h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Vegiman came up with a good point. I'd like to expand upon it here. He explained that mere "unoffensive constructive criticism" coupled with praise is insufficient. I agree. I'm not proposing we stop there.

We are all researchers. I guess perhaps one of the main points I'm trying to emphasize here is that we begin to take more serious note of what we're saying and where we're saying it. I'm not condoning any form of limits. I'm not even suggesting peer pressure to correct one another's behaviour. Perhaps I'm just questioning or brainstorming whether or not personal responsibility is sufficient?

I personally enjoy the very loose and free-form environment of h2g2.com. I don't want to see that go away. If I feel like just 'chatting' in some user forum because I see names of people there I wish to respond to, I like having the freedom to do that.

However, the forums are an extension of the original user page. If that page is being intended by the author to someday become an official guide entry, perhaps focus should be made to encourage the author, offer our own advice and knowledge regarding the subject matter, provide suggestions for where the author can find more information regarding the topic, and also critique the work itself in an unoffensive and objective manner.

Some people may dislike reading a semi-serious approach to a given topic, and then click on the user forums only to find the forums offer no supporting information about the same topic. Instead the forum participants have gone off on some tangent that has nothing to do with the original topic.

In Usenet and other online forums, this is called "topic drift." In the past, people have suggested forms of "topic police" in order to stop this. I do not suggest that. In fact, I'd encourage there to be threads in any given forum which were free-for-all. However, serious discussion is welcomed and encouraged too.

It's the original author's job to scan through the forums, find the pertinent information that will assist in future drafts of the given user page, and update and revise as necessary. So provided the author does that, the user forums could inevitably be free-for-all. Only the author has to worry about trudging through it.

Perhaps in that regard, h2g2 is kind of like Usenet newsgroups. Each user page deals with a given subject, and the forums below allow people to talk about and around that particular subject.

The user page could be like the FAQ for that forum, stipulating all the facts and knowledge gleaned from the discussion. Instead of a person just writing that document once and never touching it again, they can see that document as a dynamic work to regularly update, using the forum below it for inspiration and data.

Just how much of this am I saying which everyone else already knows? How much of this is what the editors and Powers That Be already had in mind? How much of this makes no real sense?

Your thoughts?

The criticism is I agree a big problem. Many people can take harsh criticism and respond even handedly and use it to improve (or quietly disagree). There are just as many people to whom disagreement = conflict. (If peoples feelings are hurt, try blowing off steam in Wowbaggers insults forum.) As a result of this most people have I think tried to either be generous to entries or to ignore their content altogether in the forums. I wouldn't want to see an end to this friendly atmosphere, but I do think more criticism is needed. Now how to reconcile the two is another matter. One thing that would definately help is more editors. Recruitment from within the ranks could potentially cause resentment, unless their entries were universally agreed to be good. ( I don't think elections/popularity contests would do anything other than cause trouble).
Write just what you know about? Rubbish. People often come out with a new and valid perspective on something because they haven't been told the "right" answer. If there is someone else who knows better they can come along and say so in the forum.
Changing your entry with the help of forum entries is I think what we were expected to do. There are a couple of practical problems. What to do about crediting input (another potential explosion of hurt feelings)
What about the forum itself. The comments in it relating to a previous draft could be made to look very silly by changes in the user page. Should the forums be marked For V1.23 of user page?
Maybe there are no good answers as to how to organise things better and the guide may in the long run benefit from a muddle through mentality.

You raise some interesting points in your original thesis, on what should this guide really be.
I for one when I first stumbled upon it, thought that it was to be a serious attempt at putting together, a guide to this planet, that at present we inhabit.
I then discovered that it was a bunch of froody people having fun on the internet. Concocting inusual, and absurd, scenarios based on the original thought, that for the moment has been mislaid. I have had a lot of fun doing just that.
What I think we need is two sparate types of input, a better definition perhaps of our home pages. Split into 'entries for the guide', and "whimsies".
I for one would like to type into the 'search the guide' a geographical location, and get some practicla information on that area. Not the sort of stuff you would find, written by some moron that happened to spend a couple of drunken days there. But someone that has or is, living/lived there.
Meanwhile I will still enjoy my time, shuffling inanities across the ether.

my thoughts_ well i think that the guide is really a big patchwork quilt, and as Mark the editor said, we are each suppose to use our own writing style and not try to imitate others, ie D.Adams. When i wrote my first couple entries i was under the impression that being funny was a requirement. Now that i know otherwise i feel i can write more informative entries in my natural writing style, and some bits may be funny, cause hey life is funny sometimes, and some may just be informative and interesting. So i will write about things i know lots about, and can mold together a good writing piece from, and not just try to make people laugh, but show them my genuine perspective. Expect a new entry soon.

Ah, my learned gentlemen and ladies, what are we trying to achieve, as I said in my earlier piece, we should have two 'forums, actual pieces about where we live or have visited, to aid other travellers. Ones that can be added onto, or criticised by other people that know the places, for instance I might write about the inadequacies in Banff for the more mature person, while someone adds that for the 20 year old it is a great plce to drink, listen to loud music, and get laid. Having said that I do not mean that I do not like any of those three things, just the style in which one does it when you turn 30.
And a second forum to chat aimlessly, for fun or on a serious subject amongst oureselves.
I stipulate this, as I get the feeling from Kat that it should be a word processor to start a new book, I probably misread Kats comments, but that was the interpretation that I got.

You are right, you did misunderstand. what i meant was that although i do enjoy a good laugh as much as anyone, there are times when i may just write a piece about a place i love or a figure i admire. when i became a researcher i was under the impression that the entries had to be entirely satire and funny, but as the powers that be have said, that isn't true. Do i make sense now?? I more then anyone don't want to turn h2g2 into a boring ency. or manual.

They recently aquired one editor. That's not gonna be enough the place is too darn big. They need to recruit more editors and I think recruiting from within the community would be very advantageous. One could solve the potential embitterment this may cause among those of us who are not chosen because whoever gets brought on board as an editor would be asked to create a new alias and asked not to connect their alias in any way with their pre-employment h2g2 persona.

This way, no one would ever know the editor in question was once just a field researcher like everyone else. He could even keep up the older account, so long as he didn't reveal that the two are made by the same person.

That is not a bad Idea - perhaps the powers that be could approach researchers by e-mail to become a volunteer force of SUB EDITORS - or Part Time Paid SUB EDITORS and be allocated to an EDITOR.

I often wish I could have another ID (not that I think I would be able to be an editor myself, others may jump at the chance). - I know you posted on the h2g2 club on how to do it. Perhaps I will one day.

vegiman

There you have it, ladies and gentlemen... exactly the sort of attitude that the Guide editors are looking for. Thank you, Kat!

We want entries that are worth reading; entries that will satisfy the user who wants to know about a particular subject and so uses the h2g2 search; entries that will reward the user who has invested the time required to read them. Informative entries can be rewarding, as can funny entries. However, funny entries are less likely to be rewarding because:
a) We (the Guide editors) are trying to push h2g2 in a direction where it's useful first and funny second. Hence, if all goes to plan, people will be able to use the Guide to search for useful info about given subjects. I'm hoping that soon I'll be able to use the Guide to plan my holidays.
b) It's much easier to agree on the informative value of an entry than the humour value, because people like different types of humour. We often reject entries because they try to be funny and we don't think they are, and we'll get an argument back from the researcher claiming that it *was* funny, and nobody can win that sort of argument. Similarly, there's a good chance that stuff we're amused by won't be amusing to everyone else.

The main problem is that a lot of the attempts at humour that we get are really forced and awkward, they don't flow naturally with the text. Writing humour that complements an informative piece is *really hard* - as Kat says, humour has to fall naturally out of the information rather than being hammered in.

Good luck with your entries, Kat!

-- Yoz

The anonymity is a good idea... take a look at Slashdot.org's moderation mechanism. Those who are picked as moderators aren't allowed to reveal their moderator status.

-- Yoz

What you're talking about is very much the kind of thing we want to do... be a practical guide to our planet (and any other planets that it'd be useful to have information about). I'm hoping that useful (and entertaining) travel info will be one of the primary assets of h2g2.

-- Yoz

Sorry I took so long to answer - Zach made it plain to me that without full h2g2 blessing, as a band of critics it would not be a good idea to make out as if we were.

So if you want to critique it is best done as a field researcher - hense the name FIELD Critic.

I must admit going round within the shadow of another name appeals to me, but creating an anonymous may be Ok for policing, for critique, I am no longer so sure. vegiman

Right, taking up on Vegi's six volunteers thread that I have now completely lost, I've done what I think might be what a proper field report might be like. I picked the article on Parenthood and then reported or criticed on it. Any coments on the report are welcome. I just feel that we might need a couple of visual examples/ ideas of how some aspects of this might work. It is a great idea and I for one want to see it succeed. In a way I like the anomnymity (I cant spell) of it but then isn't that why we've got nicknames on this thing. Back to point though, is this (the write up on Parenthood) the sort of thing we would be expecting from the Field Critics?

I will have to have a look tomorrow. I am still busy working and jumping between three computers to get the work done and answering a few forums, plus I have to be up at 5am.

Catcha at the weekend. vegiman

vegiman. although i am new to the guide, i feel that your initial points on editing and critiquing were good ones. i for one have no problem with criticism of my own work (afterall, i am a novice at html programming) and would gladly welcome it. furthermore, i think that people would be more open to criticism of their work than you expect. really, i think its a matter of getting the word out on your ideas. it will grow from there through gradual acceptance. afterall, if someone starts leading, people will follow (history has shown).
p.s. you can start by critiquing my page if you want.

Perhaps we're making this more complex than is necessary. Just click about and read h2g2.com at your leisure, but whenever you find a user page that has not already been accepted as a guide entry, click at the links on the bottom and just give your two cents. It doesn't have to be formal. I strongly recommend you be honest, speak your mind, and try to have as many good things to say about the piece as you do bad. Don't be hateful or insulting. Just be cool about it. Usually the reason why people are displeased with recieving criticism is because they read the criticism as if it were an attack on their talent and ability. Just be cool about it and talk to the author as you would like to be treated. Keep it simple. No worries. =)

Welcome back Zach - Have you manage to sort out your new venture in other areas?

The points you make are valid concerning GO OUT AND JUST DO IT. I believe every body should at least have go.

Have you changed you views on trying to find some way to help h2g2 editors to notice good works.

As I have said on another foram - Whether your Original Idea goes ahead or not. It has succeded. It gave the editors something to focus on, and bumped a few heads together to help give h2g2 shape.
vegiman

PS - Some have already been out there doing it, if you now slow down the momentum , you will slow down the whole idea - IT WILL DIE - You are knocking the efforts of those who followed you by back peddling.

Are you sure you really want to do this.

Do you really want to go back to the hotch potch way of doing critique.

If this is the case I am wasting my time and other volunteers who have come forward.

vegiman