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

Unless you're logged in as AGG/GAG, you have to go to the page to see the postings about new issues, which is what I do. "17" is in fact in progress, as this http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F86434?thread=173477 should suggest. I just had my 40th...and Jwf is so old he remembers when Artie had hair. The drop-down bit can be stolen from any page that has it using the test feature. I believe that the AGG/GAG page has it, as well as Zob's and Jwf's and possibly Lucinda's.

It's like keeping up with a herd of wilderbeest. "you have to go to the page to see the postings about new issues" - I think my psychic skills are somewhat under-developed here. Does one head know what the other's doing? Perhaps I ought to bash them together.
Zaphod

No. There's usually a very easy way to go about things, but my history here and elswhere has indicated that I do things in a roundabout way, but eventually get there...I'll try not to lead you in my errant way anymore than I have to...and it was "the secret is to bang the rocks together, guys!"

Just read this backlog... I've been busy doing #17 and have overlooked this 'thread with no name'. Now I'm feeling somewhat stunned and paralytic at the number of issues, questions currently on the table here... Don't quite know where to start and don't really have time now for the more personal issues so I'll stick to 'bizness' for now, except to make some positive and encouraging noises about Rome being built in a day, nothing to fear but fear itself, and damn the torpedoes, fool rush in, every rose has its thorn, to thine own self be true and remember the Alamo! #17 is at A717103 and the conversation '17' is at http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F86434?thread=173477 If anyone's looking to cut and paste the AGG/GAG members drop down box, this has been updated to include Zaphod. Just copy everything you see between the dotted lines: -------------------------------------------------------
A dropdown list of AGG/GAG/CAC members:

Hi Zaphod,

I just dropped some comments on your peer review thread for Crop Circles. The skeptics are getting snippy over there!

Once you start following the discussion thread for AGG/GAG #17, jwf usually ends a thread or tells us to move along by giving a link to the new thread. Sorry we didn't bring you up to speed more smoothly. All of this is still pretty new to us too. It will take another several months before things are "tickety-boo" at AGG/GAG.

yeah, and remember to put something in the subject box of a new thread. The Theory used to do that no subject thing all the time and I am still used to ignoring his posts....

Deidzoeb
I really appreciate your comments on my Crop Circle entry. I was beginning to feel I was in some kind of gladiatorial arena, with all the jeering and mud slinging going on. I'm afraid I saw red with one piece of feedback, being in my view particularly disparaging. It wasn't so much the content but the delivery - which I felt was unwarranted and, moreover, would likely intimidate rather than encourage new entry-makers. Perhaps I shouldn't have risen to the bait. I suppose a subject like crop circles is a red flag to a bull, flushing the died-in-the-wool scientists/sceptics out of the woodwork. Anyhow, your idea about changing the title is a positive one, fending off criticisms about it being bias. Also, you're right about the gaping inconsistency re. eye witness reports, which I'll duly amend.
It was good to see a friendly face on the other side.
Must check out those mentioned entries sometime.

Zaphod OED
PS Love your BBC thingy in #17

If we start a 'Letters to AggGag' feature I'm gonna print that last posting from Zaphod. It says it all. The real truth about the institutionalised browbeating and chest beating of the official editing process and the kindness of AggGag wisdom.

Somewhere ..perhaps the AggGag homepage, I've said it is a 'waste of precious human resources' to disparage or discourage a writer or any form of human expression ..and I'm still reasonably happy with that new age cliche.

Good to see you about Deidzoeb. Nice one.

peace
jwf

I don't know if you can blame that on the system, jwf. The problem that Zaphod experienced seemed to be individuals making unrestrained or insensitive criticism. You could use it as an example of a different kind of atmosphere that exists in Peer Review, but I don't know if it means AGG/GAG is the only or the best alternative. It would be nice if both AGG/GAG and PR had civil, constructive criticism.

> It would be nice if both AGG/GAG and PR had civil, constructive criticism. <

I hear ya.

And now, I'd second the motion by TR that this thread with no name be abandoned. It is very confusing, being indistinguishable at a glance from any one of several threads.
But having put the question, I am open to amendments before we vote. It may be possible for example to maintain decorum and still satisfy some philosophical itch by continuing to have 'no subject'. I fear however that passage of such an amendment might so oblige us to a 'no subject' committment that inevitably we'll be watching for anyone breaking the rules by introducing any subject no matter how trivial.
No, the temptation to use the rules to score points on each other might prove too great and we could all fall out. I say we abandon this thread and join up in '18' (Deadline Tues Apr 2nd) the conversation I'll attach to TR's Food Issue once I drag it over to an AggGag page.
And #19 (Deadline Tues Apr 9th) is 'witches, etc'
peace
jwf

unsubscribe