the "foreign-language" metaphor exaggerated, self-indulgent, 
and self-serving. For one thing, TBAY "conversations" are not taking 
place in real time, with spoken dialogue whizzing past too fast for 
those who don't speak the "language" to capture, comprehend, 
or "translate." We are dealing with *written* material here, and 
timing loose enough to give most who'd like to translate plenty of 
opportunity to sit and decipher. (Me, I speak and write English. 
That's all. I know several dozen words in a couple of other languages 
and envy the h*ll out of anyone who is truly bilingual.)

The *words* used to write TBAY posts are English. TBAY is a dialect, 
or an accent, or English-language performance art, NOT a foreign 
language. And you know, although I don't have a hope in h*ll of 
understanding anything but spoken English, even *I* can get out a 
foreign language dictionary and glean the basic gist of something 
*written* in a foreign tongue. And I've done it when it mattered to 
me. (As a matter of fact, I developed the granddaddy of all crushes 
on a native French speaker many, many years ago in New York, and 
tried to learn French by writing him love letters, composed word by 
painful word, in his native language. I'm sure what I said came out 
something like "About thinking I stop you cannot. Duck poop." I was 
hoping he'd respond positively, love me back, and give me French 
language lessons. Instead he responded neutrally, sympathetically (in 
French), and was too gracious to instruct me. Shucks. Well, it was 
probably for the best. Not only was he married, it turns out he 
already *had* at least one mistress.)

The person who talked about her husband and his friend had a point. I 
think it is rude to her for them to converse regularly and at length 
in her presence in a language they both know she *cannot* follow or 
respond in. (And if I were her, I'd be using some *very* clearly 
defined words to my husband on the issue. Oh. Well. Unless I'd 
married that French speaker, who could have done anything he d*mn 
well pleased. At least until I learned to look in his eyes without my 
backbone wilting.) But again, this is spoken language. Again, this is 
a matter of *words* whose meanings she just does not have in her 
lexicon.

Somebody please quote a snippet of TBAY here and point out the other-
than-English words for me. (I *understand* this "foreign-language" 
argument is metaphor. Somewhat like TBAY is sometimes. Isn't *that* 
ironic?)

TBAY obviously has enemies beyond those who just don't like or get 
the format. There's a lot of history. H*ll, there's a full-blown feud 
going on, and, while ADMIN has expressed its intention of leaving 
TBAY on the main list, this has further infuriated those who perceive 
that ADMIN is and always has been pro-TBAY to the detriment of 
everyone else. I'm starting to get sick of the debate, and by 
extension, of TBAY. So I'm going to finish what I have to say here 
and then ignore this for a while, because I don't want that to 
happen. And I don't want it to happen not only because I want to keep 
liking TBAY, but because I sense that getting people fed up with the 
conflict could work in the opposition's favor. Not that I'm 
suggesting anyone would deliberately do such a thing.

On another, related note, there was some debate about whether HPfGU 
et al is a party or a seminar. I put in my two cents' worth. Then 
Dave came back and said, wait, it's more like letters to the editor. 
He or someone else also said that none of these metaphors are 
perfect. I would like to point out some things about the "letters" 
metaphor that are less than perfect. (Please excuse any repetition.) 
A newspaper consists of far more than just its letters column; while 
that's all the list IS. While the list has many, many lurkers, the 
general expectation is that anyone may/might post (and does); but the 
percentage of people in a paper's readership who ever sit down and 
write a letter to the editor is miniscule, and those to whom it ever 
occurs to do so isn't much bigger. The paper exists to address a 
readership, not to provide a forum for its readers to interact. And 
newspapers are profit-making entities; the people selecting which 
letters to publish are paid out of the same trough which is watered 
by advertising revenue. All that keeps HPfGU going is the tolerance 
of Yahoo (or something like it), love of things HP, and a willingness 
to volunteer their time and energy on the part of those who hold up 
the infrastructure. The only common ground the general readership of 
the paper have is that they are literate and have some interest in 
the world they live in. The list is made up of HP fans. Professionals 
have seminars; fans have parties (or conventions, which include 
parties, as well as many other things which are not lectures or  
presentations). Simple. IMO.

This is a *fandom*, people. SF Fandom used to be chock-full of 
mimeographed "apas" and "zines." You furnished however many copies of 
your own offering, and in return you received a copy of everyone 
else's once they were all bound together. This happened according to 
a set schedule, and people who got the apa or zine were generally the 
people who provided some pages with which to fill it. Fandom 
attracted many with something to say, and with many ways to say it. 
And zines, so far as I know, did not fill up with complaints about 
other members whose offerings consisted of fan art, fan fiction, 
verse, or even recipes for green Jello (very fannish) shooters. 
There's a reason fanfic is rampant; it's how a segment of fandom 
expresses its heart.  As is filk. They've both been around far longer 
than Harry Potter.

Note:  I have no problem with anyone who wants to just lurk. 
Sometimes I do it. (And I was a chronic lurker, or silent presence 
anyway, in filk circles, as I am not musical.) But let's face it, 
there wouldn't be a list without those who post. And there wouldn't 
be a fandom without those who show up, are visible, who post, write 
fanfic, compose filks, or *do something*. (Maybe the Bay is a "next" 
level, inspired by this virtual venue, and the criticism it is 
receiving is partly a rejection of innovation itself.) The Bay and 
those who are active there may have their faults, but there is no 
doubt that they are _participating in the fandom_. For other people, 
who choose different forms of participation, to assert that one sort 
has more intrinsic merit than another...well, while the words of the 
Hogwarts school song remain the same, everyone sings their own 
favorite tune. I imagine it's a head-splitting, howling 
cacophony...but no one in the narrative is complaining. And while 
some people accuse TBAY of being elitist and exclusory, TBAYers are 
not the ones asking for their own separate list area. (If nothing 
else, they want their brilliance admired, as we all do when we aspire 
to show such.) The trade off is that they *do* leave themselves open 
to be sneered at and pilloried by the list at large. The notion that 
they, with their 3% (or higher, but still tiny percentage) of list 
volume are somehow detrimental, continues to strike me as specious. 
As for the "is it canon" question, well, TBAY is *about* winkling out 
the clues in canon regarding what is likely to come next. Simple. IMO.

Okay. I'm done. If you have burning rebuttal to offer, please email 
me (unless, of course, it's everyone else you're trying to sway, not 
me); I'm leaving the Feedback building for now.

Sandy




From fullmetalcardigan66 at fullmetalcardigan66.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 15 19:07:26 2003
From: fullmetalcardigan66 at fullmetalcardigan66.yahoo.invalid (Kate)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:07:26 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: We'd Like to Pick Your Brains About TBAY
In-Reply-To: <p05210602bc02d3613997@[192.168.1.100]>
Message-ID: <brl0pe+qj39@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, Jennifer Boggess Ramon 
<boggles at e...> wrote:

> Chiming in late as usual . . .

Me too!


>We'd like to see newer
> members get involved with the form, but we realize that the learning
> curve for TBAY can be a little steep. 

 

I think the best way to get new members involved is to keep the TBAY 
explanatory file up to date.  It is not up to date now.  No one who 
joined the list recently like I did could possibly understand 
something like Magic Dishwasher based on the sketchy, outdated 
description.  And none of the Sirius TBAY theories or other OoP 
theories are there either.  

 
>To this end, members of the list
> admin have been putting together a TBAY primer, which will answer
> new members' questions about the format.
 

Do you mean it will answer questions about the TBAY format and style, 
or the TBAY theories themselves?  I think there's no real reason to 
have an explanation of the TBAY style.  It is obvious that it is fan 
fiction.  What is needed is an explanation of the theories, with 
links so people can follow along.

> 1. We'd like to know how you perceive TBAY. How would you describe
> TBAY messages? What do you feel is the most important aspect of a 
>TBAY message? What does the term 'TBAY theory' mean to you? What, if 
any, is the difference between a TBAY theory and a regular HPfGU 
>theory? 

 
A TBAY theory requires background information, whereas a regular 
theory is self explanatory.  

> 2. Do you read TBAY messages? Have you ever posted a TBAY message? 
>If you have, what prompted you to do so? Have you ever wanted to 
respond
> to a TBAY thread but chose not to because of the format? What about 
the TBAY format made you reluctant to post?

 
No, I do not read them very often, although I would like to.  I read 
the explanatory file, but it doesn't discuss the recent theories.  
The old theories were great, though.  Again, the problem is that the 
current theories are not in the explanatory file and they should be.

> 3. How accessible do you find the TBAY format? Do you find 
>discussions of older theories (such as MAGIC DISHWASHER) on TBAY 
>more or less
> accessible then discussions of older theories in regular posts >
>(such as Evil!Lupin)? Do Hypothetic Alley (home of several major 
TBAY theories)and Fantastic Posts help to make TBAY posts more 
>accessible? What can veteran TBAY-ers do to make newbies feel more 
>welcome?

I don't think it is the job of the veteran TBAYer to make new members 
(I don't like the term "newbies") feel comfortable.  It is the job of 
the people who run the list to do that.  It seems odd that the new 
member should be put to the task of asking the veteran members to 
explain things.  Would they even respond if dozens of people were 
asking them to explain their post?
 

> 4. What do you find confusing about TBAY? What would you like to 
know
> before posting? What would make you more likely to post in a TBAY 
style?


If the explanatory file were up to date, that would help.  Right now, 
I don't have the information I need to participate.  Sorry.  

I don't mean to be critical, but I know I sound that way, and I want 
to aplogize for that.  I don't like to be critical if I'm not going 
to be willing to help.  If you need any help in updating the Tbay 
explanatory file, let me know.  I guess if I have to go back and read 
every Tbay post to understand them, it wouldn't be that much more 
work to write updates as I go.

Hagrid wrote:


>One of the problems that had to be addressed by the Framers of the
>U.S. Constitution was how to preserve the rights of the minority in
>a political struggle, which, in case you haven't noticed, is what is
>going on right now on the list vis-a-vis TBAY and Filks. It is one
>thing for the majority to decide questions that do not threaten the
>very existence of a genre; it is quite another to exile a
>significant minority of listees. 


<snip>

>I think that simple majority rule here would trample the
>legitimately expected rights and privileges of current listees,
>honored by list practice over time. If we seek to change them at
>all, we should seek some kind of super-majority to ratifiy these
>removal of previous practices.


I think having a poll is a great idea.  First of all, who says that 
the majority would exile or ban Filks or Tbay?  They might not.  And 
if not, then that would put an end to this "political struggle" once 
and for all, as those who don't like those posts would know the list 
supports what the current rulers are doing.

If the poll showed overwhelming unpopularity of Filk and Tbay, then 
the next step would be to figure out what to do about it.  That might 
depend on the results and on the available options.  I think we'd be 
getting ahead of ourselves to say that we won't even ask the question 
because we might not like the answer.

After all, this list is called "Feedback."  Why be so afraid even to 
ask the question in the form of a poll?  As it stands right now, only 
the loudest (and in some cases strident) voices are being heard.  
 
And I don't think voicing an opinion here is the same thing 
as "whining."  

Kate 





From naama_gat at naamagatus.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 07:55:05 2003
From: naama_gat at naamagatus.yahoo.invalid (naamagatus)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 07:55:05 -0000
Subject: Language (was : TBAY - my take)
In-Reply-To: <brkgjv+1nvi@...>
Message-ID: <brmdop+5ksq@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> "naamagatus" wrote:
> 
> > Dicentra pointed out that TBAY posts comprise only 3% of all the 
> > posts, so it's not like they are monopolizing the discussion, is 
> > it? 
> 
> No, I agree. But they make very interesting theories and points, in 
a language that many don't understand. And until someone 
> else "translates" those posts, I can't understand them or 
>participate in them.

If it's so impossible for you to understand TBAY posts, how do you 
know "they make very interesting theories and points"? 

> 
> > If you don't like it, then frankly, it's your problem.
> 
> You're not the empathic kind, are you ?

On this subject, apparantly not. 

> > Feel left out? Well, nobody is giving you the cold shoulder on 
> > purpose.
> 
> That's not necessarily the way it *feels* though.
> How would *you* feel if I started discussing some finer point of 
>the translation of "Harry Potter et l'Ordre du Phenix" with my 
>fellow French listees, in French ? We might not *mean* to keep other 
>people out (after all, who else but French listees would *care* 
>about the French version !?), but we still would be doing just that. 
>And you would be very quick to remind us that English is the 
>official language on the list.

English *is* the official language on the list. If it wasn't, I 
wouldn't think I had the right to tell people to stop talking in the 
language of their choice (especially as it may be important in the 
context of a discussion on translation). Conversely, HPfGU does not 
have an official format in which to write posts. Therefore, I don't 
see that you have the right to demand that people stop using a format 
that they enjoy and find meaningful.


> 
> > If it bothers you so much - make the effort to 
> > learn the rules and codes, and join in. If you can't or can't be 
> > bothered, then again, that's your problem, not theirs. 
> 
> In other words : even though they speak a language that has NOT 
been 
> officially approved and declared official on the list, they have a 
> right to expect other listees to learn that language to communicate 
> with them.

I agree with msbeadsly that language is not a correct metaphor in 
this case, and refer you her post.

> > Naama, thinking that when you give people a place to whine in, > 
>they  will
> 
> If you didn't want to hear people whine, why did you come here to 
> start with ?
> 

A glutton for punishment, that's what I am :-). 
I apologize for the whine thing. I suppose that the general 
atmosphere in the list is getting to me. I want people to just ... 
stop, you know? Be nice to each other (not that I've been setting an 
example!) and not *look* for things to complain about. How about a 
little live and let live approach?



Naama, in nostalgic mood






From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 09:26:26 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:26:26 -0000
Subject: TBAY : an open door to diversity
Message-ID: <brmj42+e06s@...>


In a post yesterday, Naama pretty much told me to piss off if I 
didn't like TBAY. She (you're a female, Naama, right ? If not, I'm 
deeply sorry) told me in no uncertain terms that if I have a problem 
with TBAY, well it's *my* problem and nobody else's. She hurt me at 
the time, but now I have to thank her, because she got me thinking 
hard, and I understand my problem regarding TBAY at bit better.

( There's a bit of personal history first. For those who want to skip 
it, go directly to the ***** )

When I first joined HPFGU, in the summer of 2000, I'm not sure 
exactly how many people there were, but it was A LOT less than now. 
It was a much smaller group, and as a consequence a much tighter 
group. It was almost a group of friends. We were all different, but 
because there were not that many of us, we had to do our best to 
write in a consensual manner (but not necessarily of consensual 
matters ;-). At the time, nobody would have dreamt of telling me to 
piss off, because they would have known that at least a dozen people 
would have come down on them.

Then all my energy got used persuading a poor innocent young man to 
marry me <eg>, and I fell away from the list for about 2 1/2 years.

When I got back here, I still had the feeling of "frienship" in mind. 
I noticed that the membership had grown to unfathomable numbers, and 
that there was a whole Admin Team working on managing all that 
people, but somehow it didn't occur to me that the group dynamics had 
vastly changed too.

That's why FILKS and TBAY made me uneasy. I just couldn't figure out 
why anyone would want to write in formats not necessarily liked by 
everyone else. I was puzzled, but since it seemed to be acceptable, I 
didn't say anything.

Then Admin, on this Feedback list, asked us about TBAY, and I was 
astounded to see that, not only were many people just as puzzled 
about it as I was, but some people even downright hated it.

Then others came in, defending not only TBAY in itself, but even its 
theoretical right to exist, since some people on the list like it. 
Intellectually, it made sense to me, but some warning bell kept 
ringing in the back of my mind. And I've finally understood what it 
is.

****

We have several thousand people on the main list. It makes sense that 
sub-groups of likely-minded people would form and start talking among 
themselves in their own jargon. So far, we've seen 2 of those groups 
be born : the FILKers, and the TBAYers. Since many of us happen to 
think in democratic ways, we find it natural to defend the right of 
those "minorities", including their right to use their own format for 
posting.

But that gets me thinking about the future of the list.

We have to realize that those 2 groups probably aren't the only ones 
ever likely to form. With that many people on the list, and those 
long new-book-free months (maybe even years) to come, it could very 
well be that the phenomenon which gave birth to TBAY will repeat 
itself and give birth to other kinds of groups, each with their own 
format for posting, some maybe even stranger than the BAY. Are we 
ready to welcome those groups too ? If we do, then we must consider 
that someday we might have a half-dozen or more different types of 
format for posting, all perfectly acceptable, even if sometimes very 
obscure for whoever doesn't think the way members of those groups do. 
That will make for a very lively cacophony indeed.

Personally, I'm perfectly okay with that. But Admin would have a 
tough job preventing that cacophony from turning into full-formed 
anarchy. It's doable, but the Rules have to be clear and stricly 
enforced (I'm not saying that's not the case now, mind you !)

So that's what's at stake here : either we want to keep some kind of 
unity in the group, and we have to do away with sub-groups. Or we 
welcome diversity with open arms, with all the strangeness and 
weirdness it might bring.

Del







From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 09:39:08 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 09:39:08 -0000
Subject: Language (was : TBAY - my take)
In-Reply-To: <brmdop+5ksq@...>
Message-ID: <brmjrs+f76i@...>

"naamagatus" wrote:

> If it's so impossible for you to understand TBAY posts, how do you 
> know "they make very interesting theories and points"? 

Because other people respond and comment on the TBAY posts in a 
straight way :-) And I understand *those* posts. And from the 
comments, I figure out what the theory must be about, and I get 
interested. But I can't get all the details that way.
And before you tell me so, yes I am a glutton for punishment too :-) 
If I know that the post I'm reading refers back to a TBAY post, I 
should leave it. I know. But I *can't* :-) !

> Conversely, HPfGU does not have an official format in which to 
> write posts. Therefore, I don't see that you have the right to 
> demand that people stop using a format that they enjoy and find 
> meaningful.

And that's precisely the problem, isn't it ? Should we decide on a 
unique, understandable-by-all format, or should we allow alternate 
formats even though they leave some listees out ?
I'm adressing that issue on my post "TBAY : an open door to 
diversity".

> I suppose that the general atmosphere in the list is getting to me. 
> I want people to just ... stop, you know? Be nice to each other 
> (...) and not *look* for things to complain about. How about a 
> little live and let live approach?

I know, I want the same things. But before you can decide to let 
something live, you have to make sure it's not harmful to you. And I 
guess that's what we're trying to decide here.

Del




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 10:23:15 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 10:23:15 -0000
Subject: Fandom, HP Fandom, HPfGU, Love, Language, and TBAY (long)
In-Reply-To: <brkvtm+imfj@...>
Message-ID: <brmmej+2uag@...>

"msbeadsley" wrote:

> I find the "foreign-language" metaphor exaggerated, self-indulgent, 
> and self-serving.

(Del closes her eyes, breathes deeply, and repeats in a low voice : I 
shall not take offence, I shall not take offence. ;-)

> For one thing, TBAY "conversations" are not taking place in real 
> time, with spoken dialogue whizzing past too fast for those who 
> don't speak the "language" to capture, comprehend, or "translate." 
> We are dealing with *written* material here, and timing loose 
> enough to give most who'd like to translate plenty of 
> opportunity to sit and decipher.

Hum, considering how fast a topic can advance in just a few days, I'm 
not too sure this is true.

> The *words* used to write TBAY posts are English. TBAY is a 
> dialect, or an accent, or English-language performance art, NOT a 
> foreign language. And you know, although I don't have a hope in 
> h*ll of understanding anything but spoken English, even *I* can get 
> out a foreign language dictionary and glean the basic gist of 
> something *written* in a foreign tongue.

Can you tell me where I can get a complete English-TBAY dictionary ? 
The only honest answer is nowhere. You can give me the translations 
of a few words, but not all of them.
And I'm not even mentioning grammar !

> I'm sure what I said came out something like "About thinking I stop 
> you cannot. Duck poop."

Reminds me of the time I read a FF piece about Fleur and her family. 
At one time she shouts something like "Quoi etes-tu regardant a ?" I 
remember staring at that sentence, and telling myself : I'm sure this 
is supposed to mean something, but what... ? And then I did a word 
for word translation and came out with "What are you looking at ?" I 
nearly died laughing :-)

> The person who talked about her husband and his friend had a point. 

That would still be me :-) I *told* you language is a big issue for 
me, lol !

> I think it is rude to her for them to converse regularly and at 
> length in her presence in a language they both know she *cannot* 
> follow or respond in.

And this is exactly what TBAY *feels* to me. I might know 
intellectually that this is not what is meant, but I can't help 
feeling this way.

> But again, this is spoken language. Again, this is a matter of 
> *words* whose meanings she just does not have in her lexicon.

Actually, no. My husband's language is a mightily complicated one. 
They have 3 genders, 6 declinations (different for each gender, of 
course :-), no articles, a different grammar, and so on. When I do 
get the courage to learn it, I'll have MUCH more than just the 
dictionary to learn.

> Somebody please quote a snippet of TBAY here and point out the 
> other-than-English words for me. (I *understand* this "foreign-
> language" argument is metaphor. Somewhat like TBAY is sometimes. 
> Isn't *that* ironic?)

LOL ! Yep, it is :-)
Anyway. To explain my problem, I'll quote Pippin who wrote :
"Consider the end of CoS. Diary!Tom, a man of letters, literally
literal-minded and prosaic, can not be defeated by the sword of
Gryffindor. The pen is mightier. But he underestimates the
power of symbols, and so he is destroyed by a songbird (faith),
a sleeping virgin(hope) and old clothes (charity)."
Well, when I read that, my mind just went blank. I do recognize that 
she's speaking English, I know all the words here, but I don't get 
the concepts at all. I have so many questions I don't even know where 
to start ! Why would a songbird represent faith ? Why would a 
sleeping virgin represent hope, or old clothes charity ? What's the 
relationship between "a man of letters, literally literal-minded and 
prosaic" and the fact that he can't be defeated by the sword of 
Gryffindor ??
Don't you see ? She's using a whole background of concepts and 
symbols I've never even heard of. Which is exactly the same as using 
words I don't know, as far as I am concerned.

> (SF) Fandom attracted many with something to say, and with many 
> ways to say it. And zines, so far as I know, did not fill up with 
> complaints about other members whose offerings consisted of fan 
> art, fan fiction, verse, or even recipes for green Jello (very 
> fannish) shooters. 

Maybe it didn't use to. And maybe some of it still doesn't. But one 
thing that struck me when I got on the Net and went around some areas 
of SF fandom was the cleavages there were between the different 
factions, the disrespect many fans showed towards anyone who 
expressed their fanitude (??) in any other ways, systematically 
considered more vulgar and less worthy ways.

> well, while the words of the Hogwarts school song remain the same, 
> everyone sings their own favorite tune. I imagine it's a head-
> splitting, howling cacophony...but no one in the narrative is 
> complaining.

They don't because this is the way the Headmaster has decided it 
would be : they don't have a choice, they don't have a say. But here 
in Feedback, we have the opportunity to say we don't like it, so we 
do.

> And while some people accuse TBAY of being elitist and exclusory, 
> TBAYers are not the ones asking for their own separate list area. 
> (If nothing else, they want their brilliance admired, as we all do 
> when we aspire to show such.)

I'm afraid that's too often what it seems they are looking for : 
honors. "Look how brilliant we are". I personally don't think that's 
what they are after, though. And I don't think, after reading their 
posts here, that they even realize how exclusory the BAY can be. They 
don't mean it. But it is, and we have to deal with that now.

Del




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 16:29:38 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 16:29:38 -0000
Subject: It's Not A TBAY Problem
In-Reply-To: <brmmej+2uag@...>
Message-ID: <brnbti+ir6s@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> wrote:
> Somebody please quote a snippet of TBAY here and point out the 
> > other-than-English words for me. (I *understand* this "foreign-
> > language" argument is metaphor. Somewhat like TBAY is sometimes. 
> > Isn't *that* ironic?)
> 
> LOL ! Yep, it is :-)
> Anyway. To explain my problem, I'll quote Pippin who wrote :
> "Consider the end of CoS. Diary!Tom, a man of letters, literally
> literal-minded and prosaic, can not be defeated by the sword of
> Gryffindor. The pen is mightier. But he underestimates the
> power of symbols, and so he is destroyed by a songbird (faith),
> a sleeping virgin(hope) and old clothes (charity)."
> Well, when I read that, my mind just went blank. I do recognize that 
> she's speaking English, I know all the words here, but I don't get 
> the concepts at all. I have so many questions I don't even know where 
> to start ! Why would a songbird represent faith ? Why would a 
> sleeping virgin represent hope, or old clothes charity ? What's the 
> relationship between "a man of letters, literally literal-minded and 
> prosaic" and the fact that he can't be defeated by the sword of 
> Gryffindor ??
> Don't you see ? She's using a whole background of concepts and 
> symbols I've never even heard of. Which is exactly the same as using 
> words I don't know, as far as I am concerned.

Well, well well.

This just confirms to my mind that this isn't a TBAY problem. Because
that post of Pippin's wasn't an example of TBAY. It was an example of
a regular type post that uses the same idea as TBAY. 

And Pippin's got a point. Would people who don't understand TBAY
necessarily understand us TBAY-posters *outside* of TBAY? I rather
suspect they wouldn't. The things that make TBAY difficult to
understand sometimes are not the traditions and such (there really are
less than people think, and the background's *always* changing, which
is why a map of the place would be counterproductive and make TBAY
*harder* to do).... The things that make TBAY difficult are the leaps
of the intellect in the land of metaphors. Some people, believe it or
not, follow along quite nicely without any previous introduction to
the Bay. For example, I gave the Crouch Novenna to a friend to read
with no background about HPFGU, the Bay etc. and he understood it all
perfectly. He thought that the symbols and such were completely
self-evident. I must admit that I work along the same lines. I haven't
read every TBAY post myself, and lately very few, but I can *always*
understand TBAY. It's not *about* having a key, *about* having the
history. It's about having a mind that thinks that way. 

Sure some history wouldn't hurt for those who'd a) like it, b) have
just been introduced to this style of discourse and aren't sure
whether it suits them yet, but if one doesn't think that way, a primer
isn't exactly going to help.

And this would be the same for posts on the main list. Let it be noted
that whenever Elkins posted in non-TBAY format, there were an awful
lot of people who immediately proved that they didn't *follow* her. In
fact, one of the reasons I like posting on TBAY is that it thins out
the responses that go along the lines, "I have no idea what you just
said," or "You said X" when I thought it was clear I said nothing of
the sort. 

Of course, TBAY probably takes things further than the main-list
might, which is why some people who appreciate TBAYers' posts off the
Bay might be upset to miss them when they're on the Bay.

But it might not be that TBAYers could make more sense off the Bay
proposing the same theories. I rather suspect that the reason someone
feels inclined to take one's theory to the Bay (in most cases - some
people obviously just find the format fun) is that they can express
themselves better there, that they *couldn't* explain things to their
satisfaction off the Bay. I know this was the genesis of the Crouch
Novenna, for example. There were issues there to be addressed that
Elkins *couldn't* take on off-Bay, and if she had, believe it or not,
it would have been *longer* and more confusing. Someone said the
Novenna would have better if it had just stated its theories flatly.
Well, this is to get rid of half of what the Novenna said. Just for
one example, it would infuriate me, since the Novenna was a curiously
self-undermining text. It's meant to make you emotionally involved
with the HP Crouch subplot, and for countless people, it does. And not
into rabid Crouch Sr. haters either, curiously enough. I've referred
plenty of people to the novenna, who have come out absolutely besotted
with the elder Crouch as a flawed but very sympathetic character, and
plenty who come out the other way. TBAY often addresses the issue of
reader response - which is completely on topic on the list, btw - and
how it works.

And to prove my point, I'm sure the above made little sense to some
people reading this post, 

Eileen, who commented to her beta reader once, "It's not *my* fault I
think like Robert Browning!"




From lhuntley at laura_ingalls_huntley.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 16:50:32 2003
From: lhuntley at laura_ingalls_huntley.yahoo.invalid (Laura Ingalls Huntley)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 11:50:32 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: Fandom, HP Fandom, HPfGU, Love, Language,
 and TBAY (long)
In-Reply-To: <brmmej+2uag@...>
Message-ID: <F69C0068-2FE7-11D8-9F36-000A95E29F3E@...>

Del:
> <snip>
> Anyway. To explain my problem, I'll quote Pippin who wrote :
> "Consider the end of CoS. Diary!Tom, a man of letters, literally
> literal-minded and prosaic, can not be defeated by the sword of
> Gryffindor. The pen is mightier. But he underestimates the
> power of symbols, and so he is destroyed by a songbird (faith),
> a sleeping virgin(hope) and old clothes (charity)."
> Well, when I read that, my mind just went blank. I do recognize that
> she's speaking English, I know all the words here, but I don't get
> the concepts at all. I have so many questions I don't even know where
> to start ! Why would a songbird represent faith ? Why would a
> sleeping virgin represent hope, or old clothes charity ? What's the
> relationship between "a man of letters, literally literal-minded and
> prosaic" and the fact that he can't be defeated by the sword of
> Gryffindor ??
> Don't you see ? She's using a whole background of concepts and
> symbols I've never even heard of. Which is exactly the same as using
> words I don't know, as far as I am concerned.

Oh, Del, but the confusing part of what you quoted had nothing to do 
with TBAY at all.  I mean, the language might have been fancied up a 
bit to make the dialog more snappy and interesting, but I think if 
Pippin had posted her theory in the conventional way, you still would 
have been confused.  The symbolism discussed is not a product of TBAY, 
but of history, the Bible, etc.  Perhaps there was a previous post in 
which the origin of these symbols was explained (whether in TBAY or 
conventional format), perhaps not.  But your confusion stems mainly 
from the fact that Pippin assumes that the reader will have the grasp 
of conventional, Western symbolism needed to decipher what she's 
saying, not in her TBAY format.

As for the first part of the passage, it's just a fancy way of saying 
that Tom is *literally* a "man of letters" (punning, basically), 
therefore incorporeal, therefore unable to be slain in the conventional 
fashion (i.e. with a sword).  Again, your confusion is not TBAY 
related, but rather a product of Pippin (perhaps unnecessarily) 
constructing her sentences and their meaning in a v. intricate and 
complicated fashion.

Laura (jumping into the TBAY discussion with both feet, hoping no one 
eats her, and planning to write a more detailed take on the situation 
*after* her term paper is written.)


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




From kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 15:18:54 2003
From: kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid (kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 15:18:54 -0000
Subject: Fandom, HP Fandom, HPfGU, Love, Language, and TBAY (long)
In-Reply-To: <brmmej+2uag@...>
Message-ID: <brn7ou+s9j6@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...>
wrote (and Karen added a couple of blank lines to make it more legible
between paragraphs):

> Anyway. To explain my problem, I'll quote Pippin who wrote :
> "Consider the end of CoS. Diary!Tom, a man of letters, literally
> literal-minded and prosaic, can not be defeated by the sword of
> Gryffindor. The pen is mightier. But he underestimates the
> power of symbols, and so he is destroyed by a songbird (faith),
> a sleeping virgin(hope) and old clothes (charity)."
>
> Well, when I read that, my mind just went blank. I do recognize that 
> she's speaking English, I know all the words here, but I don't get 
> the concepts at all. I have so many questions I don't even know 
> where to start ! Why would a songbird represent faith ? Why would a 
> sleeping virgin represent hope, or old clothes charity ? What's the 
> relationship between "a man of letters, literally literal-minded and 
> prosaic" and the fact that he can't be defeated by the sword of 
> Gryffindor ??

> Don't you see ? She's using a whole background of concepts and 
> symbols I've never even heard of. Which is exactly the same as using 
> words I don't know, as far as I am concerned.
> 

Oh Dear. 

If using a background of concepts and symbols that *any particular*
listee may not be familiar with is a problem, we are *all* in big
trouble. 

I am sure I miss all sorts of references to, for example, current TV
shows (or commercials) or movies or pop songs. After all, I didn't
even know who Emma Watson or Jim Dale were when I first joined the
list. Never mind all the references to old list debates, members who
don't post anymore, or discussions that took place in a thread I chose
not to follow. 

*However* I don't expect anyone to scrub their posts of all possible
references to either the culture at large or to the culture of the
list. When I joined I read back through the archives for a few months,
so I could get at least a running start to current list, but of course
the posts at the point where I arbitrarily chose to start reading were
at that point pretty confusing to me becuase of all the references to
other previous posts. I found myself spending a lot of time looking
things up in various reference files and the Lexicon. Time well spent,
I maight add.

I agree that those files *really* need to be updated, and not just the
TBAY one. I had it pretty easy, joining at a time when list volume was
relatively low (though still too much for me to read everything!) and
when volunteers apparently had many hours to while away researching
minutia while waiting for OoP. 

Oh, Del, by the way, I don't believe that Pippin made any references
from TBAY in her example... All the concepts and symbols she used were
pretty standard to English literature and culture. With apologies to
Pippin, let me try to explain a bit:

Literal == written. Diary!Tom is a product of the written word. In a
sense he exists only as a written character (written by the "real" Tom
Riddle).

"The pen is mightier than the sword" - don't know who said it first,
but has most definitely achieved cliche status, at least for those
educated in the US, Great Britain, etc. Familiarity with both the
words and the concept can be reasonably presumed when writing for a
general, English speaking audience

Faith, Hope and Charity - from the Bible, um, somewhere in the New
Testament? (OK, now you all know that I was not raised in a protestent
church, or I'd be able to cite chapter and verse. Sorry!). Once again,
so generally known and used as to be often a cliche.

As to assigning the particular images to the concepts of Faith, Hope
and Charity - I'll leave that for someone else. Let me say though,
that for me at least the symbols do "click" easily; in part because of
a long history of their usage in the language and literature I was
raised and educated in. 

By the way, using symbols and stories to illustrate and illuminate
ideas and concepts is precisely what Jesus was doing when he told
parables. Sure, he could have tried to just spell everything out
discursively instead of fictively (are those the terms we're using?)
but I think that much would have been lost in the, well, translation.

Karen

(Disclaimer: my bringing Jesus into the TBAY depate is in no way an
endorsement of any religion, faith, or belief system; nor is it to be
construed in any way as an appeal to divine authority on any matter
under discussion here; my aim is simply to provide an example of the
use of symbol, allegory, and narrative to further the undersatnding
and discussion of Serious Concepts, an example that I believe is given
further wieght by its popularity with a wide audience for a couple of
millenia.)





From dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 18:25:29 2003
From: dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid (dfrankiswork at davewitley.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 18:25:29 -0000
Subject: It's Not A TBAY Problem
In-Reply-To: <brnbti+ir6s@...>
Message-ID: <brnimp+i5rt@...>

Eileen wrote:

> The things that make TBAY difficult are the leaps
> of the intellect in the land of metaphors. Some people, believe it 
or
> not, follow along quite nicely without any previous introduction to
> the Bay. 

I think we can overstate the extent to which people 'get', or fail 
to get, symbolic interpretation.  I believe much of it is learnt 
behaviour, and that it's never too late to start.  Sure, a few catch 
on with almost no prompting or effort, but that doesn't mean those 
who don't, never can, or can't enjoy it when they do.

For myself, I hardly read literature symbolically (with the partial 
exception of the Bible) before I joined HPFGU.  It was a leap for me 
to understand this kind of thing in my forties, but it was a leap I 
could make.  36547 is my awakening, ironically in the middle of the 
posts Eileen was listing as the genesis of TBAY, for which I was not 
really ready.  It's still something that's a conscious effort for 
me, and something of a novelty, and looking back, there were other 
things in the past few years that have helped me on the way.

In that context, Pippin's offer to explain things to those who ask 
is very helpful.  After all, we most of us learn best through 
specific examples.

David




From northbysouthwest50 at northbysouthwest50.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 20:05:09 2003
From: northbysouthwest50 at northbysouthwest50.yahoo.invalid (northbysouthwest50 at northbysouthwest50.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 20:05:09 -0000
Subject: TBAY poll and Majority rule
In-Reply-To: <brfv89+bp86@...>
Message-ID: <brnohl+d444@...>

Naama wrote:

>How about a
> little live and let live approach?

My answer to that is that very little about this community is "live 
and let live."  There are lots and lots and lots of rules about who 
can post what where.  These rules exist to keep things orderly and 
organized so that it doesn't descend into chaos.  According to some 
of the administrative announcements, we're not even supposed to 
write "Now Me" to mark our own part of a post.  

Why should the issue of TBAY be any different?  I think we should 
talk about the issues (which we are doing) and we should decide 
whether we want the sort of place where lots of different formats and 
styles exist or not.  

Now, on the issue of a poll, Haggridd raised some good points, but I 
can't say that I fear finding out what the majority wants very much, 
since we're just talking about a Yahoo group.  

Also, I would like to take full credit for the idea of a poll, but I 
can't.  The rules I had to read to join this list say polls can be 
used to gauge majority opinion:  "Polls may be used to gauge majority 
opinions on matters of discussion, and list administration will be 
happy to work in tandem with any list member who wishes to suggest a 
poll. Only list moderators may create polls, however, and as with all 
other discussions on this list, poll results should not be considered 
binding upon list administration."  

Sandy wrote:

> Somebody please quote a snippet of TBAY here and point out the
> other-than-English words for me. 

This is from Message 85859:


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Erin was pondering Jenny's question and Jenny was still
wondering where she could get some decent eggs when
George came over bearing a silver tray on which rested two
elegant black-bordered engraved invitations:

~~ Breakfast at The Safe House~~

Erin picked hers up and examined it closely. "Er--" said George,
"I wouldn't do that if -- oops!"

In a few moments the two women had left a congealing plate of
runny eggs and two little heaps of ash behind them and were
strolling up the garden path to The Safe House, where those
who ponder the doings of spies and the interweaving nets of
conspiracy can always find a dish of eclairs, a change of clothes,
or, in this case, a hot breakfast.

Sneaky the House Elf ushered them into the kitchen, where a
roaring fire blazed, not quite drowing out the soft hum of the
newly refurbished MAGIC DISHWASHER. A colorful string of
get-well cards festooned the mantlepiece.

Seated at the table, sipping from a cup of red liquid, was a
dark-haired woman wearing a cape and dark glasses.

<. . . >

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This is all English.  I know that because I can read it.  But it is 
code, or I think it might be, anyway.  I don't understand who Sneaky 
is, what the egg references are, the get well cards, the change of 
clothes, the silver tray, the eclairs . . .   TBAY posts really 
aren't all that easy to understand, even though they are written in 
English.  And I'd feel silly writing to the author and asking about 
this sort of thing.  Can't we all work together to find a solution to 
this?

North





From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 16 22:15:23 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Tue, 16 Dec 2003 22:15:23 -0000
Subject: What About TBAY is mystifying?
In-Reply-To: <brnohl+d444@...>
Message-ID: <bro05r+c3ok@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, northbysouthwest50 at y... wrote:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> 
> Erin was pondering Jenny's question and Jenny was still
> wondering where she could get some decent eggs when
> George came over bearing a silver tray on which rested two
> elegant black-bordered engraved invitations:
> 
> ~~ Breakfast at The Safe House~~
> 
> Erin picked hers up and examined it closely. "Er--" said George,
> "I wouldn't do that if -- oops!"
> 
> In a few moments the two women had left a congealing plate of
> runny eggs and two little heaps of ash behind them and were
> strolling up the garden path to The Safe House, where those
> who ponder the doings of spies and the interweaving nets of
> conspiracy can always find a dish of eclairs, a change of clothes,
> or, in this case, a hot breakfast.
> 
> Sneaky the House Elf ushered them into the kitchen, where a
> roaring fire blazed, not quite drowing out the soft hum of the
> newly refurbished MAGIC DISHWASHER. A colorful string of
> get-well cards festooned the mantlepiece.
> 
> Seated at the table, sipping from a cup of red liquid, was a
> dark-haired woman wearing a cape and dark glasses.
> 
> <. . . >
> 
>  
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> This is all English.  I know that because I can read it.  But it is 
> code, or I think it might be, anyway.  I don't understand who Sneaky 
> is, what the egg references are, the get well cards, the change of 
> clothes, the silver tray, the eclairs . . .   TBAY posts really 
> aren't all that easy to understand, even though they are written in 
> English.  And I'd feel silly writing to the author and asking about 
> this sort of thing.  Can't we all work together to find a solution to 
> this?


Err... what exactly isn't understandable in that post above? It says
clearly that Sneaky is the "House Elf" who lives at the Safe House,
which Erin has *clearly* explained is where "where those who ponder
the doings of spies and the interweaving nets of conspiracy" hang out
i.e. "can always find a dish of eclairs, a change of clothes, or, in
this case, a hot breakfast." "Not quite drowing out the soft hum of
the newly refurbished MAGIC DISHWASHER. A colorful string of get-well
cards festooned the mantlepiece." I assume, not having read the post
in question, the get-well cards were for the newly-refurbished MAGIC
DISHWASHER. The newly-refurbished seems to lead to that logical
conclusion. 

I didn't read this exchange or probably most ahead of it, so I'm not
sure if there's anything else in there that I'm missing, but it seems
pretty simple to me. The only difficulty due to previous information
not explained might be someone not knowing what MAGIC DISHWASHER is.
But they would know that it is a theory and it's been newly
refurbished. You don't have to get *every* reference someone makes to
follow them. 

What may be the other problem is that it *does* refer to the general
cliches you'll find in spy movies and novels, with disintegrating
messages and all. But again, not a problem due to previous information
or code.

Yep, I still think that people's problems with understanding TBAY
don't lie in the fact that it's a foreign language, but a foreign way
of thinking.

Eileen. 




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 17 13:55:09 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 13:55:09 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
Message-ID: <brpn7t+lgav@...>

Hello all !

I've been thinking, again :-) Here's the result of my thinking. It's 
quite long, sorry. For those of you who want just the conclusion, you 
may jump straight to the "SO !"

OK, so first of all, I'd like to say that I'm not completely stupid, 
guys :-)

Eileen said:

> that post of Pippin's wasn't an example of TBAY. It was an example 
> of a regular type post that uses the same idea as TBAY

Laura said :

> Oh, Del, but the confusing part of what you quoted had nothing to 
> do with TBAY at all.

And Karen said :

> Oh, Del, by the way, I don't believe that Pippin made any 
> references from TBAY in her example... 

Well, I was perfectly aware of that, thanks very much :-) ! I used 
Pippin's post as an example of how literary metaphors and symbolism 
can get me lost. Which leads me to my second point :

Eileen said : 

> Yep, I still think that people's problems with understanding TBAY
> don't lie in the fact that it's a foreign language, but a foreign 
> way of thinking.

> The things that make TBAY difficult are the leaps of the intellect 
> in the land of metaphors. 

> It's not *about* having a key, *about* having the history. It's 
> about having a mind that thinks that way.

Exactly ! That's the point I've been trying to make right from the 
beginning ! My language discourse was only a *metaphor* to explain my 
problem with symbols and metaphors (duh ! :-)

See, I said in post 178 :

> you have to figure out the metaphors and other symbolic stuff (which
> I don't).

> there are threads on this list that require not only tremendous 
> specific knowledge, but also additional capacities or specific 
> mindsets, 

> people who request that other people have a specific mindset to 
> understand them and who don't care about being understandable by 
> everyone

> Note : this is not just a matter of *knowledge*, but most of all a
> matter of capacity and mindset. Discrimination by knowledge is
> impossible to avoid. When someone gets talking about alchemy, for
> example, they get me lost. But I don't hold it against them, because
> the only difference between them and me is a real-life learned 
> thing. With TBAY it's different. In order to be able to just 
> understand some TBAY posts (let alone participe), I not only have 
> to acquire a great load of specific background, but I also have to 
> develop (if that's possible) a very specific mindset.

So I did say right from the beginning that one of my main problems 
with TBAY is that I just don't understand the way it works !

So now that pretty much everybody seems to have understood the 
problem symbolism can create for some people, let's see if something 
can be done to solve that problem. It doesn't seem so :

Eileen said :

> This just confirms to my mind that this isn't a TBAY problem. 

> Pippin's got a point. Would people who don't understand TBAY
> necessarily understand us TBAY-posters *outside* of TBAY? I rather
> suspect they wouldn't.

> Let it be noted that whenever Elkins posted in non-TBAY format, 
> there were an awful lot of people who immediately proved that they 
> didn't *follow* her. 

> But it might not be that TBAYers could make more sense off the Bay
> proposing the same theories. I rather suspect that the reason 
> someone feels inclined to take one's theory to the Bay (in most 
> cases - some people obviously just find the format fun) is that 
> they can express themselves better there, that they *couldn't* 
> explain things to their satisfaction off the Bay. 

Laura :

> I think if Pippin had posted her theory in the conventional way, 
> you still would have been confused. The symbolism discussed is not 
> a product of TBAY,

> But your confusion stems mainly from the fact that Pippin assumes 
> that the reader will have the grasp of conventional, Western 
> symbolism needed to decipher what she's saying, not in her TBAY 
> format.

Karen :

> If using a background of concepts and symbols that *any particular*
> listee may not be familiar with is a problem, we are *all* in big
> trouble.

In big trouble indeed, which would explain why TBAY systematically 
leads to such a hot debate. It seems that some people just NEED to 
express themselves in metaphorical ways, while at the very same time 
some other people simply CANNOT understand most metaphors. This is  
going way beyond a simple matter of preferences. It goes right down 
to people's needs. Enforcing a rule one way or the other is 
necessarily going to trample someone's needs.

As Eileen said :

> if one doesn't think that way, a primer isn't exactly going to help.

But as Karen said :

> I don't expect anyone to scrub their posts of all possible
> references to either the culture at large or to the culture of the
> list. 

> By the way, using symbols and stories to illustrate and illuminate
> ideas and concepts is precisely what Jesus was doing when he told
> parables. Sure, he could have tried to just spell everything out
> discursively instead of fictively (are those the terms we're using?)
> but I think that much would have been lost in the, well, 
> translation.

(Will it come as a surprise to anybody that I've had a very hard time 
understanding Jesus's parables ? I do grasp some symbols, but I keep 
missing the more profound ones)

So in short : on one hand, it wouldn't be fair to forbid people like 
Pippin to use metaphors and symbols. It might not even be feasible : 
if it is their way of thinking, there isn't much you can do to change 
that. On the other hand, it wouldn't be fair either to expect people 
like me to understand all that metaphoric talk.

Note : David did try to be a middler in this. He said :

> I think we can overstate the extent to which people 'get', or fail
> to get, symbolic interpretation. I believe much of it is learnt
> behaviour, and that it's never too late to start. Sure, a few catch
> on with almost no prompting or effort, but that doesn't mean those
> who don't, never can, or can't enjoy it when they do.

> In that context, Pippin's offer to explain things to those who ask
> is very helpful. After all, we most of us learn best through
> specific examples.

I don't completely agree. While it is true that quite a few people 
can familiarise themselves enough with the TBAY style of thinking, I 
stil think that many people simply don't have the means necessary to 
study and acquire that kind of knowledge. Some don't have enough 
time, some don't have the opportunity, some have a mindset that is 
just to alien to that kind of thinking, etc... Whatever the reason, 
it can't just be *expected* of EVERYONE to make such an effort.

SO !

Where does that leave us ? I'd say, in the Land of Diversity. We have 
to acknowledge the fact that we listees aren't all the same and will 
never be and shouldn't be expected to be, and to be at peace with 
that. It's tough with me, because it means that some brilliant 
theories born of brilliant minds will almost always elude me, but I 
have to accept that as inevitable. (Well, I'm being a bit too 
emphatic here : there are quite a few good "translators" out there, 
who have already proven that they can express a good deal of the TBAY 
theories in more "conventional" terms).

It's just the same as in real life : I can't figure out why so many 
people just don't seem to understand the basics of mathematics, but 
on the other hand, I am absolutely hermetic to law. It's just the way 
it is, it's diversity, and it's a good thing.

But as I said in a previous post, it also means we have to be ready 
to welcome other formats of post, reflecting other mindsets, other 
ways of thinking. If it ever happens, it probably won't be too easy, 
it might be quite unsettling, but it will be necessary and the only 
fair thing to do.

This TBAY War, far from being a destructive war, can turn into one of 
the best things that ever happened to this group, if it means that 
ALL the listees feel welcome to express their individuality, to 
discuss things in their very own way, at the best of their ability. 
If EVERYONE feels respected for who or what they are, if all of us 
feel we have the right to speak to our same-minded fellows in our own 
jargon, if each of us knows that he is excused in advance for not 
always understanding what someone else said, then things will be a 
bit more chaotic for sure, but hopefully a great deal more productive 
as well.

However, as I said before again, this will mean that the Rules will 
have to ensure that everyone's specificity is respected. Again, I'm 
not saying that they don't as of today.

(That was the end of my TBAY conclusion. Those of you who were 
interested only in that can stop here).

By the way, since I'm talking about respecting everyone's right to be 
different, I'd like to make a few comments about "expectations".

Laura said :

> But your confusion stems mainly from the fact that Pippin assumes 
> that the reader will have the grasp of conventional, Western 
> symbolism needed to decipher what she's saying, 

Karen said :

> All the concepts and symbols she used were pretty standard to 
> English literature and culture. 

> "The pen is mightier than the sword" - don't know who said it first,
> but has most definitely achieved cliche status, at least for those
> educated in the US, Great Britain, etc. Familiarity with both the
> words and the concept can be reasonably presumed when writing for a
> general, English speaking audience

> Faith, Hope and Charity - from the Bible, um, somewhere in the New
> Testament? (OK, now you all know that I was not raised in a 
> protestent church, or I'd be able to cite chapter and verse. 
> Sorry!). Once again, so generally known and used as to be often a 
> cliche.

(First of all, I'd like to say that I *do* know both "the pen is 
mightier than the sword" and "faith, hope and charity". What I did 
*not* understand was how those concepts were applying to the 
situation at hand).

I know English is the official language of the list. I also know that 
we can safely assume pretty much everyone on the list has read HP in 
English.

However, that's a BIG step from assuming that everyone comes from a 
Western, Christian, Anglo-Saxon background, and that everyone knows 
all the cliches, symbols and concepts relating to it.

And even among those who do come from a Western, Christian, Anglo-
Saxon background, I'm pretty sure quite a few don't know much if 
anything about the concepts and symbols commonly used in Literature.

We have a lot of listees coming from quite a few different 
backgrounds. It is true that most do come from that Western Christian 
Anglo-Saxon background. But quite a few of us don't. *I* don't. I'm 
not from an Anglo-Saxon culture. And I quite resent being told that I 
am expected to know what an American would, or to instinctively react 
like a Brit would. The name of the list is HP for Grown-Ups, not HP 
for American and British Grown-Ups. There are no borders on the Net, 
so let's not put any on this list either.
I'm not saying we should explain every cliche either, mind you ! But 
I *am* saying that we should be aware that those cliches might not be 
self-explanatory to some listees reading us. Hopefully, they will ask 
for some explanation. But they might not and still answer to our post 
and make gross mistakes because they misunderstood us. That's the 
downside of extreme diversity like we have on the main list. But I 
personally think it's worth it.

Del





From heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 17 15:06:03 2003
From: heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid (heidilist at heiditandy.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 15:06:03 -0000
Subject: Lessons from FA (was Fanfic vs. TBAY)
In-Reply-To: <brcg5d+cr3d@...>
Message-ID: <brprcr+fkar@...>

Sorry it took a few days to get back to this... 

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:

> I had been meaning to ask about this.  
> 
> I had been dimly aware that FA now hosts canon discussion (I am a 
> member but hardly ever visit and only have a rudimentary knowledge 
> of what's there).

Actually, we've hosted canon discussion for almost two and a half 
years now - we launched the boards about ten days after the fanfic 
sections of the site went live. 
> 
> For one thing, we have had a little discussion here of the pros 
and 
> cons of stronger threading of the kind FA provides.  Is it, in 
fact, 
> incompatible with email delivery of individual posts to members?  

At the moment, using the system we use, yes it is incompatable. We 
know there is a way to do the posting via email but the software 
developers haven't released it to the public yet. 

> Would people have to keep specifying which threads to receive 
posts 
> from, or can they be categorised (for delivery/subscription 
> purposes) in some way that broadly corresponds to our lists?

Well, you can get a notification now, whenever anyone posts a reply 
on a thread you're interested in, or in a forum you're interested 
in. But in terms of replying, you'd have to go to the site to do so, 
so it's similar to the webview setup on Yahoogroups. Plus, we can 
send emails or "private owls" to people in a special announcements 
sort of way, although it takes about 6 hours to send emails at this 
point, if we send them to everyone, simply because we have so many 
users. 
> 
> What about workforce implications?  Does this type of arrangement 
> noticeably change the admin workload?

We have about 50 ementors, who are similar to the elves, and about 
30 moderators for the message boards, but as things are divided up 
by category, character or concept, mods don't have any obligation to 
read everything. 
> 
> What about the use of LJ?  Is that practically seamless, so that 
> people who want to role play can respond to non-role play and vice 
> versa?  (I'm not thinking of facilities-managing TBAY from LJ 
here - 
> just curious about the possibilities generally)  To what extent do 
> people need their own LJ accounts to make use of this FA feature?  
> In short, does the user feel like they have to leave FA and go 
into 
> LJ or do they feel part of the same site?

It's not seamless at all, mostly because a lot of the LJ stuff is 
user-generated. If people want to create a guild or a team, 
their "selection of roles" and such happens on the LJ they've 
created, and put links to on their signatures and/or on discussion 
threads. But then again, it's not seamless to jump between the Main 
List and OTC, if you're using webview. It's easy to make the jump, 
and jump back, though. 

But, then again, ever since we started, we've always had things 
located "off" FA - we were originally an EZBoard for messages & 
reviews, an html system for fics, and shortly added google for fic 
searches - within a month of launch, we were using LiveJournal for 
status updates and our fic update lists are replicated from the site 
to a Yahoogroup to LJ, all more or less in tandem. There's a lot of 
ways in... and a lot of ways out.

heidi




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 17 18:24:04 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 18:24:04 -0000
Subject: TBAY poll and Majority rule
In-Reply-To: <brnohl+d444@...>
Message-ID: <brq704+q732@...>

North (on not understanding a TBAY post):

> And I'd feel silly writing to the author and asking about 
> this sort of thing.

Why?

> Can't we all work together to find a solution to this?

It seems to me that writing to the author *would* be working 
together. 

And if you don't understand it, why bother? I mean, nobody follows 
all the nuances of every single thread. I have never seen that 
there's all that much of a problem.

~Amanda, unofficial





From thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 17 20:57:17 2003
From: thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid (thomasmwall at thomasmwall.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:57:17 -0000
Subject: TBAY poll and Majority rule
In-Reply-To: <brq704+q732@...>
Message-ID: <brqfvd+11evs@...>

I've seen a lot of really nice points here, both for and against the 
TBAY format, and I'm glad to see that most all of us have been able 
to keep our emotions controlled and the tone both civil and 
productive, despite the fact that TBAY is - and probably will 
continue to remain - a contentious topic.

I figured I'd throw in my own two cents, since I hadn't noticed a 
particular perspective - namely, mine - on the board.

When I first joined in January of this year, I have to confess that 
the TBAY format, well, it *befuddled* me a little bit. 

I suppose it's because I didn't get a few of the jokes, but that's 
not, IMHO, a big deal: I don't get the in-jokes in more academic and 
straightforward posts as well. In-jokes will exist no matter what 
particular *style* of writing the list uses. That's what naturally 
happens when groups of people get together.

I also suppose that it's because I didn't appreciate the complexity 
of the literalized metaphors that TBAY luminaries, like Eileen, 
Elkins, Cindy and Pip use in their posts. For me, though, arcane 
references to 'MATCHING ARMCHAIRS' and 'FEATHERBOAS' weren't daunting 
or annoying. Quite to the contrary, they were an exciting call to 
visit Hypothetic Alley and a chance to learn more about the highly 
idiosyncratic functions on HPfGU. For anyone who *hasn't* spent a 
weekend there reading the Memory Charm Symposium or all about George, 
Faith, and Toadkeeper, I highly recommend it.

I'd say that my biggest problem with the TBAY format was *myself.* 

I personally wanted to be sure to, well... Elkins put this really 
well in the Crouch Novenna, which I just finally printed out in its 
entirety and read, um, 'cover to cover,' so to speak. I loved every 
minute of it, by the way, and wholeheartedly agree with Eileen's 
point that it's very likely that over half of that content wouldn't 
have been even writable - in an interesting way, so to speak - if the 
form of dialogue wasn't used. Some stuff just can't be properly 
conveyed unless you're 'handsawing CRABCUSTARD' and sitting on a 
hobby-horse that goes by the name 'Affective Fallacy.' Maybe that's 
just me. ;-)

At one point, Elkins attributed quite a bit of pro-Crouch Sr. 
invective to TBAY!Eileen, and knowing that Real!Eileen hadn't said 
*half* of the stuff in there, the distinguished lady threw in a 
disclaimer, and an explanation that she was trying to stick to 
the 'canon' of Eileen's posts.

I really appreciated reading that, and realized that even an 
*established* member like Elkins was conscious of the possible danger 
that could be derived from putting words into people's mouths.

So, if I had to accurately express my position on TBAY, it's this: 
I'm often hesitant to jump in because I don't want to wrongfully 
attribute a position to someone. 

For instance, how embarassing would it be to make Pippin a Lupin-
lover in a TBAY post?

As an ignorant newbie, who didn't then - and to a large degree still 
doesn't now - necessarily know all of the participants' various 
positions on the canon, I was mostly concerned that I'd cite someone 
incorrectly, or attribute to them a position that they wouldn't 
ordinarily take on their own.

My own compromise for this was to participate in a way that wasn't 
necessarily discussion oriented, but that employed the fictive style 
of TBAY. For instance, I wrote a post after the OoP release in which 
I characterized the fraud that is the Heir of Gryffindor theory 
(sorry, had to get my digs in there <g>) as a balding old man with 
tattered robes who couldn't let go of his past glory and instead 
spent all of his time hanging around his ruined manor house. I cited 
some other discussions that were going on for the sake of setting 
information, but by and large most of the action took place between 
me and the Heir. And let me tell you - it was *delightful* to kick 
the old fraud around a little bit, both figuratively and literally. 

;-)

What am I saying here? TBAY as a format doesn't bother me at all - in 
fact, I find it highly interesting and imaginative. I understand why 
some might not want to participate in the style, and can relate to 
reservations that a new person may have upon first reading a post of 
that nature, and the subsequent reservations one might have about 
jumping right into the fray.

What's the best solution? Well, IMHO it's *not* to try to make TBAY 
go away. My advice? Read up on Hypothetic Alley, and *then,* once 
you're prepared with knowledge, feel free to jump right in. In my 
experience, most of the veterans here are very forgiving and would be 
delighted to welcome some new members to the Safe House, the Canon 
Museum, or on the Bay itself. The more the merrier! ;-)

-Tom




From lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid  Wed Dec 17 22:34:38 2003
From: lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid (lucky_kari at lucky_kari.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 22:34:38 -0000
Subject: Representing Other People in TBAY
In-Reply-To: <brqfvd+11evs@...>
Message-ID: <brqllu+dqdd@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, thomasmwall at y... wrote: 

> At one point, Elkins attributed quite a bit of pro-Crouch Sr. 
> invective to TBAY!Eileen, and knowing that Real!Eileen hadn't said 
> *half* of the stuff in there, the distinguished lady threw in a 
> disclaimer, and an explanation that she was trying to stick to 
> the 'canon' of Eileen's posts.
> 
> I really appreciated reading that, and realized that even an 
> *established* member like Elkins was conscious of the possible danger 
> that could be derived from putting words into people's mouths.

Actually, the Crouch Novenna did perhaps muddy the waters. 

See, I don't think that it's standard for TBAY to make up other
people's dialogue wholesale. It's not some art anyone should have to
learn to TBAY. As Tom notes, personifying a theory is often a good
approach. So is  quoting earlier posts, which is all I did in my
latest "Crouch Redux" post with Debbie. With some unobtrusive "So
thens?" and "What's your theory?" attributed to another listie, it
usually works perfectly fine. (As does having Pip say, "I love MAGIC
DISHWASHER." or Eileen saying "Crouch Sr. is dead sexy." That's
obviously quite safe!)

The only real person I've ever made up substantive dialogue for is
Elkins, and that's always been based off things she's said to me
off-list. A lot of her dialogue in the Crouch novenna was based off
things I'd said off-list, as well. 

But after having me talk so much using my own words and concepts,
Elkins came to one area where she honestly didn't know my opinion. And
there she left that note Tom referred to. I think that sort of
disclaimer would be absolutely necessary that rare time that you're
putting words into someone's mouth that don't spring from that mouth
in the first place. But seriously, I don't think that really happens
often. 

And really it should only be done with the permission of the other
person. And since I'd been literally begging for months to be TBAYed
about the issue, it was quite above board.

Usually, though, I don't think it's an issue that should worry people.

Eileen




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 18 08:29:57 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:29:57 -0000
Subject: About writing to an author (Was : Re: TBAY poll and Majority rule)
In-Reply-To: <brq704+q732@...>
Message-ID: <brroi5+1jgt@...>


North said (on not understanding a TBAY post):

> And I'd feel silly writing to the author and asking about this sort 
> of thing.

Amanda asked :

> Why?

To which Del replies :

I'm not talking for North or anybody else, but here's why *I* would 
feel silly. Maybe it's pride, maybe it's a sign of some deep 
pyschological problem, but I just can't force myself to ask about 
something I feel everyone else has understood. It goes back to 
elementary school at least. I would rather spend a great deal of time 
researching on my own, rather than ask the teacher, if I felt like 
all the other kids had understood that particular point. I didn't 
want to look *stupid*. And it's still the same now. My first instinct 
is always to try and guess, rather than ask. I have to make a 
conscious and big effort to do otherwise.

North said :

> Can't we all work together to find a solution to this?

Amanda replied : 
 
> It seems to me that writing to the author *would* be working 
> together. 

Del answers :

Not for me. Writing to the author would be making a fool of myself. 
It would mean signalling to someone whose work I'm interested in that 
I'm a fool stupid enough not to understand it, which is of course the 
last thing I'd want to do !

Amanda said :
 
> And if you don't understand it, why bother? I mean, nobody follows 
> all the nuances of every single thread. I have never seen that 
> there's all that much of a problem.

Del answers :

Call me a control freak if you like, but it makes me feel stupid to 
not understand something my fellows do. It makes me feel inferior. I 
have this deep-rooted belief that I must be smart to be respectable 
and respected. I guess it's just some kind of inferiority complex, 
but it's very powerful.

Del




From kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 18 16:59:27 2003
From: kkersey at kkersey_austin.yahoo.invalid (kkersey_austin)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:59:27 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <brpn7t+lgav@...>
Message-ID: <brsmdf+1jpt@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, delwynmarch at y... wrote:

> OK, so first of all, I'd like to say that I'm not completely
stupid, 
> guys :-)

Of course not! You've written some of the most interesting, thought
provoking posts in this debate.


Del rebuked Eileen, Laura, and myself for pointing out that Pippin's
example did not have TBAY content:

> Well, I was perfectly aware of that, thanks very much :-) ! I used 
> Pippin's post as an example of how literary metaphors and symbolism 
> can get me lost. 

Del, thanks for the clarification. At least three of assumed that you
*were* talking about TBAY; after all, it was the subject of not only
this thread but your post up to that point. Plus, you introduced your
example by quoting (someone or other) asking for a "snippit of TBAY"
in which the "other-than-English words" can be pointed out. I assumed
that you were answering that request when you wrote "To explain my
problem, I'll quote Pippin who wrote...."

So, anyway, the discussion has moved from TBAY to the more general
problem of accessibility of *any* post, in any format, that uses
metaphor or symbols. Which begs the question - why is TBAY in
particular being scapegoated by some (not you, Del, at least at this
point, if I understand you correctly)if this is the problem?


Much later, Del responded to Laura and myself, who had both tried to
shed some light on some of the references / symbols in Pippin's quote:

> (First of all, I'd like to say that I *do* know both "the pen is 
> mightier than the sword" and "faith, hope and charity". What I did 
> *not* understand was how those concepts were applying to the 
> situation at hand).

Del, I certainly never meant to come across as condescending. When you
wrote "I know all the words here, but I don't get the concepts at all"
I took you at your word. You did after all refer to "a whole
background of symbols and concepts I've never even heard of", though I
see now that perhaps that was a bit of hyperbole.  

In any case, the larger issue still stands - 

There is no disputing that some people find TBAY posts hard to
understand. I see three main issues being cited as reasons why TBAY
can be inaccessible for some people:

1. Lack of the right mindset to understand metaphorical discussion.  
2. Unfamiliarity with TBAY (or more general list) list history - i.e.
who is who, various theories, running jokes or themes, and so on.
3. Lack of specific knowledge to understand the particular symbols or
cultural references used.

Seems to me that all of these issues can apply to discursive posts as
easily as TBAY. 

Even in *this* discussion, various metaphors/models have been used to
try to explain the "mindset" issue. The irony has not been lost on Del
and Sandy, at least. And I do find it amusing that Eileen's brother
was wandering through these discussions in way that reminded me a bit
of the nascent TBAY!George... 

Perhaps Eileen's brother is a better example of Issue #2, though, as a
recurring reference, possibly in danger of becoming a running joke. I
really don't see any way that this can be avoided. One of the greatest
strengths of the list, something I greatly appreciate, has been the
effort put into all the accessory files (e.g. Fantastic posts,
Hypothetic Ally) so that newcomers can learn and participate in the
list culture and history.

The third issue, that of cultural or education background, was
addressed eloquently by Del. 


I do want to say in my own defense, though, about this that I said:
> All the concepts and symbols she used were pretty standard to
> English literature and culture.

Del is concerned that people who are not from a Western, Christian,
Anglo-Saxon background are being excluded:

> And I quite resent being told that I am expected to know what an
> American would, or to instinctively react like a Brit would.

Oh dear! I really thought for a long time about how to phrase my
thoughts in inclusive language. I am truly sorry if I did not succeed.
The fact is, the Harry Potter opus *is* a work of English literature,
written by an author who is from a Western, Christian, Anglo-Saxon
background. A certain familiarity with the literary and cultural
context of the books is *not* a huge leap. (I'm thinking about writing
in an exception here for MAGIC DISHWASHER and its Stanislavian MDDT,
but then, would I have to explain that darned appliance, which I don't
understand myself? Or Stanislavian analysis, or whatever it's called?
Too much work! Perhaps I'll just not make that point, in the interest
of inclusivity. Hrmph.) As Del pointed out, if every post was
scrutinized by its author for any trace of possible confusion, if
every cliche had to be explained, I doubt that *anyone* would find
much readable or writeable. But where to draw the line?

I think Del rightly put the responsibility of asking for clarification
and explanation when needed on the reader, and the responsibilty of
being open to such questions on the writer. In my experience, which is
necessarily limited lately, questions of this sort have been answered
graciously. 

In that spirit, I didn't quite catch this:

> I am absolutely hermetic to law.

???

Anyway, I agree with Del's conclusion that diversity is a good thing,
even though if it means that not everyone will always understand 
everything (never an expectation on my part anyway). As long as we are
all doing our best to be welcoming of questions, discussion, and even
a bit of confusion, I think it will be OK.

Karen




From editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 18 21:44:23 2003
From: editor at mandolabar.yahoo.invalid (Amanda)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:44:23 -0000
Subject: About writing to an author (Was : Re: TBAY poll and Majority rule)
In-Reply-To: <brroi5+1jgt@...>
Message-ID: <brt73n+b95k@...>

> Amanda had said : 
>  
> > It seems to me that writing to the author *would* be working 
> > together. 
> 
> Del answers :
> 
> Not for me. Writing to the author would be making a fool of myself. 
> It would mean signalling to someone whose work I'm interested in 
that 
> I'm a fool stupid enough not to understand it, which is of course 
the 
> last thing I'd want to do !

Amanda:

This is a perception thing, I can see. I'd have considered it 
complimentary to the author that they intrigued me enough to warrant 
the effort of a follow-up for clarification. As the author of some 
things that have been asked about, that's certainly the way I took 
it. Wow--somebody *read* what I said, and wanted to know 
more/understand better/etc. !! Total compliment, and in many cases 
helped me refine my point by making me think it through again in 
responding to them.

> Amanda had said :
>  
> > And if you don't understand it, why bother? I mean, nobody 
follows 
> > all the nuances of every single thread. I have never seen that 
> > there's all that much of a problem.
> 
> Del answers :
> 
> Call me a control freak if you like, but it makes me feel stupid to 
> not understand something my fellows do. It makes me feel inferior. 
I 
> have this deep-rooted belief that I must be smart to be respectable 
> and respected. I guess it's just some kind of inferiority complex, 
> but it's very powerful.

Amanda:

Another perception thing. Why do you believe everyone else 
understands it? It's entirely likely that many people had the same 
confusion you did, and nobody wanted to be the one to raise their 
hand (on or offline), and so a great point went non-understood.

I have tended to come right out and say "Hey, maybe I'm stupid, but I 
couldn't follow this" onlist, myself, on the assumption that, given 
our size, at least a couple other interested people couldn't follow 
it either and would appreciate me being the one to request 
explanation.

I don't think I'm stupid--but there are certainly ways of putting 
ideas together, analytical approaches, etc., that I won't be able to 
readily follow. Not everyone accesses information the same way. 

[On a related note, if someone I am carrying on a thread with is 
intellectual snob enough to condescend in explaining, or otherwise 
imply that I am mentally inferior if I can't follow their brilliant 
reasoning--well, hey, I want to know that too. Again, though--that's 
*their* perception, not mine.]

This is fascinating, the different perspectives I've been seeing here.

~Amanda




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 18 22:04:42 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid)
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 17:04:42 -0500
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] About writing to an author (Was : Re: TBAY poll and Majority rule)
Message-ID: <7C214367.1F73A6C5.4B073798@...>

I agree with Del.  I would feel so dumb asking an author what they meant by writing what they did.  Oddly enough, we had this conversation in English class today.  Maybe what my teacher said applies here as well: No one could possibly think that anyone on this list is dumb, because we joined a group that discusses HP in-depth (of course, she was talking about English class, but ya know).  The hard thing about explaining TBAY is that even if you did e-mail the author and others had the same question, it wouldn't be answered on-list.  Wouldn't asking who Sneaky was or the Safe House is be a little off topic?

Oryomai



From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 19 09:50:29 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 09:50:29 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <brsmdf+1jpt@...>
Message-ID: <bruhl5+mtub@...>

Karen wrote :

> You've written some of the most interesting, thought provoking 
> posts in this debate.

(Del blushes deeply) Well thanks Karen !!

> At least three of assumed that you *were* talking about TBAY; after 
> all, it was the subject of not only this thread but your post up to 
> that point. Plus, you introduced your example by quoting (someone 
> or other) asking for a "snippit of TBAY" in which the "other-than-
> English words" can be pointed out. I assumed that you were 
> answering that request when you wrote "To explain my problem, I'll 
> quote Pippin who wrote...."

Argh, really sorry about that ! I can get stuck in my own logic 
sometimes, and not manage to see whether other people will follow my 
reasoning.

> So, anyway, the discussion has moved from TBAY to the more general
> problem of accessibility of *any* post, in any format, that uses
> metaphor or symbols. Which begs the question - why is TBAY in
> particular being scapegoated by some (not you, Del, at least at this
> point, if I understand you correctly)if this is the problem?

My answer to that question is that we weren't aware of the bigger 
picture before. We were aware of the fact that TBAY was a problem, 
but I think we just assumed quite logically that it was its own 
problem, not the most visible example of a bigger problem.

As you said later in your post :

> There is no disputing that some people find TBAY posts hard to
> understand. I see three main issues being cited as reasons why TBAY
> can be inaccessible for some people:
> 
> 1. Lack of the right mindset to understand metaphorical 
> discussion.  
> 2. Unfamiliarity with TBAY (or more general list) list history - 
> i.e. who is who, various theories, running jokes or themes, and so 
> on.
> 3. Lack of specific knowledge to understand the particular symbols 
> or cultural references used.
> 
> Seems to me that all of these issues can apply to discursive posts 
> as easily as TBAY. 

I agree, but :

1. It's pretty rare that *all 3* issues appear at once in a 
discursive post, while it can be pretty common in a TBAY post.
2. And even if they do, they are much less visible in a discursive 
post than in TBAY posts. I'm not saying they are necessarily much 
less *present*, just that it's much harder to figure out they are the 
reasons we might not understand a discursive post. IMO anyway.

Which is why I advocate that we keep TBAY on the list (yes, I changed 
my mind, that's what education does to me ;-), since it is not a 
problem in itself, just the expression of a bigger problem that we 
cannot do much about. 

As you said :

> One of the greatest strengths of the list, something I greatly 
> appreciate, has been the effort put into all the accessory files 
> (e.g. Fantastic posts, Hypothetic Ally) so that newcomers can learn 
> and participate in the list culture and history.

Things like that can help shed light on some parts of the problem, 
which is the best we can hope for.

About symbols now :
 
> Much later, Del responded to Laura and myself, who had both tried to
> shed some light on some of the references / symbols in Pippin's 
> quote:
>
> Del, I certainly never meant to come across as condescending.

Huh. Sorry I made you feel bad, but I never thought you were being 
condescending, and I didn't mean to sound hurt, not this time 
anyway ;-) I was just trying to explain what my problem was, since I 
realised I hadn't been precise enough. Boy, it's SO HARD to get the 
right nuance of tone through sometimes :-) !

> I see now that perhaps that was a bit of hyperbole.  

Heh heh :-) ! When I read "hyperbole", the first thing that comes to 
my mind is the mathematical concept, not the literary one. Always 
gives me quite a jolt ;-) And it's just another example of how one 
word can translate into different concepts for different people.
But anyway, I'll iron my hands later (need them to type now) for 
having used an hyperbole in a discussion that required precision and 
exactitude. (Just kidding ;-)

About cultural issues :

> Oh dear! I really thought for a long time about how to phrase my
> thoughts in inclusive language. I am truly sorry if I did not 
> succeed.

Nah, don't worry, you did a pretty good job :-) But it was a perfect 
opportunity for me to delve deeper into what I know from personal 
experience to be a not-so-obvious problem.

> The fact is, the Harry Potter opus *is* a work of English 
> literature, written by an author who is from a Western, Christian, 
> Anglo-Saxon background. A certain familiarity with the literary and 
> cultural context of the books is *not* a huge leap.

The way I see it, there are 2 inter-mingled issues here.

First, you're right of course when you say that JKR is from a WCAS 
(Western Christian Anglo-Saxon, I'm sick to spell it out :-) 
background. Which means that in order to understand her books more 
fully, you have to be familiar with that background.

But her books are famous all over the world, not just in WCAS 
countries. Which means that many readers are not necessarily familiar 
with that background.

So what I was trying to exlain is that we on this list can assume 
that JKR wrote from that WCAS background, BUT we can *not* assume 
that everyone *is from* that background or even *knows* it. There is 
a very fine line here, I'm not sure I'm being clear, but this is 
important.

What matters when we talk to each other is not JKR's background, it's 
OURS. If I dare using my language metaphor again, it's like studying 
Harry Potter in French : we know JKR is British, so we know we must 
be careful not to apply our French background on her *works*. But we 
still study them in French, and we speak French among ourselves. We 
can use French idioms, French symbolism, French whatever you want. We 
can use our French background to talk among ourselves. We don't have 
to use a British background.

It's the same on the list : we each speak from our own background, 
which doesn't necessarily happens to be JKR's.

Of course, one could say that the fact that JKR's background also 
happens to be the background of a majority of listees is enough to 
determine that it is the "official" background of the list. I would 
understand that, and I could live with it. I already did, on other 
occasions, on other lists.

But I think HP is very different from most other lists, because of 
its HUGE international success. It's not like it was a success for 10 
or 20 years in WCAS countries before it became famous in other 
countries. No, the success was almost international right way, in 
barely 3 or 4 years ! So I think it would be doing the list of major 
disservice to make it less welcoming to non-WCAS people. We have the 
unheard of, amazing possibility of discussing a hugely popular work 
in progress with people from all over the world ! Let's make that 
diversity our good fortune. 

> As Del pointed out, if every post was
> scrutinized by its author for any trace of possible confusion, if
> every cliche had to be explained, I doubt that *anyone* would find
> much readable or writeable. But where to draw the line?
> 
> I think Del rightly put the responsibility of asking for 
> clarification and explanation when needed on the reader, and the 
> responsibilty of being open to such questions on the writer. In my 
> experience, which is necessarily limited lately, questions of this 
> sort have been answered graciously. 

Yup, I don't see any other way to go. Any other ideas, anyone ?

> In that spirit, I didn't quite catch this:
> 
> > I am absolutely hermetic to law.
> 
> ???

LOL !!! Well, sorry, my mistake, I think this should have been "Law", 
with a capital L, not just "law". You know, the school subject, the 
stuff lawyers eat for breakfast, lunch, and dinner ? I did maths and 
physics in University, so it's amazing to me when people get lost 
with "simple" high school maths, but if you start telling me about 
even the simplest basics of Law, my mind turns blank, and I become 
the female version of Crabbe (or Goyle, pick your favorite :-)

> Anyway, I agree with Del's conclusion that diversity is a good 
> thing, even though if it means that not everyone will always 
> understand everything (never an expectation on my part anyway). As 
> long as we are all doing our best to be welcoming of questions, 
> discussion, and even a bit of confusion, I think it will be OK.

Confusion, cacophony, havoc, yeah !!! So, has anyone finally figured 
out that I am a would-be Evil OverLady, trying to crush that list to 
smithereens ?

...

...

Bad Del, bad Del !!! (Sounds of fingers crushed in the door...)





From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 19 17:59:51 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:59:51 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <bruhl5+mtub@...>
Message-ID: <brvean+8a1n@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> Karen wrote :
> 
> About cultural issues :
> 
> > Oh dear! I really thought for a long time about how to phrase my
> > thoughts in inclusive language. I am truly sorry if I did not 
> > succeed.
> 
> Nah, don't worry, you did a pretty good job :-) But it was a 
perfect 
> opportunity for me to delve deeper into what I know from personal 
> experience to be a not-so-obvious problem.
> 
> > The fact is, the Harry Potter opus *is* a work of English 
> > literature, written by an author who is from a Western, 
Christian, 
> > Anglo-Saxon background. A certain familiarity with the literary 
and 
> > cultural context of the books is *not* a huge leap.
> 
> The way I see it, there are 2 inter-mingled issues here.
> 
> First, you're right of course when you say that JKR is from a WCAS 
> (Western Christian Anglo-Saxon, I'm sick to spell it out :-) 
> background. Which means that in order to understand her books more 
> fully, you have to be familiar with that background.
> 
> But her books are famous all over the world, not just in WCAS 
> countries. Which means that many readers are not necessarily 
familiar 
> with that background.
> 
> So what I was trying to exlain is that we on this list can assume 
> that JKR wrote from that WCAS background, BUT we can *not* assume 
> that everyone *is from* that background or even *knows* it. There 
is 
> a very fine line here, I'm not sure I'm being clear, but this is 
> important.
> 

Haggridd:   This is quite an important point.  See my discussion 
below.


> What matters when we talk to each other is not JKR's background, 
it's 
> OURS. If I dare using my language metaphor again, it's like 
studying 
> Harry Potter in French : we know JKR is British, so we know we 
must 
> be careful not to apply our French background on her *works*. But 
we 
> still study them in French, and we speak French among ourselves. 
We 
> can use French idioms, French symbolism, French whatever you want. 
We 
> can use our French background to talk among ourselves. We don't 
have 
> to use a British background.
> 
> It's the same on the list : we each speak from our own background, 
> which doesn't necessarily happens to be JKR's.
> 
> Of course, one could say that the fact that JKR's background also 
> happens to be the background of a majority of listees is enough to 
> determine that it is the "official" background of the list. I 
would 
> understand that, and I could live with it. I already did, on other 
> occasions, on other lists.
> 

> ...
> 
> Bad Del, bad Del !!! (Sounds of fingers crushed in the door...)


Corect me if I misunderstand you, but I infer from what you have 
written that, in the interests of some vague goal of inclusivity, 
you would destroy all that diversity which you previously celebrated.
Why must there be one set of symbols, metaphors what have you on 
this list?   Who says that this so-called "WCAS" background is 
excluding persons of any background from understanding and/or 
participating in any thread, including TBAY?  You are advocating a 
course of action similar to those idiot editors at Scholastic who 
eliminated the orition British idioms-- yea, even the title-- in PS 
because the poor, befuddled Americans couldn't cope with jumpers and 
triners and the like.  A great part of the charm of reading the book 
is to see the diffent modes of expressing the same ideas ON THEIR 
OWN TERMS.  Likewise, understanding a post from a liste from Israel, 
on the poster's own terms, is more enjoyable simply for the 
difference of mindset and backrground, and how it afects the 
language of the post.  The same with this invention of yours, the 
WCAS-- which is by no means as homogenousor monolithic as you would 
make it.

Why force all listees into the same mold, one of which that 
the "inclusivity police would approve?

Haggridd




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 19 18:07:05 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:07:05 -0000
Subject: The science/humanities dichotomy; list demographics
In-Reply-To: <bruhl5+mtub@...>
Message-ID: <brveo9+qf1e@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> wrote:

> Heh heh :-) ! When I read "hyperbole", the first thing that comes to 
> my mind is the mathematical concept, not the literary one. Always 
> gives me quite a jolt ;-) And it's just another example of how one 
> word can translate into different concepts for different people.

There seems to be a contiuum of "ways of thinking" that has hard
science at one end and art & humanities at the other.  Notice that I
didn't use the terms "concrete" and "abstract."  Mathematics may have
plenty of practical applications, but it's also got all kinds of
theoretical/hypothetical elements to it. Using numbers and symbols to
express math is another form of abstraction and metaphorizing. (I
couldn't grasp theoretical mathematics with an industrial vise).

I lean toward the art end of the continuum, but my profession
(technical writer) necessitates communication with people at the other
end (harware/software engineers).

The interactions are sometimes rather comical.

For example, I was to write a technical white paper for Novell's new
"ZENworks for Servers" software.  Unlike most product managers (who
think that a few PowerPoint slides give us enough information to write
a detailed description of proprietary technology), the ZFS folks
invited me down to Novell to see the product for itself.  After two
hours of demo, I still had no idea what the product did or why.

So a few days later they drove up to my office, set up the software in
our lab, and spent another two hours messing with it and asking
questions.  Finally, I got what they were talking about.  After they
left, my colleagues came in to see what the deal was, and I was able
to explain it to them in 5 minutes. 

Had I been a software engineer or a network administrator, I would
have known what the Novell folks were talking about after five
minutes. They didn't know how much I knew about network
administration, so they just started talking about the details, when
what I needed was a big-picture explanation of the problem and how
their product addressed it *before* the details would make sense.  

On another job, I was working on a software process improvement
journal for the Air Force.  One of the journal staff had a little "Zen
garden" toy (no relation to ZENworks) that comprised a shallow box of
sand, a few small rocks, and a wooden rake.  The idea is that to
relieve stress or boredom, you rake the sand into patterns and place
the rocks artistically.  (I've uploaded two pics to the photos section
of this group to show what I mean.)

A couple of software engineers wandered in from the other room and
look at the little sand box.  "What's this?" asked one. "A Zen
garden," my colleague replied. 

He studied it for a minute. "What are the rules?" 

Well, there aren't any rules, you just rake the sand and place the
rocks at your own whim and pleasure, but I suspect that the engineer
wouldn't find that terribly interesting. 

I think that we're all in agreement that having thinking styles from
both ends of the spectrum makes the list that much more interesting,
not to mention educational.  I know I've learned TONs from the main
list, and not just about Harry Potter.

As for what Del said about diverse backgrounds on the list, I agree
that we can't assume that we all have the same cultural/literary
background as JKR.  I am a fairly well-read person in the "WCAS"
tradition, but I majored in Spanish lit, so there are some
considerable gaps in my English lit knowledge, such as the alchemical
symbolism and the "Inklings" tradition.

To see what our list demographics were, I went to the main list and
found a closed poll wherein people had indicated their world region. 
There were 1012 respondents, and the results are as follows: 

8.99%  United Kingdom (England/Scotland/Wales) and Ireland 	
8.99%  Continental Europe 	
0.40%  Middle East/North Africa 
0.10%  Africa, sub-Saharan   
0.49%  Russia and former Soviet Union 
0.30%  Asia, China/Japan
1.48%  Asia, Southeast/Indonesia/Pacific Islands
4.25%  Australia
2.87%  North America, Canada (Western) 
3.06%  North America, Canada (Eastern)
6.82%  North America, US (New England)
11.76% North America, US (Eastern Seaboard) 
13.44% North America, US (Southeast)
16.01% North America, US (Midwest)
1.19%  North America, US (Great Plains)
2.77%  North America, US (Rocky Mountains)  
5.43%  North America, US (Southwest)
9.78%  North America, US (Pacific Coast) 
0.10%  North America, Mexico
0.40%  Central America/Caribbean 
1.09%  South America
0.30%  India and Pakistan

When you total Great Britian, Australia, Canada, and the U.S., you get
86.37%.  Adding continental Europe puts it at 95.36%.

I know this is hardly a scientific poll, but I think it demonstrates
that most of the readership will share *most* of JKR's cultural
assumptions. However, being an extremely well-read and well-educated
woman, JKR has an intellectual background that is still beyond the
reach of most of the English-speaking world.  That's so totally cool I
can hardly stand it.  There's nothing like New Stuff To Learn to get
my boat floating.

Anyway.  I'm glad we're articulating this argument here, though I
suspect Del might be more comfortable demonstrating the problem with a
solid set of equations. :D

--Dicentra






From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 19 18:16:01 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 18:16:01 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <brvean+8a1n@...>
Message-ID: <brvf91+k058@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Haggridd" <jkusalavagemd at y...>
wrote:
> --- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
> wrote:

> > So what I was trying to exlain is that we on this list can assume 
> > that JKR wrote from that WCAS background, BUT we can *not* assume 
> > that everyone *is from* that background or even *knows* it. There 
> > is a very fine line here, I'm not sure I'm being clear, but this is 
> > important. 
 
> Corect me if I misunderstand you, but I infer from what you have 
> written that, in the interests of some vague goal of inclusivity, 
> you would destroy all that diversity which you previously celebrated.
> Why must there be one set of symbols, metaphors what have you on 
> this list?   

I think that you might have misunderstood Del.  Although her earlier
posts tended to advocate a normalization of communication styles, her
position has shifted since Eileen pointed out that the problem seems
to be with ways of thinking and communication styles rather than with
TBAY itself.

> You are advocating a 
> course of action similar to those idiot editors at Scholastic who 
> eliminated the original British idioms-- yea, even the title-- in PS 
> because the poor, befuddled Americans couldn't cope with jumpers and 
> trainers and the like. 

I think that Del has backed off from that stance.  Instead, we seem to
be coming to the idea of putting a Brit-American glossary in the
appendix of the HP books (which metaphorically refers to
HypotheticAlley and InishAlley as glossary resources).

Which, incidentally, leads us back to the ADMIN question that started
it all: what do people need to know to better understand TBAY?

--Dicentra




From pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 20 00:11:06 2003
From: pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid (bluesqueak)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 00:11:06 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
Message-ID: <bs042q+p36a@...>


Update to our recent ADMIN,
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPFGU-Feedback/message/212


We recently learned that two tables in the Database section of the
main list, "Birthdays" and "Recommended Reading" were deleted. We
have since managed to restore them from back-up copies. We have
reason to believe they were deleted by the disgruntled party or 
parties who threatened the HPfGU community. Sad and petty? 
Absolutely.

In order for us to protect the other databases, we have had to 
change the group settings. This means that the Database and the 
Files sections can't be open to members uploads. This has some 
implications for our members, as our Files section includes several 
sections (humour, essays) that members have always been able to add 
to themselves. [We've managed to tweak the database section; members 
can still add data to the databases.]

We would welcome your thoughts on how we can re-establish a files
section that allows member input without leaving files vulnerable to
the same kind of deletion that happened to our database section.
Please feel free to share your views on the Feedback list, or send 
an e-mail to the owner address.

Lastly, if your birthday is in the birthday database, please double-
check your entry.  We have observed some glitches in the restored 
version of the Recommended Reading database (which sometimes occur 
when databases are imported) and we wouldn't want to get anyone's 
birthday wrong. Of course, if your birthday isn't in the Birthday 
Database, feel free to add it in. [grin]

We do have some good news: we mentioned in a previous ADMIN that one
of our administrative lists had been deleted; fortunately, Yahoo
responded to our messages about this, and the admin list *was*
restored.

Pippy Elf
For the List Administration team





From siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 20 01:16:34 2003
From: siskiou at siskiou97405.yahoo.invalid (Susanne)
Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2003 17:16:34 -0800
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs03oq+n4vg@...>
References: <bs03oq+n4vg@...>
Message-ID: <7324526978.20031219171634@...>



Hi,

Friday, December 19, 2003, 4:05:46 PM, bluesqueak wrote:


> Update to our recent ADMIN, 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/86659

> We recently learned that two tables in the Database section of the
> main list, "Birthdays" and "Recommended Reading" were deleted. We
> have since managed to restore them from back-up copies.

> Lastly, if your birthday is in the birthday database, please double-
> check your entry.  We have observed some glitches in the restored 
> version of the Recommended Reading database (which sometimes occur 
> when databases are imported) and we wouldn't want to get anyone's 
> birthday wrong. Of course, if your birthday isn't in the Birthday 
> Database, feel free to add it in. [grin]

I went to see if I could add myself to the birthday
database, but found that the option "database" isn't listed
at all for the main list.

Am I the only one who can't see the option, or did something
happen to the database since you posted?

-- 
Best regards,
 Susanne                           mailto:siskiou at ...

Visit our two pet bunnies: http://home.earthlink.net/~siskiou/





From carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 20 20:57:41 2003
From: carmenharms at snazzzybird.yahoo.invalid (snazzzybird)
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 20:57:41 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <7324526978.20031219171634@...>
Message-ID: <bs2d45+tab0@...>

--- Susanne <siskiou at m...> wrote:

> I went to see if I could add myself to the birthday
> database, but found that the option "database" isn't listed
> at all for the main list.
> 
> Am I the only one who can't see the option, or did something
> happen to the database since you posted?

snazzzybird sez --

Nope, you are not the only one!  I don't have that option either.  
I've been watching the lists, hoping an explanation will be 
forthcoming.

--snazzzybird, who can't remember if she previously added her 
birthday or not




From kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 17:32:48 2003
From: kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:32:48 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs2d45+tab0@...>
Message-ID: <bs4lg0+pe58@...>

Susanne <siskiou at m...> wrote:
> > I went to see if I could add myself to the birthday
> > database, but found that the option "database" isn't listed
> > at all for the main list.
> > 
> > Am I the only one who can't see the option, or did something
> > happen to the database since you posted?

snazzzybird <carmenharms at y...> wrote:
> snazzzybird sez --
> 
> Nope, you are not the only one!  I don't have that option either.  
> I've been watching the lists, hoping an explanation will be 
> forthcoming.


Hi Suzanne, snazzzybird, everyone--

Sorry about this; the person(s) we've been having problems with 
thought it would be amusing to screw up some of the database tables.  
Fortunately it's very easily fixed.

I've created a text file version of the Birthday database info, and 
have uploaded it here, on the main list, and on OTC.

If everyone could verify that their info is correct (birthday date 
and current email address, if you want to include that), that would 
be great.  Plus, anyone who'd like to add their birthday to the list, 
please just drop us a line at the owner address:

HPforGrownups-owner@ yahoogroups.com

Thanks!

--Kelley




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 22 01:36:36 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 17:36:36 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
References: <bs4lg0+pe58@...>
Message-ID: <003201c3c82c$09b1a860$a6706751@kathryn>



Sorry about this; the person(s) we've been having problems with
thought it would be amusing to screw up some of the database tables.
Fortunately it's very easily fixed.


I was just wondering are all the files members only? Because if so that
would mean the person doing this is still a member, and I'd have to wonder
*why* since they're doing this stuff and if not, why don't you make thm
members only so they're protected?

K




From kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 18:02:20 2003
From: kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:02:20 -0000
Subject: Group Files, Database, etc. (Re: ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups)
In-Reply-To: <003201c3c82c$09b1a860$a6706751@kathryn>
Message-ID: <bs4n7c+ge7s@...>

Kathryn <kcawte at n...> wrote:
 
> I was just wondering are all the files members only? >>>

Yes, they are.

> Because if so that would mean the person doing this is still a 
> member, >>>

That's right; the person(s) keep creating fake ids and are trying to 
do their damage that way.

> and I'd have to wonder *why* since they're doing this stuff and if
> not, why don't you make thm members only so they're protected? >>>

They are; we've tried to avoid how restrictive the various features 
have to be, so genuine list members can still access and upload and 
so on.  The way the groups are now set, members can view everything 
but for the databases (I'm creating text files of those so the info 
can still be accessed, though), but for members to upload anything 
(links, pics, files, entries for any of the database tables, etc.) 
all you'd have to do is contact us.  Working around this is very 
easily done.

--Kelley







From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 18:06:45 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:06:45 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4lg0+pe58@...>
Message-ID: <bs4nfl+5fkb@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelleythompson at g...> 
wrote:

> 
> I've created a text file version of the Birthday database info, and 
> have uploaded it here, on the main list, and on OTC.
> 
> If everyone could verify that their info is correct (birthday date 
> and current email address, if you want to include that), that would 
> be great.  Plus, anyone who'd like to add their birthday to the 
list, 
> please just drop us a line at the owner address:
> 

Carolyn:
Puzzled question - why would you want to hold this info about members 
anyway ? 





From kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 18:22:32 2003
From: kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:22:32 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4nfl+5fkb@...>
Message-ID: <bs4od8+4874@...>

Carolyn:
> Puzzled question - why would you want to hold this info about 
members anyway ? >>>


The birthday info?  This is just for sending the birthday greetings 
on OTC (by Sheryll, our "Birthday" elf).  Or do you mean something 
else?  (I have a feeling I'm confused here. <g>)

--Kelley






From carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 18:38:42 2003
From: carolynwhite2 at a_reader2003.yahoo.invalid (a_reader2003)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:38:42 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4od8+4874@...>
Message-ID: <bs4pbi+42vm@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Kelley" <kelleythompson at g...> 
wrote:
> Carolyn:
> > Puzzled question - why would you want to hold this info about 
> members anyway ? >>>
> 
> 
> The birthday info?  This is just for sending the birthday greetings 
> on OTC (by Sheryll, our "Birthday" elf).  Or do you mean something 
> else?  (I have a feeling I'm confused here. <g>)
> 
> --Kelley

Carolyn:
Sorry, no doubt its a reserved Brit thing, but it just seemed a bit 
OTT to me, but now I see it is just OTC...<g>




From kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid  Sun Dec 21 18:58:01 2003
From: kelleythompson at kelleyscorpio.yahoo.invalid (Kelley)
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2003 18:58:01 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4pbi+42vm@...>
Message-ID: <bs4qfp+ocjm@...>

> > Kelley:
> > The birthday info?  This is just for sending the birthday 
greetings on OTC (by Sheryll, our "Birthday" elf).  Or do you mean 
something else?  (I have a feeling I'm confused here. <g>)
> > 
 
> Carolyn:
> Sorry, no doubt its a reserved Brit thing, but it just seemed a bit 
> OTT to me, but now I see it is just OTC...<g> >>>>

LOL!  Ah.  Yes, our next project is to have copies of everyone's 
dental records, blood type, a DNA swab, and the name of the first boy 
you ever kissed.  All a part of our Plan ... mwahahahaaaa.

:-D

--Kelley





From Ali at alhewison.yahoo.invalid  Mon Dec 22 20:56:46 2003
From: Ali at alhewison.yahoo.invalid (Ali)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 20:56:46 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4pbi+42vm@...>
Message-ID: <bs7lqe+p68e@...>

 Carolyn wrote:-

>>> Sorry, no doubt its a reserved Brit thing, but it just seemed a 
bit OTT to me, but now I see it is just OTC...<g><<<

But even reserved Brits have birthdays!

Ali,

a very shy Leo Brit




From kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 23 05:00:53 2003
From: kcawte at slytherinspirit.yahoo.invalid (Kathryn Cawte)
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2003 21:00:53 -0800
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] Re: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
References: <bs7lqe+p68e@...>
Message-ID: <003001c3c911$c2b69b00$a6706751@kathryn>


But even reserved Brits have birthdays!

Ali,

a very shy Leo Brit


lol - well said

K

a Taurean Brit - who feels she has 5 months before she needs to wonder if
she's in the database or not, plenty of time to fix things.




From pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid  Tue Dec 23 11:32:21 2003
From: pip at bluesqueak.yahoo.invalid (bluesqueak)
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2003 11:32:21 -0000
Subject: ADMIN: Databases
Message-ID: <bs9945+r5u0@...>

Following our recent admin in message 317, we'd like to update you 
on the vanishing Main List databases.

The previous admin informed you that our Main List databases were 
maliciously deleted, and had been restored from backup. Shortly 
after, a second attack was made in which false entries were made 
into three of the databases.

Quite a lot of false entries; several hundred, in fact. ;-)

The admin team decided to take the databases offline until we could
work out a system that still allows members to read the databases,
and will also allow them to be quickly updated.

We apologise that we didn't inform you of this earlier; our first
concern was to find a way to restore the Main List databases in a 
tamper-proof form. We didn't want to send out an endless series of 
administrative updates.

Currently, all the Main List databases are in read only format.
They've been edited so that they can be restored from backup copies
in a matter of minutes. All members can read them; if you want to
add an entry then, for the time being it will be necessary to email 
HPforGrownups-Owner at yahoogroups.com

List administration will then make the updates.

Some entries may have been lost in the process of editing the backup
copies for speed of loading; please notify us of any errors or 
omissions in the Inish Alley database, the Birthday database and the
Recommended Reading database.

Our apologies for these problems


Pippy Elf
for List Administration.





From lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 25 00:15:09 2003
From: lupinesque at lupinesque.yahoo.invalid (Amy Z)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:15:09 -0000
Subject: [HPforGrownups] ADMIN: An update on the threat to our groups
In-Reply-To: <bs4od8+4874@...>
Message-ID: <bsda6d+8e5i@...>

Carolyn wrote a:

> > Puzzled question - why would you want to hold this info about 
> members anyway ? >>>

Kelley wrote:

> The birthday info?  This is just for sending the birthday 
greetings 
> on OTC (by Sheryll, our "Birthday" elf).  

And clarification:  the birthday list is voluntary.  Those who want 
others to know their birthdays may put their own info in.  
Reserved Brits, or people who have existed since before the 
dawn of time and don't have birthdays, may refrain.  ;-)

Amy Z




From SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 25 00:22:27 2003
From: SnapesSlytherin at talia_dawn_3.yahoo.invalid (Blair)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:22:27 -0000
Subject: Was there a decision?
Message-ID: <bsdak3+3hkm@...>

Was there a decision on the fate of TBAY?  I was thinking about a 
post, but I wasn't sure if we're still allowed to make them.

Oryomai




From dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid  Thu Dec 25 00:45:44 2003
From: dicentra at dicentra63.yahoo.invalid (Dicentra spectabilis)
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2003 00:45:44 -0000
Subject: Was there a decision?
In-Reply-To: <bsdak3+3hkm@...>
Message-ID: <bsdbvo+gdde@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Blair" <SnapesSlytherin at a...> 
wrote:
> Was there a decision on the fate of TBAY?  I was thinking about a 
> post, but I wasn't sure if we're still allowed to make them.

TBAY's fate was never in question: it is still allowed on the lists 
despite the objections/reservations of some.  The discussion we had 
here was to generate ideas for making TBAY posts more accessible to 
more people.

--Dicentra, unofficially speaking




From delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid  Fri Dec 26 19:12:47 2003
From: delwynmarch at delwynmarch.yahoo.invalid (Doriane)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 19:12:47 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <brvean+8a1n@...>
Message-ID: <bsi17f+am4o@...>


Sorry for being so late to answer this, but real life holidays kept me
off the Net for a whole week now (not to mention that I wouldn't stand
a chance of winning a fight with my husband for the use of the home
computer, but he's away right now, so... <jk> ;-)

Haggridd wrote:

> Corect me if I misunderstand you, but I infer from what you have 
> written that, in the interests of some vague goal of inclusivity, 
> you would destroy all that diversity which you previously celebrated.

No ! No no no, not at all. Quite the contrary, actually.

> Why must there be one set of symbols, metaphors what have you on 
> this list?

I obviously wasn't clear enough, because that's exactly what I've come
to realise we shouldn't try and enforce.

>  Who says that this so-called "WCAS" background is excluding persons 
> of any background from understanding and/or participating in any 
> thread, including TBAY?

I'm not saying it's excluding people, preventing them from
understanding. I'm just saying that people who come from different
backgrounds might understand things in different ways, and that this
should be OK.  I was defending the fact that though JKR wrote her book
from a specific background, and though most people on the list share
that same background, we shouldn't expect everyone to grasp all the
details of that background.

> You are advocating a course of action similar to those idiot editors 
> at Scholastic who eliminated the orition British idioms-- yea, even 
> the title-- in PS because the poor, befuddled Americans couldn't cope
>  with jumpers and triners and the like.

If it had been up to me, I would have kept the British text, word for
word, and maybe included a glossary at the end, but only because it
was published as a children's book.

>  A great part of the charm of reading the book is to see the diffent 
> modes of expressing the same ideas ON THEIR OWN TERMS.  Likewise, 
> understanding a post from a liste from Israel, on the poster's own 
> terms, is more enjoyable simply for the difference of mindset and 
> backrground, and how it afects the language of the post.

I'd like to point out that you've only expressed your own opinion. I'm
pretty sure that there are people on this list, like in every social
group, who don't want to be bothered with understanding another
poster's background or mindset. They rarely show it on this list
because it's not the spirit of the list, but I'm sure some people
won't read a post from an Israeli listee if it requires them to accept
another mindset. And I myself was doing exactly that with the TBAY
posts, before I realised what I was doing.

> The same with this invention of yours, the WCAS-- which is by no 
> means as homogenousor monolithic as you would make it.

Wow, sorry it angered you that much... And no, I wouldn't make it
monolithic. In fact, I probably wouldn't make it at all, if I had to
explain it in details :-)

> Why force all listees into the same mold, one of which that 
> the "inclusivity police would approve?

??? That goes completely against my purpose ! In the name of
inclusivity, I request that nobody be forced into a specific mold,
that nobody be expected to understand the books in a specific way,
even if that way happens to be the hugely majoritarian way of
understanding of the listees as a whole. 

Del, who thanks Dicentra for defending her :-)





From boggles at omorka.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 27 01:57:30 2003
From: boggles at omorka.yahoo.invalid (Jennifer Boggess Ramon)
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 19:57:30 -0600
Subject: [HPFGU-Feedback] About writing to an author (Was : Re: TBAY
 poll and Majority rule)
In-Reply-To: <brroi5+1jgt@...>
References: <brroi5+1jgt@...>
Message-ID: <p05210601bc1294f9b1c4@[192.168.1.100]>

Oh, dear, I'm so late . . .

At 8:29 AM +0000 12/18/03, Doriane wrote:
>
>I'm not talking for North or anybody else, but here's why *I* would
>feel silly. Maybe it's pride, maybe it's a sign of some deep
>pyschological problem, but I just can't force myself to ask about
>something I feel everyone else has understood. It goes back to
>elementary school at least. I would rather spend a great deal of time
>researching on my own, rather than ask the teacher, if I felt like
>all the other kids had understood that particular point. I didn't
>want to look *stupid*. And it's still the same now. My first instinct
>is always to try and guess, rather than ask. I have to make a
>conscious and big effort to do otherwise.

Oh, boy.  You just hit a nerve for me, there, as I'm a teacher, and 
this is one of my greatest bugaboos.  You see, I *know* I have a 
great number of students for whom this is true, and I also have a few 
students with a bit of a mean streak who really will think the less 
of student who does ask a question.  This, of course, drives me up 
the wall.

As a teacher, I have a workable if inelegant solution: I make sure I 
am available during non-class times, so that those who cannot ask in 
front of the other students out of pride or nervousness have a time 
when they need fear no ill-judgement but mine (which I try to not do, 
of course).

It seems that there is an equally inelegant but just as workable 
solution here: e-mailing the author of the original post off-list.

In both cases, this also gives me or the original poster a chance to 
re-visit the topic in class/the public forum, as if one person has a 
misunderstanding and realizes it it's likely that there are two more 
who have the same misunderstanding and don't realize it.

>Amanda replied :
>
>>  It seems to me that writing to the author *would* be working
>>  together.
>
>Del answers :
>
>Not for me. Writing to the author would be making a fool of myself.
>It would mean signalling to someone whose work I'm interested in that
>I'm a fool stupid enough not to understand it, which is of course the
>last thing I'd want to do !

Trust me: it's highly unlikely that someone whose work is worthwhile 
and who is *not* trying to be obtuse is going to think you a fool for 
asking questions.  Moreover, it's possible (I learned this trick 
myself in school) to ask questions in such a way as to elicit 
information that wasn't in the question - and get compliments on the 
insightfulness of the question.  It's all a matter of phrasing. 
Asking good questions is an art form, not a fool's task at all.


-- 

  - Boggles, aka J. C. B. Ramon			boggles(at)earthlink.net
"It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not possession but the 
act of getting there, which grants the greatest enjoyment. "
	- Gauss, in a Letter to Bolyai, 1808.



From jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid  Sat Dec 27 03:27:44 2003
From: jkusalavagemd at jkusalavagemd.yahoo.invalid (Haggridd)
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2003 03:27:44 -0000
Subject: TBAY and diversity, continued and long
In-Reply-To: <bsi17f+am4o@...>
Message-ID: <bsiu7g+g29i@...>

--- In HPFGU-Feedback at yahoogroups.com, "Doriane" <delwynmarch at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> Sorry for being so late to answer this, but real life holidays 
kept me
> off the Net for a whole week now (not to mention that I wouldn't 
stand
> a chance of winning a fight with my husband for the use of the home
> computer, but he's away right now, so... <jk> ;-)
> 


I'm glad you did.   The various posts defending your position helped 
me understand that our views are actually quite close on these 
matters, after all.

> Haggridd wrote:

> 
> >  A great part of the charm of reading the book is to see the 
diffent 
> > modes of expressing the same ideas ON THEIR OWN TERMS.  
Likewise, 
> > understanding a post from a liste from Israel, on the poster's 
own 
> > terms, is more enjoyable simply for the difference of mindset 
and 
> > backrground, and how it afects the language of the post.
> 
> I'd like to point out that you've only expressed your own opinion. 
I'm
> pretty sure that there are people on this list, like in every 
social
> group, who don't want to be bothered with understanding another
> poster's background or mindset. They rarely show it on this list
> because it's not the spirit of the list, but I'm sure some people
> won't read a post from an Israeli listee if it requires them to 
accept
> another mindset. And I myself was doing exactly that with the TBAY
> posts, before I realised what I was doing.
> 

On the above point, I would maintain that those who could not be 
bothered to see things from the originator's point of view either 
ignore those post s they don't understand, or change their ways. I 
have little sympathy for them.

> > The same with this invention of yours, the WCAS-- which is by no 
> > means as homogenousor monolithic as you would make it.
> 
> Wow, sorry it angered you that much... And no, I wouldn't make it
> monolithic. In fact, I probably wouldn't make it at all, if I had 
to
> explain it in details :-)
> 

 No, please forgive me if you got the impression I was angry.  A 
forceful and enthusiastic argument on my part does not mean I am 
angry.  I still think that there is more variation even wthin 
Western Europe than you contend, but it is an intellectual 
objection.  I am not offended and we are not at war.  I need to 
learn more diplomatic phrasing.  Sorry.

> > Why force all listees into the same mold, one of which that 
> > the "inclusivity police would approve?
> 
> ??? That goes completely against my purpose ! In the name of
> inclusivity, I request that nobody be forced into a specific mold,
> that nobody be expected to understand the books in a specific way,
> even if that way happens to be the hugely majoritarian way of
> understanding of the listees as a whole. 
> 
I can agree with that, provided that you also conced that nobody be 
expecteded to write their posts in a specific way, theirby forcing 
the writr into a specific preconceived mold.

> Del, who thanks Dicentra for defending her :-)

Yes, Dicenta, they were compelling, presuasive and clariying posts.  
I thank you as well\.

Haggridd