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

To convey ones thoughts in to a good piece of work takes a vast amount of skill. It is far more difficult than writing a report about the machanics of a bicycle, or other such things.

I'm afraid I will never accept that these entries need no skill.

This is just Defamatory.

But thank you Tango for attempting to improve this

it's easy to convey ones thoughts, it's only hard to convey ones thoughts well. the question is, do you only accept the entry that conveys thoughts well, or do you accept both?

spook

I'll repeat myself :

"To convey ones thoughts in to a GOOD piece of work takes a vast amount of skill"

Jodan : "There was one that was something like 'I went to a Metallica concert but I can't remember it because I was drunk'

Would you like it?"

Spook : "well, , i'm not sure. i mean, it needs a lot of grammatical work doing, you know, like, a full stop at the end and all, so it may be too big a project to do right now. maybe after i expand... "


Is 'I went to a Metallica concert but I can't remember it because I was drunk' Good?

it sounds like a journal entry that was written in the wrong place then submitted to AWW by a newbie who didn't understand the system.

spook

I'll take that as a no then. In which case should it be accepted?

not into the UG. i would have to see the actual entry to judge it though.

spook

Assuming it said simply 'I went to a Metallica concert but I can't remember it because I was drunk', with nothing else would you accept it? And is it a good entry because of that?

i need to know the original subject title for one thing, and whether the author is still active.

would i accept it?

for the UG no, cause it isn't of the standard.
for the SOG, possibly. if the author was active and submitted it to me directly, then a definite yes. if not, then maybe, maybe not, depending on a number of variables.

spook

Could you please explain what difference a title for the entry 'I went to a Metallica concert but I can't remember it because I was drunk' would make?

"if the author was active and submitted it to me directly, then a definite yes"

So to answer my question above 'And is it a good entry because of that?'

the title could make the enry humourous. if not the title could be adapted.

>"And is it a good entry because of that?"

like i said, not of quality enough for the UG, but the SOG does not judge quality.

spook

"the title could make the enry humourous"

For example?

"the SOG does not judge quality"

So how is the comment "Entries need no skill of writing or work to gain status, but can simply be written thoughts" a con for the UG since you say yourself that "the SOG does not judge quality"?

because the SOG entries will not be gaining a status of any kind, will not be appearing an 'The World Of H2G2' categories, at least not for a while if i ever ask for that, and will not be getting Front Page exposure. the SOG is something totally different to the UG.

spook

"Other Options

If the Underguide is not a good idea, then we must consider the other options, such as:

The Post - The Post is h2g2's one and only newspaper that provide Alternative Writing with the exposure people like, doesn't require any technical website changes, is running effectively right now, and is read by a large proportion of the community. This would be one of the best places to submit well written, interesting entries on any subject.
AGG/GAG/CAC - This group features entries in a column in The Post. It doesn't provide as much exposure, yet it is great place to have your entries in progress shown in their rough form, perhaps giving people a taster of what will eventually appear in The Post.
Spaced Out Guide (SOG) - The SOG is somewhere for every entry to be seen. So if your entry isn't up to scratch for The Post, you're not bothered about submitting it to the CAC and you're not bothered about working on your entry, you just enjoy writing humourous articles then the SOG is for you. It accepts all entries, no matter what the length or quality is. If you just want to have your entry become a part of something that in the future will become a great resource of entries, then submit it here."

So why do you compare the two?

i was looking at other options and looking at whether with all the other alternative writing groups that promote alternative writing whether the UG was needed as well.

spook

"It accepts all entries, no matter what the length or quality is."
- The SOG

So why is this better than the UG?

why are you turning this into a competion? i wasn't looking at better, i was looking at different. is the Ug better then The Post? is the Ug better then the CAC? how can you compare to different things? each 3 groups focus on different elements. i question whether UG is needed when there are already these 3 groups promoting fiction.

spook

"why are you turning this into a competion?"

It is you who implies that the UG is worse than the other alternatives when you say that "it certainly looks like the Underguide is a bad idea", so it would seem reasonable to surmise that you believe that the others are better. In this light why to you level an unfair comment that "Entries need no skill of writing or work to gain status, but can simply be written thoughts" at the UnderGuide?

If you had the option to go back to when the CAC was first starting would you argue its necesity while the Post was still going?

the premise is that h2g2 has groups dedicated to fiction and the introduction of another group is un-needed and would have an adverse effect on the already running groups.

spook

"the premise is that h2g2 has groups dedicated to fiction and the introduction of another group is un-needed and would have an adverse effect on the already running groups."

Yes, I know thats what you believe. You haven't answered my questions


I'll repeat myself:

"In this light why to you level an unfair comment that "Entries need no skill of writing or work to gain status, but can simply be written thoughts" at the UnderGuide?"

"If you had the option to go back to when the CAC was first starting would you argue its necesity while the Post was still going?"