It sounds like the editors of h2g2 may give us a green light for a parallel/alternate guide* if we can convince them we won't mess things up. So everybody, sit up straight, extinguish those doobies, and concentrate on manufacturing some credibility. We need to write a proposal that will make this thing run smoothly and democratically, and which will sell the editors on the idea.
Below are a few of the suggestions for how this system should run. I'm spelling them out here so it will be easier to discuss them and vote on them.
Newsflash: This page is not updated often enough!
Please check out the MSN group page at http://groups.msn.com/theh2g2underguide for the latest discussions offsite or links to discussions and entries on h2g2. I can't keep up!
A girl called Ben's proposal
[excerpted from post #95 of this conversation thread]
1) Create an 'Underguide' with scouts and or subs and official entries.
2) Extend the scouts and subs scheme to support the UG. This can be done gently at first, possibly moving to wards a a separate parallel scheme for those particularly interested in fiction / poetry / musings / travel / portraiture / etc
3) Create a new kind of page with the status 'Recommended' or whatever - but an OFFICIAL status
4) Use PR as the central place for all writing - the EG scouts and the UG scouts will need to be very clear on the guidelines, but this is much simpler and much less complex for newbies to understand than having two separate beauty parades
5) Keep the WW, and possibly merge it with the AWW, for works in progress
6) Create a set of UG guidelines - in fact I think that I may start up a new thread in this forum for that debate. [And so she did, at F55683?thread=237166 ]
friendlywithteeth said it would be important "to have a volunteer working with the researcher from the first changes all the way through to the Underguide: so that the researcher really understands what they are trying to say. The more you change hands, the more the creative whatsit is lost."
[see posts #4 and 7 of this conversation thread]
1. a brand new site (possibly called h3g3), for people to write fiction on for a fiction guide, or
2. a fictional part to the h2g2 edited guide, which is what the editors totally do not want.
"a new dna site that i think would definately work, would be my idea of h3g3, or have HHGG, but what it could be is the real hitchhiker's guide, which can contain loads and loads of fictional entries. edited entries on h2g2 like the earth one and the answer to life, the universe and everything one could be moved to this new site, and it could be really successful."
1. Writer submits entry to PR.
I think this step should be the damn same. I feel strongly that one review forum should be used, or else all but one will be ignored.
2. Entry gestates for one week, collects feedback.
I don't see any reason this should be different. Somewhere in the PR thread, someone should specify whether the entry is appropriate for the EG or the UG.
3. Anytime after 1 week, entry may be scouted.
I see UG scouts as being a distinct volunteer scheme from EG scouts, although one person could belong to both schemes. UnderScouts? No, that sounds terrible. Something else. Anyway, UG scouts could pick entries just like EG scouts, but would have a smaller quota to meet. They still couldn't scout their own entries, and they should scout entries that Peer Reviewers have determined are suited to the UG and not to the EG.
4. In-house person approves scout's pick(s).
This would be less necessary than it is now, because there isn't a strict set of guidelines that UG entries have to meet. It would still have to happen, because a scout picking an entry actually make the entry picked. That's a button that someone in London pushes. Sam or whoever might as well check to see that it's a legitimate entry that wasn't picked by mistake, and that there weren't any major unresolved issues in the PR thread. Usually, I imagine they would just get approved.
5. Entry is allocated to sub.
Same subs or different ones? I'm just one EG Sub, but I wouldn't mind if I received a batch including a UG Entry, for which I had to do less work than I normally do. What would the sub do? Standardize the GuideML... Add links?... Run any changes by the author, for sure. Not all Subs like contacting authors. Perhaps Subs could volunteer to take on UG entries if they want to. By agreeing to Sub UG entries, they would agree to do so in close communication with the author.
6. Entry is returned to towers and gets final polish.
I don't know what the italics would be checking for, in the final polish, but I suppose if there was something egregious, they could catch it at this point. Come to think of it, this is also when entries get artwork, if they're going to get it. Artwork for UG entries? One/week?
7. Queue for Front Page, Front Page, immortality.
Plan D (Deidzoeb's proposal)
I wrote way too much, including sections on how the process might run, how to organize the volunteers, succinct guidelines, short and long term goals, etc. It's based on A Girl Called Ben's and GTB's earlier proposals, but with lots of extra junk. Probably needs cutting. See what you think.
[insert your proposal here]
Start a conversation below if you think there's a better way than any of those listed above.
There have been some other proposals that involved modifying existing groups like CAC or The Post. This page is more about the possibility of starting a new group, so I'm not copying them here. You can find them in one of the conversation threads below.
- Why is the AWW still such a dead-end? F55683?thread=231192
- Alternative guidelines for the Underguide F55683?thread=237166
- If you're interested in setting up or participating in this project, you can also join the email group at http://groups.msn.com/theH2G2Underguide for lots more discussion offsite.
- A girl called Ben asked about how AGG/GAG/CAC works, so I wrote a little page about A932717. Not sure if there are any valuable lessons to impart, but there it is if you're curious.
- List of UG links by Waz, who has done a much better job of keeping an eye on these things than I have.
Nothing here is set in stone...
...including the title of this project or scheme or whatever. I'm partial to calling it the "Underguide," and a few others have expressed a fondness for same, but if you want to call it "Storyland Pinata Factory," then please lay out your reasons in a conversation below and we'll vote on this stuff.
We also need to talk about how to organize this thing. Scouts and subeds? Scouts who are also subeds? Are we doing a lot of subediting, or just a little, or are there certain classes of entries we'll treat differently like poems or fiction?