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

I feel the need to get the advice of fellow Scouts. I suspect I'm either the only one doing this right, or else the only one doing it wrong. It's a moot point which.

This month, as nearly always happens, the Entries I've had my eye on to pick have all already been picked by others. The ones I could still pick all fall into a category that I would describe as perfectly adequate for the Front Page according to precedent, but nonetheless unexceptional.

Because I feel I shouldn't pick something that doesn't stimulate me, I pick nothing in these circumstances.

I get the impression, though, that some other Scouts see making their full quota of picks as essential to the role, and that adequacy rather than excellence is their quality measure.

So who's right?

Pin (World's Worst Scout)


Further clarification of my Scouting approach, since I'm now well and truly on the couch...

1. I read the Entries in PR comprehensively. (I was subscribed to the PR page for years, but unsubscribed recently because the Convo list-length restriction on the new site threatened to detach me from treasured old threads - but that's another story).
2. I form an opinion as to which Entries are special and (the much greater proportion) of Entries that are OK but unexceptional.
3. I comment where I can suggest constructive improvement. I lost the habit of posting only to praise an Entry when I realised that such posts were sometimes construed as meaning 'hands off - this is mine to pick'.
4. Because of the 'pick special' ethos, I almost never pick my full quota and probably more often than not I don't pick at all.

I only pick when I see something I want in the Guide. I actually ignore the email sent out automatically (it's more of a reminder that I should be in PR and know what's going on).
I have no idea of whether I pick my quota or not - is it three per month? I can't remember - I just pick what seems like a good idea at the time.

I don't know of any 'hands-off' rule - if there is one I had no clue and have probably pissed off a lot of Scouts over time.

It's been discussed ad nauseam elsewhere, Pin.
I'm with you, though. I think nobody should pick entries to 'fill a quota', and entries that are clearly not finished shouldn't be picked, either.

I never approved of people picking 'out of turn', ie whenever something grabbed their fancy (like Vip says she does). It's unfair towards those scouts whose turn it is and who are left with nothing suitable to pick. just my

Thanks Vip. I'm not in a minority of one after all. That's good.

(We're even alike in the 'probably-three-but-I'm-not-sure' sense)

Hi Bel

Simulpost there.
Yes, picking the unready is unhelpful. I will confess to the occasional pick when I think the Entry is getting damaged by PR nitpicking though.

I've found an old Editors page that seems to confirm the excellence requirement (see third last parag)
A395624

...however it also seems to be describing an older (and better?) variant of PR whereby anyone could recommend, and the job of the Scouts was to assess the nominated pool for quality.

I think I'd like to be that kind of Scout more than the present kind.

This behaviour gives a whole new (and opposite) meaning to the word "picky".

And yes, there shouldn't be quotas, just a monthly reminder to take a look and pick if something's ready.

No, I agree, Pin. I've not actually picked anything in quite a while, because all the ones I thought were good guide material when my turn came around were picked already. And I refuse to reward authors who see it as a waiting game more than anything else.

It is interesting to read others' thoughts on the Scout process. I am surprised to find out that there ever was an undercurrent of 'hands off - I've got my eye on this' In fact I am dismayed. I am really happy when something I have been maybe cultivating or encouraging gets picked quickly by someone other than me.


It does make total sense not to pick something each month, just to fulfil your quota. But perhaps a little note to the Scout's forum to explain? From my perspective it often appears that there have been only a couple of Scouts for quite a while now, who actually make any picks at all. Unless there have been comments from the other Scouts, in PR, it is difficult to guess whether the others have been reviewing or not.

I could say more, but am aware that this thread is now featured on latest activity in Barlesque, and so is not confined to those who are subscribed to the Scouts' pages.

>>I could say more, but am aware that this thread is now featured on latest activity in Barlesque, and so is not confined to those who are subscribed to the Scouts' pages.<<

That's why we have our yahoo forum


lil x

My point exactly lil

I only asked

And I don't think much of the inference that some h2g2 postings should have a limited circulation either

That wasn't what I was inferring Pinn - I wanted to know which Scouts were actually active, and which were really going to PR and reviewing things, even if they hardly ever comment.

Aaah. OK, sorry.

I might not be the most active Scout in PR. I sometimes lack confidence in my own abilities, but I *do* know good writing when I see it and will select accordingly. However, I will also select a new piece of writing from a newbie which I consider to be completed and only requiring a decent Sub-Editor to finish it off.

No, I don't shove them in to make up the numbers. For a few months now I have only been selecting one or two Entries.

lil x

Looking around, trying to find out what to do. I always assumed that scouts would try to read as many articles in Peer Review as they could, and if they had something to say, they'd say it. When I've written something I'm always happy to have comments from as many people, scouts or otherwise, as possible, as it shows that someone's read it, which is always nice.

I don't see how it benefits anyone if a scout has a suggestion to make on an article which will improve it, but says nothing because a different scout has already made a different suggestion. Or if something is good, what is the harm in saying that, in your opinion, it is good? Peer Review works when peers review. Otherwise it would be called 'I would peer review, but won't in case I inadvertently upset someone'.
The only exception I can think of is if the second scout would suggest something which would directly contradict a suggestion made by another scout, ie Scout 1 says 'You should write in more detail about Point A' followed by Scout 2 saying 'Cut out the section on Point A'. Contradictory arguments don't help anyone and can be a bit off putting, and should be resolved on a entry-by-entry basis.

<BB<

Very good points BlueBottle, although I can't recall any instances of Scouts differing vehemently.

If so, we now have the Noesis forum which can be used for discussion away from the Peer Review threads, in cases of strong disagreement between Scouts.

At the time this thread was begun, there were more 'inactive' Scouts than there were 'active' and some of the active ones were sporadic at best. So, I am delighted you've joined us - but we have moved on quite a lot in a whole year and the team of Scouts is actually quite strong once more.