Justin Finch-Fletchley (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
alt_justin) wrote2012-10-26 12:06 pm
alt_justin) wrote2012-10-26 12:06 pm
Entry tags:
I Solemnly Swear That I Am Up To No Good
Hullo, all,
Michael wrote to me and to Sally-Anne last night about assembling a small group of people we trust to practise the ventriloquism spell for Professor Dolohov's class.
First off, I'm willing to meet him this evening, as well as Sally-Anne (and I've told him as much, in Potions this afternoon). But second, It's got me to thinking--again, I'm sorry, what, I know I sound like a broken record--that there ought to be a better way of getting together a small number of people, so that we may arrange other groups like the revising sessions. I say, something larger than the lock but smaller than sending out an open invitation via journal.
Because I well take Michael's point, what, that there are certain persons and certain subjects for which one must take care in agreeing to work together, what? As much as I like Michael, I rather think he's not exactly someone we want to have here, if you follow me. But if we keep on using the lock to tell large groups what's going on, someone's bound to notice, what?
Ron, do you suppose you might ask Fred and George about a clever way to alert a number of people if we wish to meet up? I can only imagine that these little sessions are going to become more frequent.
-Justin
Michael wrote to me and to Sally-Anne last night about assembling a small group of people we trust to practise the ventriloquism spell for Professor Dolohov's class.
First off, I'm willing to meet him this evening, as well as Sally-Anne (and I've told him as much, in Potions this afternoon). But second, It's got me to thinking--again, I'm sorry, what, I know I sound like a broken record--that there ought to be a better way of getting together a small number of people, so that we may arrange other groups like the revising sessions. I say, something larger than the lock but smaller than sending out an open invitation via journal.
Because I well take Michael's point, what, that there are certain persons and certain subjects for which one must take care in agreeing to work together, what? As much as I like Michael, I rather think he's not exactly someone we want to have here, if you follow me. But if we keep on using the lock to tell large groups what's going on, someone's bound to notice, what?
Ron, do you suppose you might ask Fred and George about a clever way to alert a number of people if we wish to meet up? I can only imagine that these little sessions are going to become more frequent.
-Justin
no subject
So are you inviting the rest of us to come revise with you and Corner? Or just telling us what you're doing?
Bundy and I worked on it last night, which was a laugh and a half! I mean, it let's you use the other person like a ventriloquist's dummy, yeah? Hilarious!
Anywiz, if you're asking, I'd come tonight, and I expect Bundy would, too.
And sure, I'll talk to the twins, but I don't really see what you mean about it being a problem to use the lock to arrange getting together. I mean, I get that we can't use it to talk to people we haven't included. That's obvious. But what do you mean about people noticing if we use it?
no subject
Yes, quite right, I'm terribly sorry: Yes, of course, I'm inviting you. And Bundy, if she'd like to come along.
But that's just what I mean: Let's say that we go up to the room we tried to use last Wednesday, what, and those older lads were there again and we jolly well decided to go somewhere else. Well, if you and I were there but not yet anyone else, and if we only had two people to tell each, we could send a PM, what? But to tell everyone would be three or four PMs each, do you see?
So, instead, we send a message to this lock. But first off, that doesn't get the message to the people who aren't on it, what (as you said), and second, what happens if someone on our lock is with someone who isn't?
For the sake of argument, let's say that Sally-Anne is with, oh, with Greengrass, when she gets the post telling her to go up to the sixth floor instead of the fourth. Sally-Anne might tell Greengrass that it's a PM, but as the subjects of those are visible, eventually Greengrass might look in her own journal and see that no one whose posts she reads actually sent a PM to Sally-Anne.
Do you see what I mean?
-Justin
no subject
Yeah. Well, that's always been the problem with the lock, hasn't it? If that happened, Sally Anne would have to tell Greengrass they should go look for us on the sixth floor because someone was just saying the other day that there's a classroom there that would be as good as the one on the fourth. Or something. You've just got to think on your feet to get around those things.
But I get it that if we actually had a bigger group that was a regular thing, it would be great to have a way to communicate with them that's not the lock. Only... well, yeah. I asked the twins, and they're still thinking about it. The thing is anything like that would be dangerous if someone got caught with it. Not as dangerous as having anyone find out about the lock, but still. So we'd still have to think about who'd be included. And you're right. I don't think that would be Corner.
no subject
It'd probably be complicated, what with the charms and all, but I'd bet it could be done if Fred and George put their minds to it.
I could talk to them about it, during our next get together.