What Price Success? Improving Posting Quality on HPfGU

[dumbledore11214]

> C/K:
> In the best posts:
> 
> * the idea is supported by canon, logical thinking or extrapolation
> of theory
> * presents a hitherto unconsidered subject for criticism/comment
> (unlikely right now - but just wait until the new book arrives)
> * casts new light on an old subject or re-assesses old ideas
> * uses the theory, idea or opinion to link disparate canon events or
> characters and perhaps modify or confirm a plot trend/plot arc
> * demonstrates that previous posts on the same subject have been 
read
> and considered, giving references where appropriate
> * invites responses, both pro- and anti-
> * eschews presenting RL personal experiences as having relevance to 
a
> work of fantasy fiction
> * does not pretend wishful thinking is a compelling argument
> * low emotional intensity - humour preferred to passion
> * complies with acceptable standards of grammar and spelling
> * is well presented.
> 
SSS: 

I have a bit of trouble with some of this.  For instance, what 
does HPfGU do with those who lack the time or ability or interest 
to do extensive research?  Are they kicked off?  Told to stay quiet?  
And to prescribe humor or prohibit RL analogies or comparisons 
seems to me to be unrealistic.  Not everyone has the same interests, 
abilities or experiences.  Humor is pretty much always good, but 
can everyone do it?  Prohibiting the RL stuff seems to show a 
personal preference, frankly.  To say that someone who's taught in a 
British boys' school should not bring in his experiences in a compare-
and-contrast to Hogwarts seems too restrictive for my liking, for 
instance.


Alla:

Susan, please forgive me for replying in your post, not in the 
original one.


I snipped the points,which I agree with ( threaded topics do sound 
fantastic) and just wanted to say my agreement with your POV ( of 
course I am only speaking for myself, since I am one of those posters 
who loves bring real life examples into my posts).


I absolutely understand the necessity of regulating the quantity of 
posts AND the form of what we write ( snipping, net speak, etc.)

I strongly disagree with possible regulation of SUBSTANCE of what we 
write, except if the substance of the post is being rude to another 
poster ( but that is being regulated already).

It is just my personal view of course , but as you are saying in your 
next point, who gets to determine the substantive quality of the post?

It is VERY subjective, IMO. I mean sure there are brilliant writers 
on the list, but many people's writing is more or less the same.

So, say you feel my post does not add anything new to the discussion 
and I feel differently, why your POV should prevail ( and my post 
being rejected), if my post is readable and civil otherwise  AND if 
it is not "Me too" post of course.

Rejecting the posts for the "substantive" reasons reminds me of the 
censorship and quite honestly I don't like it at all. Just my 
opinion, of course.

There is enough place on the list for VERY different type of 
arguments, not just different topics, IMO.



 


> Carolyn:
> One of our recommendations was to accept no new members between June
> and August each year, and especially this year with the release of
> HBP on July 16th. I would still be interested to know if Yahoo Group
> rules would permit you to do this.
> 
> SSS:  I don't think I like this idea, but I'd be curious to read 
> other responses.  I prefer a limit on number of posts, even 
possibly 
> that read-only period for newbies, which would slow people down.

Alla:

Susan, I again want to register my agreement with you.



JMO,

Alla