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

Including:

<./>ScoutRecommendations</.>
lists of entries in review fora based on various stuff
anything else?

Why? So you can complain that a particular scout never picks your work? - I can't see any practical use for this?
As to the rest - see the PR thread, click on the various column headings and you've all the information we've got.

The only possible use for this that I can see is for retribution of some kind. Maybe I'm just being dense, but there's no reason for what the Scouts do to be available for the world to see - you're told when you're moved or picked...

We have so-called 'secret' areas to help us do our jobs - and some of the stuff isn't suitable for general consumption. All volunteer groups on h2g2 have a private email forum so that we can discuss things amongst ourselves. It's a necessity that this so-called 'secrecy' is the case so that we can do our jobs without being bothered by people over every last decision...

Whoami?

Woah! And your link got modded, too.

That's what happens to broken links I guess.

It's an interesting point Lucinda, that doesn't seem to have gone down very well with at least two scouts. Can you tell us what you think are the benefits of the idea to let the Community have access to our Editor tools?

I'll leave that to Bels, I think.
(this thread is drift from F55683?thread=221214&post=2573630#p2573630 you see)

I missed it

this coversation don't make sence without the link
and I like a good conversation
(quick what was the link )

manda

Lucinda, if you make a suggestion, then I think you should stand by it. As it stands, we're not interested. If you aren't interested in giving us good reasons for it, then it's going to be a very short conversation.

Manda - Go to <./>Scouts-What</.>, scroll down to "The Recommendation Process" and look at the "The Scout Recommendations Page" link, which links to a Named Entry called ScoutRecommendations.

-Martin

Here's an extract from Bels' post:

"I don't agree that knowing who picked which entry is extraneous to anyone who isn't a Scout. It's confidential information at present, but that doesn't make it extraneous."

"In fact it's probably less relevant to most of the people who get it - ie the Scouts themselves (who only need to know that an entry has been picked, not who picked it, and they have other ways of finding that out) - than it is to some authors, to whom it could be very interesting, even revealing."

The page allows us to keep track of our picks. That's what it's for. If you're interested in what's been picked, then look at the Entry's PR thread.

Whoami?

can't get passed the "The Scout Recommendations Page" link ,

manda

> "If you make a suggestion, I think you should stand by it. As it stands, we're not interested. If you aren't interested in giving us good reasons for it, then it's going to be a very short conversation"

Well that's a quotable quote.

Patience, dear Mina. Researchers regularly wait several days for an answer from an Italic, without complaint. You've been waiting just over thirty minutes. Don't worry, you'll get your reasons.

-Xanthia

And it's just a standard editor's tool. I suspect what has happened in the past is that a couple of scouts said they'd like to be able to see a list of picked entries, so they didn't waste their time trying to pick an entry that had already been recommended by another scout... The editors already had this tool, so they made it visible to the scouts - end of story.


I don't know if anyone realises it, but just because a scout recommends an entry, it doesn't get the "congratulations" message on it straight away - It stays in Peer Review until approved by an editor... so, for instance... Scout A comes along and recommends three entries, Scout B comes along and recommends 3 more - both during the evening, when all the editors are at home/in the pub (or more likely, as their all complete addicts - still online but not working )
A third scout comes along to make his picks, he or she can find it a real pain in the neck if the first six entries they try to pick all send him back messages saying they've already been recommended...

Therefore, apart from making savings on hardware expenditure for scouts (ever seen a computer being drop kicked out of a third floor window ) The only other use I can think for this page is for people to complain/comment on the personal tastes of individual scouts...

Has someone declared open season on Scouts around here?

*looks around like a scared *

I'm always quotable Lucinda.

And I'm sorry for reading into your statement that you would 'leave it to Bels' as you saying that you weren't going to answer.

Maybe I should read the words, not the meaning. What do you think?

As Whisky says, I don't fancy getting asked by researchers why I didn't pick their entry, because the answer will always be because it's not suitable, because I preferred something else, because something else has been waiting longer, or (most often) no particular reason.

I also don't fancy getting "soliciting" messages from researchers asking me to pick their entry after I make my first pick and it becomes known that I have picks to spare. It makes the whole system too open to unpleasantness and abuse.

There might be an argument for this information to be available if there was an accountability question here, but there isn't as far as I can see. The people who are accountable for what goes in are the italics, who say yay or nay to scout picks. It might be argued that scouts are collectively accountable for entries that don't get picked, but I really don't see how this change will help.

I can see no non-political reasons for making this change.

Otto

Who, exactly, is this information going to benefit?

There are several fairly indentifiable 'cliques' of researchers on this site, which in and of itself is fine. However, I can foresee that if the Scout responsible for *picking* an entry became public knowledge, then accusations of 'Scout X only picked Researcher Y's clearly sub-standard entry because they are both members of the Left handed nostril pickers Club' will follow, and it's a short step from there to 'Researcher Y's clearly sub-standard entry has only been approved by the editorial team because they are an editors pet/(dare I say it) 'Underline'. Also, of course, there is the possibility that accusations will fly of 'You *didn't* pick my entry on X because you've said in thread Y that you don't like people who support X.'

Look at the opprobrium that has been rained on two scouts who have dared to say that they felt two recent PR entries were unsuitable for the Guide. And yes, I *know* there were other issues involved in both, but it is illustrative of why Scouts should have the right to remain anonymous in their picks if they want.

It remains an option for individual Scouts to post in the thread in PR to say they have picked an entry, as has happened a couple of times with my entries.

But the I can definitley see that some Scouts might prefer to remain anonymous.

Whisky: "ever seen a computer being drop kicked out of a third floor window?"

No, I haven't! I've gotten after monitors with a 12-gague, but yours sounds more dramatic.



On topic, I think it makes more sense to have the page in question kept invisible to all but Scouts. I'm not a scout, and don't really plan to be one, but I think making the page public would just encourage people to bother Scouts unnecessarily about who picked what. Sounds annoying. I'm perfectly willing to be convinced otherwise, if this cause can find a champion.... *looks around*....

The Scout system seems to work. Before it was a nightmarish never deminishing queue. I remember it!
As subs we be sent out batches of entries, some of which were compeltely dire. I remember one I was sent was someone's diary. Another was someone's rant. We didn't choose what we were sent, we just yayed or nayed them in our opinion and the editors had the final say.
That part has been taken over by the scouts, and I was glad when they did. As Subs we were never forced, or even asked, to say "I didn't choose your entry" for many reasons. The last thing you want when you're doing something voluntarily is someone else ranting at you because your views may not match.

>The last thing you want when you're doing something voluntarily is someone else ranting at you because your views may not match.

Good job you're no longer a sub then.

Too right