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

i can see from what i just read that you have put a lot of thought into what exactly needs to happen with this idea and if we all work together i can see where it will serve to improve h2g2 and help all of us better our skills. i myself have not submitted anything and honestly do not know if i ever will. i might in the future get up the courage to jump in and would like to know that whoever comes to me with comments and suggestions on my article knows what it is they are supposed to be accomplishing. i think with the guidelines you have set out that this can be done. there are a lot of forums out here for fun and play but when it comes to the articles that one has submitted it needs to be understood that what is wanted is critisism and not tongue in cheek responses. there is a time and place for this and an article that someone has put a great deal of time and effort into is not it. maybe with us all working together we can grow and expand our knowledge, hey, if we are lucky we might even learn something interesting that we did not previously know about a subject that we find along the way. after all from what i have seen by wandering in and out of the different threads on the subject of field critic that is the idea of the entries, to give us insight on different subjects.
sharil aka monshari

I think that it's a really good idea, you have a way of taking ideas and turning them into an easy, organized plan. My respect and support is undying.

I have...er... let me count... 14 submitted entries, however a few were written in the wee beginnings of the Guide and if I could go back I wouldn't have clicked the "submit" button, as they were just experiments with styles during my "What exactly do they want from me" phase (we all have gone through that, I'm sure...). So I'd count 5 or 6 good, quality, in-depth entries submitted... the diploma's hot off the presses, and I went to an IB school (that's the International Baccalaureate-good old fashioned British curriculum shipped all over the world, and then certified by writing-extensive tests (I still need to sit for a few, wish me luck) sent back to England for review) So I suppose I meet the rigorous criteria ...

You're really looking for some heavy-duty critisism exchanges, eh? I've corrected some people on spelling, and made a few suggestions, but after reading your article I just might whip out my "Oxford Guide to Really Spectacular, Good, Impressive, Fabulous Writing" and get down to the nitty-gritty, it's really convincing.

In keeping with Zachsmind's page I'm going to get a bit more negative on his ass. I don't think Zachsmind wants us to just say that's great and leave it at that. Let's debate it.
I do not wholeheartedly agree with the points I'm going to list below, but just want some feedback.

[1] Re. the h2g2 yahoo chat room. I don't like IRC as I have to pay telephone call charges, the chat becomes geographically disparate due to time zone differences and it can vary between one small loner whispering to themselves to dozens of people babbling which loses focus and the page scrolls like a lunatic. I don't like the idea of having to use this method in order to 'count' as a field critic.
Ideally, the h2g2 tech team could brainstorm a more elegant solution within these pages e.g. some 'pager' mechanism that alerts you to a recent reply to your post when you're looking at a completely different page.

[2] I would prefer that all of us non-Editors were on a level playing field. I don't want an unpaid job, I come here for insight and a laugh in equal measures. I dislike hierarchy and elitism so I have my doubts about the proposed system. Will the newly ennobled 'Field Critics' spurn non-Critics posting to these 'review' forums. Which leads me to...

[3] Surely all Field Researchers have a duty to not only post pages, but visit other people's and offer helpful/humorous comments where applicable. We can (and do) do this now. So let's carry on.

[4] When most of the 13,000 or however many h2g2 people out there (most of whom only dip in now and again, let's face it) realise that there is this other 'sexy' rank they can obtain, who will decide if they can or can't become Field Critics. What if we end up with 13,000 or more Field Critics. Will it have made any difference. Can they be blackballed out of the 'FC Syndicate' and how and for what reasons and by whom?

[5] I re-iterate the idea I submitted in the previous forum http://www.h2g2.com/forumframe.cgi?thread=10818&forum=14215 [see Editing Ourselves?] about researchers marking up their pages in such a way as to allow filtering to take place. This filtering could be applied not only to submitted pages but also to forum threads. I got no feedback on that idea so I'm eager for some now.

OK, 5 things off the top of my head. Remember, this is not an unwarranted attack on Zachsmind's proposal (which is the best yet and good on him), this is for the sake of balance and so we can get any system right.

Rebuttal to #1 - I really don't see a need for a "pager" system, time problems are going to be a problem no matter what, and I'm sure if someone wants to know immediately or as soon as possible if someone has a comment, they would check in frequently (many people already have a post on their page, so if someone "discusses" it the author of the page would know) or maybe even provide an e-mail address. I don't see why the editors/paid h2g2 people need to develop another communication system as there is already obviously very effective avenues to discuss, critique, etc., especially while h2g2 is still fairly young and has bugs to be worked out as it is.

Discussion for #...aahh I forget--As to the "sexiness" of being a field critic, I think the idea would be easier in the form of a way to be, not an actual new "position", "field critiquing" the verb, not the noun. Or at least that would seem ideal, whoever has the time and willpower to do it can seriously help people out, without parading around a title. Just a kick in the butt to do what the editors asked us to do in the first place-make an honest effort to help others and ourselves make the guide better, entry by entry.

I wasn't going to get involved in this forum, but I can't sleep, and no one else is on yet, so anyway....

I think Zach has it absolutely right on the way to critique someone's article, by giving both positive and negative feedback. The negative feedback shows that you are not just kissing ass, and the positive feedback makes the researcher feel there is a reason for writing. If you write something and everyone just rips it apart, are you going to want to keep writing? At the same time, if no one is willing to be negative and just heaps praise on you, the critique is doing you no good.

So in the spirit of positive and negative feedback, I will attempt to provide both on Zach's idea.

Positive: Zach is trying to find the best way to get us researchers to read each others submissions and help make them better. And he's doing a great job of getting ideas out there where we all can see them. I assume most of us are proud of what we write, and that makes it difficult to self-criticise. So the best way to improve our work is to ask the help of others.

Negative: I agree with The Wisest Fool about the idea of Field Critics. I think we risk driving a lot of people away from H2G2 by separating one group of researchers from another. I know that if certain people were annointed Field Critics, it would not make me want to be one myself, but rather, to retreat to my own page and just have fun. For example, I have seen a few HTML mysteries going around H2G2, such as Shim's blue fish (no longer a secret), and more recently, how to get the "Referenced Entries" and "Referenced Researchers" to show up in the margins. The researchers who have figured it out have sworn each other to secrecy, and now I don't even want to know. I may not even take advantage of it if The Powers That Be make it widely available.

Positive: Zach, you are doing a great job of brainstorming. I don't know how you find the time to think and write so much about the serious side of H2G2, but it can only help in the long run. Keep it up!

Ok, that's enough out of me. Back to my own little corner of the world, to write something silly about college dorm games or something....

One little side note: I was accused recently of being elitist on my own page because of my softball team. I have been asking team members to help name the team, and this particular researcher was upset because I was not letting non-members participate. Of course, all he/she(?) had to do was sign up, and I never turn anyone down who asks, but I guess that wasn't good enough.

Oddly enough, 10 minutes later that researcher asked to join, so maybe he/she(?) had a change of heart. At any rate, I'm trying to imagine how upset this person would feel about something like not being able to be a Field Critic.

(oops, forgot something positive to say......er.....)
Zach, I like the new picture on your home page.
(that should hold him......)

-TVF

The idea of using the unofficial h2g2 chat room for field critics is as good an idea as it gets, right now. No, a chat room ,per say, is not a good venue for idea exchanges, but the message board seems to work right nice.

At present there is no way to get that same effect at h2g2. The forums don't work well because the conversations splinter off too easily, making it difficult to follow the "idea path".(note the number of different conversations pertaining to Zachs' brainstorming article)

If h2g2 would set up a message board page, where ideas would stay together in cronilogical order, then there would be no need to go outside the system to discuss ideas and problems.

I'm not sure if I'm looking for 'heavy-duty' criticism. I think we should try to focus on the submission guidelines and keep it relatively on the same even keel that the Editors are trying for. We should be a BIT harder, because we can. We aren't limited by whatever political or corporate machines the h2g2 editors may or may not be limited by. However, we shouldn't tell a person (for example) to write in a way unlike their personality or to write fiction since that's obviously not what the Powers That Be are hoping to incite. I mean using "Oxford Guides" and things like that is good to help the professionalism of a given piece, but we're not professionals in here, so we can't be militant about it.

I appreciate your negative AND positive comments, Wisest Fool. That's just what I was getting at. Thank you for offering a perfect example. I agree that the h2g2 Yahoo chat thingy can't necessarily work for everyone. I specified the Yahoo Club shouldn't be considered a requirement, but it would be nice to have some place outside h2g2.com where active critics could talk shop, and the Yahoo Club's already there. No need to reinvent the wheel, unless it rules out a large number of participants. Then we'll just have to find somewhere else.

I'll re-examine the pages in question and see if I can rewrite the parts that lend to elitism. I feel eventually that's where it's gonna go, simply because I've seen this sort of thing before in other community venues.

The Palace (www.palace.com I think) is a visual chat proggie that allows people to 'dress' in avatars and talk to each other with word balloons over their heads. I find it cheesy but my exwife was really into it for years.

They had this 'mentor' kind of program, where helpers were given special rights in certain places so they could help newcomers. It got real complex and eventually became a volunteer "job" with rights, titles, privileges and responsibilities. Naturally, it also had complex and laughable politics because those 'in the know' thought they were hot sh**.

I don't WANT to see the Field Critic idea evolve into that, but we will theoretically be doing some of the Editor's job for them, IF this works. I've just seen this path before and tried to prepare for it this time. Odds are by the time it gets there I'll be long gone though. First sign of political b.s. and nowadays I tend to run for the hills.

If anyone knows of ways to AVOID that inevitable pitfall, I'm all ears.

Will established critics spurn non-critics? Not if they know what's good for them. It's best to stay above the fray in those kinda things. You look bad if you start slinging mud. It's why I reacted to Wingpig the way I did. Instead of arguing the matter with him incessantly, I said my piece and then went straight to the source. Let the Powers That Be decide. When they did, I bowed out as fast as possible, to curtail further damage.

Was that a politically sensible move? Heck no! However, it KILLED the political argument. I'd rather burn the field than let the locusts have it. It's how I respond to politics nowadays.

All field researchers DO have a duty to perform the acts I'm describing as Field Critics. However, I don't see them doing it. Some do, yes. Not enough. There's a page somewhere that a person put up. A user page where they said they didn't know why they were writing anything on their user page cuz no one was reading them.

Heck, I'M not critiquing other people's pages myself! I'm spending too much time talking about it! And I hope to rectify that soon, but someone needed to lay out the groundwork and start the ball rolling on communication. Otherwise I'd be doing it WRONG and have to do it all over again anyway. The more grey matter in the idea the better.

Regarding the Editing Ourselves URL Wisest Fool offered, there were two points.

I like the idea of a CGI index that lists the latest new user pages on the front page. I think everything.slash.org has something like that. Good idea. However, the front page of h2g2.com is already cluttered enough as it is, and the Editors have enough on their plate. Asking them for yet another thing just means they have less time to edit, and I'm hoping they find time to focus on editing more soon. If we keep asking them to tweak the engine, it means more time for the rest of us to have to get out and push.

The markup idea where people could do the equivalent of metatags is good, but again, the Powers That Be would have to take the time to program, test, and launch it into the h2g2 system. Very time consuming. Like I said above, they got enough on their plate already. Besides, people don't use metatags in their regular webpages now. I mean some do. The porn sites do extensively because they're in it for the hits and the money. If you're just writing a piece about chivalry or chattanooga tennessee, taking extra time to make metatags is just unfun, so even if we had the option, I don't think people would use it. the index.cgi isn't great, but it's actually pretty good if you know how to use it. It's tolerable to use for now.

As for whether or not this will ever be a 'position' I do explain eventually h2g2.com may have to make it official in some way, but it's up to them how to do it. I'm not thinking I'm a Field Critic. It's not a title you can bestow upon yourself. Theoretically I'm suggesting it as terminology others would choose to bestow upon you, if you perform the actions regularly that I've described. So it's not really a 'position' so much as a way of describing veteran researchers who invest time in helping others.

It's a compliment other researchers can choose to bestow upon you. I just hope that doesn't turn it into a popularity contest where friends start calling each other critics when they're only criticizing friends works, and offering mostly praise. That would defeat the whole purpose of the title. I'm sure some of that's bound to happen. I'm open to hearing suggestions on how to curtail that.

It's sad to hear that 'html mysteries' are being hidden. That's inevitable because some people think creative projects like this are 'games' in which the ones with the most toys wins. When I get a hold of something like the smiley faces or Jim Lynn's Who's Online script or the index.cgi, I share it with others. This place is only going to improve if its community improves along with it. Having some pages with stuff in the right margins and some without makes the whole place look inconsistent and the right margin is undependable to the casual surfer, so those who keep such information to themselves only hinder the project. They aren't helping it. However, that sort of person is not interested in helping others unless they're helping friends or there's something in it for them. Those kindsa people aren't the sort who would be interested in being actual Field Critics anyway. They think short term. They don't realize that selflessly criticing other people can indirectly encourage others to come read your pages. They don't see the long term advantages because they're too caught up in themselves and selfish to realize. I'm not pointing fingers. I'm just describing what I see. I'm not trying to tick people off, but when I see the emperor's not wearing any clothes, I'm the sort to come out and say it.

Finally, if h2g2.com set up a message board that was chronological in design, it still would not necessarily encourage people to stay in h2g2 to talk shop. Some stuff (I think) just doesn't belong here. Technically, I think THIS thread should be on neutral turf. However, I could just be wrong. The Editors need to see this, if it's to their interest. Perhaps we don't need the Yahoo Club at all. If there's a new topic you want to discuss, write a user page and post the URL here if you want people to tell you what they think, or just add a new conversation to this thread. H2g2.com isn't all that bad. I was just thinking it's difficult to objectively criticize the Powers That Be (or in a worst case scenario, bite the hand that feeds you) when you know they're not too far away.

Sorry it took so long for me to respond, but I've been reading a lot on the 'Net about this new movie, the Blair Witch Project, and I saw it last night. I'm a bit obsessed with this thing. Great movie! I highly recommend it, but I guess that belongs in a different forum.

My TWO PENNUTH
At:
http://www.h2g2.com/P120565
vegiman

I've written a response/defence for the 'hidden secrets' part of zachs speech. If you care to read it, it's at:
http://www.h2g2.com/forumframe.cgi?forum=3596&thread=12879
Just to explain my position.

Hey something is going on at:
http://www.h2g2.com/P130852
Join in on the CRITIQUE FUN RUN and excersise your brain, you don't even have to leave your seat.

I Would Appreciate Everybody spreading the word around.

vegiman