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

First of all I, personally, am not much in favour of taking the UG to a new DNA site. As I understand it the aim is to make non-EG-material some part of the h2g2 guide, creating h3g3 wouzld prevent just that. And it would also require the BBC to give us a DNA site (pretty much) of our own. And I can't see them doing that.

While I realise that the proposals quoted above are only shortened versions of some heaps of backlog, I'd like to suggest this:
Merge the proposals by agcBen and GTB. [Surprising idea, given the subject of this thread, eh ]

From my POV, agcBen's suggestions center around the 'material' parts [rules, where should the UG-PR be located ...], while GTB's proposal centres around the 'formal' matters [scouting, subbing...].
These seem like different sides of the same coin or soemthing. At least they are not mutually exclusive.

So, how does this unifying theory sound to you?
Tube

Great, now you did it and got me involved!

I wondered how long it would be before you joined in the fun, Tube.

Tube, have you read at the MSN group? There's been some debate over there which is also part of the backlog.

(Rule #2 - Nobody's read ALL the backlog.)

I agree with what you're proposing though. We ought to start bringing all our ideas together into one write-up that covers all the angles of what we're proposing.

From what I've seen, the main practical issues that have more than one side so far are A) Which review forum to use, and B) Guidelines for the UG. Question A is basically down to a debate between PR and AWW, I think, and question B is just a matter of someone writing something up, calling it official, and modifying it in response to feedback.

At a more conceptual level, there's the question of spelling out the vision behind the UG. There's a very clear vision behind the EG, and there are also existing visions guiding such groups as the Post and AGG/GAG/CAC. We need to figure out where we stand with respect to these groups, with which we're not trying to compete, but to complement.

I need to sleep just about now, but the next time I'm online, I'll have a shot at writing something that maybe Deidzoeb can include on this page? Unless someone else does it while I'm sleeping... , nudge nudge...


GTB

Oh, hi Ben! Good morning, simulpost, etc...

MSN group?

Evening, GTB! Or whatever time it is there!

The MSN Group is at http://groups.msn.com/TheH2G2Underguide, Tube, just sign up and join in. In fact - anyone who wants to join in, please do so. The only request is that you use your ususal h2g2 ID.

B

Ah, f**k, you really want me to join this M$ .Net b*lls**t?
Is it really a good idea to split the conversations in two (h2g2=public vs MSN=restricted)?

It's public there, too

Probably not. But the MSN group is just as open as h2g2 is.

It has the advantage of not clogging up the fora here, and of being easier to monitor, since emails arrive in your inbox.

There is a saying that you should never watch laws or sausages being made, and I have a feeling that a proposal from a group of h2g2 volunteers falls into the same category.

There is also the possibility that it could be the starting point for the UG-Miners or UG-Scouts group or (whatever they are ultimately called).

But you are right - it is just an idea, not necessarily a good one!

B

provided that MSN thing would accept Opera as a valid browser. I tell you that I won't re-install IE just to join that group!

Ah, intercourse that! At least I can read the stuff there. haven't got time to really get involved ATM, I'll be back, though.

I didn't know that MSN did not work with Opera. They really are ers out in Seattle, aren't they? (How do they manage that, then? Anyone know? I mean surely they use standard web-elements in those forums, what is wierd about MSN?)

B

Knowing Micro$oft, they probably go out of their way to make sure their MSN territory and sites can't be viewed properly on software from competing companies.

Sorry about that glaring omission. I've added a link to groups.msn.com/theh2g2underguide on the Proposals page. (Also changed the name to "Proposals".)

RE: merging proposals, I thought GTB's was more like a detailed version of what agcBen had said, but I think they'd definitely fit together.