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

Your feedback required!

shazz

This sounds good.

I wasn't around for the foop, but I can give my perspective on a few things:

It's really amazing how this community has branched out like it has- on one end of the spectrum, we've got people with 100 edited entries, on the other, we've got people who have never written an entry, but have been here for years, playing games and having serious conversations.

One thing I DO wish is that the BBC would give us a little more freedom to submit our own pictures. I would understand a review process, but I think that a lot of Guide entries could be enriched if the author was able to dictate a photo, figure, or diagram he or she wanted in it.

Thanks Shazz!

About submitting our own pictures for edited entries - there are some examples where it has been allowed if the pictures are relevant and add - eh - is significance the word I'm looking for (and if the author and sub-ed have the patience to do some ling)?

One example: I wrote an entry on how to build your own snow lantern. The instructions wouldn't really have been enough on their own, I felt - and I was kindly enough allowed to use my own photos to illustrate the process: A2408492

I regret the loss of foreign languages on h2g2. At one time we had thriving German and Swedish communities as a part of the Guide, and you could join a thread and try out your wretched German and it was just a hoot as well as good for your language.

I had always thought Australians spoke English, but I hardly see any of them these days, and before the Foop there was always a bunch hanging round the barbie. Anyone else remember Bubster and Hypoman?

So there is a definite argument to be made that the BBC destroyed some of the original h2g2's internationalism.

When we first became part of the BBC congeries, Auntie clutched her bodice convulsively and forbade all kinds of things, such as links to other sites, so we were doubly whammied: not only could we no longer post our pictures, we couldn't even point to them! So matters ~have~ improved.

If there is anything I regret the most, however, it's the loss of communication with our editors. If I weren't one of the CA's I might know little or nothing of Jimster. The editors now speak only in deus ex machina mode. In the Old Days, arr, they were more like Greek gods, liable to burst into threads and ladle in some opinion, jokes, or whatever. Like real researchers. Will there ever be a time again when an Italic can tell a researcher to go suck on a pig?

Hey Beeb,
Hopefully I will have some "well thought out" input in a few hours. However, while spending my afternoon reaquainting myself with the guide I have been ovewhelmed with a yearning for the old days. We spent hours building limmerikcks, singing so loud they could here you in the bar next door, discussing books over coffee (or tea), Going on raucous adventures with our favorite arch bishop, or planet (& underwater) trekking. We badged our pages to show our support. Everyone helped the newbies. Politics and cultural differences had their forums and we felt we moderated ourselves fairly well. The PTB were here all the time, giving input, helping out or just joining conversations. I miss that.
This was the first place on the internet that I ever wanted a 'homepage' . We linked them to places we frequented outside H2G2 (mostly yahoo sites, back then) to get others to come and join the fun. I, personally, have found the site hard to navigate, some of the old places just disappeared after the change over.
BTW, Amy has posted a link to some of the original stuff! It's great.
Thanks for letting me babble......

so what does one have to do to get original pictures approved. Is this just a special case or what? Now we can, what .. link to pictures but not point to them so they appear automatically, right?

I just read a post by peta over on DNA about the language issue: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/classic/A864236 it was from 2002 and about how the issue was trying to ensure content met the guidelines do to lack of foreign language moderators, but that the issue was up for revision and they had an eye to broadening the language rules. Any word on this in the last 3 years? Is the post-moderating system still in its pilot phase?

So the italics are few and farther away these days? That does make me sad. Is it becasue they are all managing the DNA empire and have their hands in lots of pots, or for other reasons do you think?

I think a sort of a compromise was reached on the language issue.

A1145477 is allowed to post in foreign languages if they provide an English translation along with it. I remember helping them wrangle up that concession from the italics. Seemed reasonable to me.

Interesting, though it seems a bit of a limitation, having to simul-translate. If only babel fish was more proficient it could be automated (click to translate!) Though I think we will see that soon in browsers in general..

I have to admit that I was trepidatious to come back here after the foop. I liked the site before, and was worried that the beeb would just corporatize the whole thing...pop ups and the like. at least in that, I was mistaken.

However, one of the things that bothers me more than anything else is the inability to talk about British elections except for in specific threads. Why is that? What could any researcher possibly say to another that would make this a requirement? No one has ever explained it to me satisfactorily.

I don't know. I mean, there's a lot that hasn't changed per se, but as Lil pointed out, the Italics don't come out and play much any more. There was, at one time, a throughly obnoxious researcher who needed to be put in his place, and it took a large number of complaints and several months before he was dealt with, largely because Jimster had *way* too much to do.

And I'm going to say this, and probably get flooded with exceptions and people being mad at me, but the subs and eds and scouts etc., well, they don't seem so enthused any more. They're still volunteering (as are the CA's) but they don't seem to be really utilized to the best of their abilities (why is it that from all the subeditors, the assignments can't be more closely aligned with what people are good at, for instance?)

A lot of the problem, I think, is that the beeb has cut back on Italics, and thus, they have far too much to do to interact with us anymore. Which, frankly, makes me sad.

I asked this elsewhere but after that post Montana, I'll ask it again here. Do you still write articles, or has the enthousiasm gone out of that aspect of h2g2?

Regarding the election Montana - a lot of newspapers in the states will restrict letters to the editor endorsing a particular candidate right before the election.

If I'm not mistaken, that is even part of the election code here in Pennsylvania. It prevents campaigns from writing a smear letter on the day before an election or something to influence undecideds.

For the beeb, it must be even worse since it is a state-sponsored organ. Imagine if someone wrote a nasty letter about a candidate and then he narrowly won office despite some voters saying the letter changed their minds -- I'm sure he would still look kindly on the h2g2 budget.

Don't you just love politics?

The thing about the elections is mostly to do with the fact that the main parties are entitled to equal time on air on the BBC - and the BBC can't risk having campaigning going on. That's why it's so restrictive. If 75% of the people who want to talk about elections support the same party and spend a month talking about them then the other parties are entitled to demand the same amount of time on BBC space.

We do have candidates visiting the BBC as well - we have our most famous one, but of course others visit the site as well. If they could just come on and put 'vote for me' in their name, or on the bottom of each post because no-one was paying close enough attention, or otherwise try to persuade people to vote for them or their party - the other parties would again want the same thing going on.

That's why they restrict the places that the election can be talked about - so that hosts can keep a close eye on discussions because they know where they will be, and make sure that there is no campaigning and that the discussions are balanced. Before I left the BBC they were able to make certain articles and their conversations post moderated - a requirement of any election discussion.

Jimi X, they certainly don't do that in California. There are letters up to the morning of the election, touting this candidate or that. In fact, there were often special letters to the editors sections during the recent recall election.

Mina, thanks for the explanation. I think it's rather silly, really, but I'll respect it. It's sort of like the TV stations chosing not to air Schwarzenegger movies during the recall for fear they'd have to give extra time to non-movie star candidates. Or, heaven forbid, show the works of a couple of them, who happened to be porn stars. That would have raised a ruckus with the FCC.

Beeblefish, I don't write guide entries anymore, not so much because I don't want to, but because, frankly, I don't have the time. Between studying for my oral exams and starting to map out my dissertation, any writing I do isn't exactly guide material. My last EG entry was, in fact, written almost 2 years before it went in. So it's a combination of lack of time and no real subject matter that would be guide-friendly.

It's like that in Canada too, witht he moratorium right before election time, which I like. Though I love the 'equal time on the BBC' way of doing things. Here and in the states its 'whoever has the most money'.. and there is a huge scandal going on with our Liberals (who are in power) for that very reason.

Hey, is there a h2g2 stats page where I could find out things like how many registered users there are and how many editted guide entries there are .. things like that?

Try <./>info</.>