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

Entry: Relational Guide Mechanics - A87715542
Author: Gaston Prereth - U14993418

This is a helpful description of the Relational Guide Mechanic: A response to the much supported but somewhat idealistic UGT. The RGM is the way forward.

A question, is this supposed to be an entry on what it is, to be placed in the guide (which, basic mistakes aside, it is qualified for) or to promote debate in PR?

Concerning the entry itself, the concept it self-referencing to an extent, so only basic details would need to be corrected

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive goals as any acceptance into the guide is a comment on the PR system. Therefore we should be constantly talking about the PR system and debating its way forward.

Certainly both should occur, and this entry, whether edited or not, is likely to promote debate. However I am uncertain on whether debate on the current method will be allowed to happen in the actual PR thread - could a sub-ed advise.

If they say no however, you can always start a thread attached to the entry, with the PR thread for comments referring to the specific details of the entry.

I myself will join in the debate (read, argument when concerning h2g2) once an answer is given.

Relational Guide Mechanics (from “Relational Quantum Mechanics”),is
- doesn't need the comma, and even if it did, there should be a space between the comma and the "is"

While of cause in h2g2 we make up both words and definitions of words, I think you have the wrong definition/spelling as stands

meretricious means
"Apparently attractive but having in reality no value or integrity"
Not what we want entries to be, regardless of how the guide is defined

meritorious means "deserving praise or reward" which is closer

seperation - separation

entwinded - (i do like the word, i must say) but is probably entwined

As must as I love how meta having a discourse on the Edited Guide in the Edited Guide would be, I'm not sure this *is* suitable for PR being one person's idea rather than a factual Entry.

I could be wrong, but that's how I'm reading it.

Gaston, out of interest are you a returnee with a new account or someone who simply decided to jump in with both feet?

See i am considering the same thing Rum

is there a significant amount of people with the same (or very similar) idea on the EG?

If yes, then as a common theory then it would contribute,
If no, then I'm not certain it should be added, as it might entail hundreds of conflicting ideas in the EG

If the decision made turns out to be no, then we need to figure out where it should be sent to, in order to encourage debate

Thank you Nosebagbadger for the editing points.

And yes Rum I am an old Guard (back from 2001 when Mark Moxon was in charge and times were good... when men were real men, women were real women, and small furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were...) I have been to and from here in the intervening years, but took the change in ownership to start a fresh and take things a little more seriously (I shall no longer petition for things like the cake smiley... yes, I helped us get that!)


As to your comments about it being a common theory: If a theory is logical and consistent and puts forward a valid point of view, how many people need to support it before it gets accepted as a theory?

If we accept, as I think we must by the way we Edit the guide, that there is objective truth, then surely a theory that touches upon that truth (regardless of how many people support it) should be in the guide as it speaks of reality?

Of course, if the argument is not sound, and no one has ever supported it, then it seems perfectly reasonable for it to be rejected as it is historically uninteresting as it would not have impinged on thought or society.

I would still say that if we accept one person as sufficent for any idea to be accepted into the EG, then we will have far too many in a short time.

Therefore, without dismissing the idea of placing into the EG, and certainly not the idea given within the entry ABOUT the EG, it cannot be placed inside without more people being consulted (whether they be general researchers for a general opinion, or volunteers for the legitimacy of its entrance in the EG)

"I would still say that if we accept one person as sufficent for any idea to be accepted into the EG, then we will have far too many in a short time."

Nail. Head.

I honestly don't think it's a good idea to make a whole sort of general mish-mash out of the whole Guide, where there is no distinction between Edited and Unedited and one person having an idea is enough for it to be accepted as gospel. Apologies if I've got the wrong end of the stick there.

Have you considered putting this into the Underguide? Which was set up specially for stuff that's not really right for the EG but is too good to just sit around being just zis Entry, you know?

Thus far my argument has been solely concerning the entry and its right to be in the EG, not on the actual ideas contained - much as i would like to debate how the EG is made, i feel that this PR thread is not the correct place for it.

We need debate provoking topics in the UG, and anything that changes h2g2 (particularly an idea like this) is even better

Rum, do you think its worth pointing this out to a Miner?

I think it could well be, there's nothing wrong with what's here or the points it raises, just that it's not really right for the EG as it is... leaving aside my own thoughts on the subject this is definitely something worth bringing to the community at large for discussion.

Indeed, and the general concept of the layout and design will be one that will be asked sooner or later, better to have a better laid out starting page - though were we to start such an argument I think we should have several people with different POIs make similar pages to this, and one of us to comment to CEs and such

Nevertheless, if there is an active Miner or Polisher around, then we need to bring this to their attention

I bow down to your greater knowledge of the places where things should be.

Although I feel my position was misrepresented in some of the earlier comments, I will gracefully accept that this is not the place for such discussions.

Thank you for such an invigorating thread.

I would say thankyou, and unless you want to remove it, either PR or the Writing workshop would be an acceptable place to leave this entry until we can get a good reply or idea on where exactly you should put it, and who with.

I don't wander into the depths of hel, sorry i mean the underguide often, but with this around, I'll make sure to check what is happening

How would I go about moving it? It's been a long time since i braved the PR system

I wouldn't move just yet, since I haven't got an immediate answer on where to go with it (we don't have a "political" area concerning h2g2 just yet - thats next year)

Actual method, for when you want to move it:

Go to Peer Review, the actual page, then scroll down to where the title of your entry is displayed, to the side of it, there should be a cross which can be used to remove it
To place it in a forum, use a similar method to how you put it in, in the first place, just select a different area

On the main PR page click on the 'X' next to the Entry's... entry, then submit for review again but this time choose the Alternative Writing Workshop.

Note to self: suggest to tech guys that a means of moving Entries directly from one review forum to another would be brilliant.

Nice Sim-post

And yes, a forum to forum would be helpful,

Hi Guys

Sorry I didn't get round to reading this before now. No excuse, it was on my list of things to do, but lower down than I'd have liked.

I agree, that at the moment, I don't think this discussion piece is destined for the Edited Guide.

It may be very sought after for the Post though? Therefore moving it to the Alternative Writing Forum would be the best thing, as Dmitri and many others will be able to read and comment on it there, and that is where they select a good deal of Post material from.

As for moving, forum to forum? Even the Guide Editors don't have such amazing powers. There's a few bits of string and an old pencil stub, but not much in the way of tools behind the scenes.

I can help move this if you give me the say so Gaston, otherwise, remove it from here ( Peer Review) It will then appear as an ordinary Entry on your Personal Space again. Then you have to resubmit it to the Alternative Writing Workshop.




ps nicely written stuff though