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

This discussion gives the results of a community vote on a number of suggested ways to improve the quality of h2g2. This follows a number of previous discussions:

1. A general discussion - see F3719964?thread=5482356
2. Suggested actions to improve quality - see F3719964?thread=5500615
3. A community vote on those suggestions - see F3719964?thread=5529824

The results of the vote follow:

In each of the three areas, I've categorised the suggestions into those with significant agreement, those with significant disagreement, and those with mixed agreement. The numbers in square brackets at the end of each suggestion shows the number of voters who agreed, the number who disagreed, and the number of abstentions or ambiguous comments.

***

Part 1: Writing process and style

Suggestions with broad agreement:
17/3 Encourage writers to underestimate the reader's knowledge rather than their intelligence. [12, 3, 2]
53/1 Reconsider the need for writing workshops, as these don't get the same level of attention as Peer Review. [7, 2, 8]
67/1 Choose new specimen entries to feature in the Writing Guidelines, as the existing ones are getting a bit old now. [12, 0, 5]

Suggestions with broad disagreement:
17/1 Remove the Douglas Adams influence from the site. [2, 12, 3]
52/3 Style h2g2 upon the Rough Guide series. [1, 8, 8]

Suggestions with mixed agreement/disagreement:
4/4 Request a new feature to automatically convert special character codes into Guide-ML [4, 4, 9]
4/3 Encourage writers to use the Edit window buttons if weak at Guide-ML. [5, 4, 8]
17/2 Encourage 'opinionated & provocative' writing. [8, 3, 6]
17/4 Change writing guidelines to relax the 1st person rule. [4, 9, 4]
62/7 Allow entries to be factually incomplete if necessary. [7, 5, 5]
71/1 No longer see the Edited Guide as the 'central project' of h2g2. [3, 8, 6]
72/1 Pre-categorise newly-created guide entries into Edited Guide, Underguide, etc. [4, 5, 8]
75/1 Have a pop-up box for entry options (eg Guide-ML, not for review, etc), as these are not clear to the newcomer. [5, 4, 8]


Part 2: Review forums, reviewing process, picking and editing

Suggestions with broad agreement:
5/1a Remove Scout deadlines (a Scout currently makes recommendations every 4 weeks). [10, 1, 6]
5/1b Remove Scout minimum picks (a Scout is expected to recommend 2 or 3 entries). [12, 0, 5]
12/2 Allow Scouts to make additional picks (see 5/1b above). [10, 0, 7]
85/4 Require the h2g2 Editors to review their picks, as some unsuitable entries are slipping through. [8, 2, 7]
102/1 Create a set of 'how to review' guidelines. [11, 2, 4]

Suggestions with broad disagreement:
24/1 Post Peer Review comments in the 3rd person only. [0, 11, 6]
49/1 Allow unregistered, premoderated comments in Peer Review. [2, 7, 8] * this suggestion was misrepresented in the voting thread, so this result isn't representative.
66/1 Create a new h2g2 Peer Reviewers offline forum, as not all reviewers are Scouts. [2, 8, 7]

Suggestions with mixed agreement/disagreement:
12/1 Reconsider the Scout Peer Review clearout process (from time to time, inactive entries are moved into the Fleamarket, or 'back to entry'). [4, 2, 11]
62/5 Keep unsuitable entries in Peer Review rather than refer them to the Edited Guide Writing Workshop or the Alternative Writing Workshop. [5, 6, 6]
62/6 Use the Scouts offline forum (Yahoo group) more to discuss contentious points occurring in Peer Review. [3, 3, 11]
82/1 Adopt the Underguide Quality Assurance process into Peer Review. [2, 2, 13]
83/4 Have one review forum, containing every type of entry (currently there are forums for the Edited Guide - PR, Underguide - AWW, Writing Workshop - EGWW, and the Fleamarket. [5, 7, 5]
83/5 Abolish the Fleamarket forum, as it's not being used. [5, 6, 6]
122/2 Publish nothing if there's nothing good enough to publish. [8, 3, 6]


Part 3: Encouraging new writing and promoting the site

Suggestions with broad agreement:
2/1 Start a project to identify unedited entries suitable for the Edited Guide. [11, 2, 4]
6/1 Publicise the Entry of the Month competition. [9, 0, 8]
10/1 Publicise the Challenge h2g2 forum. [11, 1, 5]
10/3 Publicise first-time writers in The h2g2 Post (ie revive Emmily's column). [9, 0, 8]
10/5 Revive the Collaborative Topic of the Week. [8, 2, 7]
10/7 Publicise h2g2 via other BBC messageboards, including a tailored welcome page. [12, 2, 3]
13/1 Promote new collaborative entries via the Front Page. [9, 1, 7]
39/1 Publicise Edited Guide gaps and new Flea Market entries via the h2g2 Post. [10, 1, 6]
62/9 Publicise the home town entries project through Challenge h2g2. [5, 1, 11]
62/12 Write h2g2 - The Book. [10, 3, 4]
68/1 Publicise h2g2 via BBC radio stations. [11, 0, 6]

Suggestions with broad disagreement:
none

Suggestions with mixed agreement/disagreement:
8/2 Identify and target non-writing researchers. [4, 8, 5]
9/1 Identify and target non-writing 'old-timer' researchers. [3, 7, 7]
10/2 Start a project to identify and fill the obvious gaps in the Edited Guide. [6, 4, 7]
10/4 Revive collaborative entries, eg: a) Revive the collaborative workshop b) Create a new Writers Lounge forum to plan entries. [7, 3, 7]
10/6 Publicise the h2g2 Researchers Group. [4, 3, 10]
27/1 Start a new project to get everyone writing about their home town. [5, 3, 9]
33/1 Submit unedited entries which may be suitable for the Edited Guide into the Flea Market. [6, 2, 9]
62/1 Use the h2g2 Researchers Group forum as the repository for rewriting unedited entries, rather than the Flea Market. [2, 4, 11]
62/8 Publicise Flea Market removals via a thread in the h2g2 Researchers Group forum. [3, 2, 12]
62/11 Researchers to self-publicise the site by e-mailing links to interested organisations. [5, 5, 7]
62/13 Use the h2g2 Researchers Group as an ideas repository. [2, 3, 12]

***

I invite your comments on these. If you feel that there is now enough broad agreement to start implementing some of these suggestions, then feel free to discuss how we can do it. If you prefer to do this in a separate discussion thread or forum, then please post a link here.

Alternatively, if you feel that a suggestion is worth further discussion despite not gaining broad agreement (and it was only a small sample who voted), then please do that too.

No ground rules this time!

Icy

You mention somewhere that only 15[?] people responded to this poll/questionnaire and so I wondered if those fifteen were representative of the community and it's attitudes or were they representative of the original precepts of hootoo and now there is a majority of people who no longer adhere or feel the need to contribute to the DNA ethos?

I'm not really qualified to comment too much on Entry related matters as I have just one to my name and I needed help with it and if I ever do another I'll need help too as I'm no good at any sort of html and my grammar is lousy. But what originally drew me to hootoo was the idea of writing something that other people would find interesting(I hope) and the over riding raison d’être of this place.

I still harbour many of the thoughts of the newbie; it is a big and bewildering place, it can be difficult to work out just exactly how you do some of the things here and it easy to just wander off into the many threads here and never contribute anything to the site as it can be quite daunting and I feel like a cumbersome dolt sometimes trying to work out what to do. (Well to be truthful I am both of those)

There is as you know, a hard core of people who's names just pop up constantly in those parts of the site that contain the Guide entries and the Underguide and the Post etc, etc. It's these people who (to me anyway)represent this site's functional form within it's original raison d’être.

If you can only get fifteen people to to take the time to reply then you either failed in your efforts to get all or as many members to reply or there is just general apathy amongst the populace.



Could you pare down the results to a list of concrete proposals and then inform every member of the site that these are the proposals to be put to admin and they need to/have to, vote on them?

Icy, I think it's great that people are concerned and doing something about PR. I'm here sporadically at the moment and haven't been able to follow what's going on because of the sheer number of posts. I also haven't kept up with the voting and discussion because of the amount of time needed for what seems like a very complicated process.

I agree with Keith - an easier to access synopsis available to a wider number of people would be a good complement to the concentrated convos already going on

I'm with those two. Get a simple "manifesto" as it were, then stick it in Ask and see what people have to say.

Thanks guys,

I can do that (as indeed can anyone else), but I'm inviting a discussion of these results first.

Even though only 17 voted, I reckon that in the cases where I've marked them as broad agreement/disagreement, this is plausibly the view of the community as a whole. There are statistical methods to support this, but I won't get into that unless there's disagreement here. (People sometimes tell me that the h2g2 community isn't a democracy, but I don't really understand what they mean by that.)

We would need to indicate how the suggestions can be implemented. OK, let's run a straw man up the flagpole:

* * *

These are the suggestions which appear to have broad agreement:

17/3 Encourage writers to underestimate the reader's knowledge rather than their intelligence. [12, 3, 2]

>Request a new sentence in the Writing Guidelines (I think Alex already has this entry in Peer Review)


53/1 Reconsider the need for writing workshops, as these don't get the same level of attention as Peer Review. [7, 2, 8]

>To be honest, I'm not sure of the next step with this one. A working party, involving the Scouts and the Underguide volunteers seems like a good place to start.


67/1 Choose new specimen entries to feature in the Writing Guidelines, as the existing ones are getting a bit old now. [12, 0, 5]

>Run a Post article which describes the situation, links to the existing ones and invites suggestions for new ones (a bit like Entry of the Month, but these specimen articles are illustrative of specific points). Alert people to it on Askh2g2 and on the Front Page. Run it for a few months to allow people to spend a bit of time reading around the guide. Encourage discussion. Hold a vote at the end.


5/1a Remove Scout deadlines (a Scout currently makes recommendations every 4 weeks). [10, 1, 6]

>Volunteer Scout to discuss with the Editors on the Scouts forum.


5/1b Remove Scout minimum picks (a Scout is expected to recommend 2 or 3 entries). [12, 0, 5]

>See 5/1a above


12/2 Allow Scouts to make additional picks (see 5/1b above). [10, 0, 7]

>See 5/1a above


85/4 Require the h2g2 Editors to review their picks, as some unsuitable entries are slipping through. [8, 2, 7]

>Volunteer to discuss with the Editors on the Editorial Feedback forum (although I believe the Editors are already aware of this).


102/1 Create a set of 'how to review' guidelines. [11, 2, 4]

>A volunteer collates material on 'how to review' from the existing Help Pages and also from comments made in this series of discussions, then proposes a set of guidelines. I think this goes wider than the Volunteers, so maybe this should be discussed in Askh2g2 or The Post. Invite Editors to comment, too. Finally, propose it as a new Help Page and put it through Peer Review.


2/1 Start a project to identify unedited entries suitable for the Edited Guide. [11, 2, 4]

>Volunteer to set up a community project to identify gaps on a category-by-category basis. Invite volunteers to assist and allocate each a subset of the Edited Guide category numbers to review and report on. Publicise these through The Post (see 39/1 below). I think it will generate too many ideas for the Challenge h2g2 forum.


6/1 Publicise the Entry of the Month competition. [9, 0, 8]

>I'm not sure - it's already being promoted. Maybe we could ask the Editors to put it on the Front Page at least twice per month, or something?


10/1 Publicise the Challenge h2g2 forum. [11, 1, 5]

>Again, ask the Editors to link this on the Front Page twice per month? Invite a volunteer Challenge h2g2 fan to write an article for The Post about it, linking to some of the successful articles which were written as a result of Challenge h2g2.


10/3 Publicise first-time writers in The h2g2 Post (ie revive Emmily's column). [9, 0, 8]

>Ask the Post Team to co-ordinate this.


10/5 Revive the Collaborative Topic of the Week. [8, 2, 7]

>Invite a volunteer to set up a community project to get collaborative entries going again. I don't think this will be successful without an appetite for collaboration within the writing community, so it will need a few dedicated writers to get it going.


10/7 Publicise h2g2 via other BBC messageboards, including a tailored welcome page. [12, 2, 3]

>Discuss with Editors via Feedback forum. They are the ones with the links to the other messageboard hosts. I don't think this can work without BBC approval. (I'm happy to drive this one)


13/1 Promote new collaborative entries via the Front Page. [9, 1, 7]

>See 10/5 above.


39/1 Publicise Edited Guide gaps and new Flea Market entries via the h2g2 Post. [10, 1, 6]

>See 2/1 above.


62/9 Publicise the home town entries project through Challenge h2g2. [5, 1, 11]

>Need a volunteer to promote this as a community project - create a new Forum, put it in The Post, as the Editors to put it on the Front Page, etc. In fact, they might do a lot of the work, as they did for Counties, Universities, etc.


62/12 Write h2g2 - The Book. [10, 3, 4]

>Even though this one was a popular suggestion, SkankyRich has already been told by the BBC that it's a non-starter. I can only suggest that we continue to lobby the BBC over it, and we have a parallel discussion to see if there's a scope for a book which doesn't require BBC approval. I can see the tagline now: "The book the BBC didn't want you to read!"


68/1 Publicise h2g2 via BBC radio stations. [11, 0, 6]

>No idea whatsoever. Someone has to discuss this with the Editors in the first instance.


Icy

The Book.

Not on paper - but could it be done anyway?
...Or at least prepared, with voting and assembly as, perhaps, a supplement to The Post?

Build it and we will come.

Oh, now that I like. We could go a bit viral with it. Put together a short online "Pamphlet" (possibly AV?), bang on a catchy strap line (and a tiny "not sanctioned by the Beeb" disclaimer) then spread it round on a few likely looking forums?

Great thought, Rod. That might be even better. After all, we're after greater exposure above all else, and the easiest and most efficient way to get the word out about h2g2 is through the internet. Viral is the way to go.

Now that I could get onboard with.

Hmmm - I draw a comic which is going live very soon, and it's about a TV show, meaning it has ads, too Usually just silly ones for fun - but is there any legal reason I can't do an ad for h2g2?

I can't think of any...

But can I use the logo?

>>(and a tiny "not sanctioned by the Beeb" disclaimer)<< (Psycorp)

Maybe not Too tiny, eh?

Well that's the thing with it being viral. No disclaimer and we leave ourselves open to action from the Beeb, but if we slap a massive "Unofficial" sticker on it, we'll get disregarded as spam. It's about covering the bases without putting off the audience I think.

Following up my own suggestion, I've just sent this to a presenter on CWR (Coventry Warwickshire Radio) the local BBC station.

The guy's a local, and his name's John Butler, he was talking about local schools that have disappeared.

"I bet you hated On The Buses………..

Couldn't listen tonight, because I am working, but my old primary disappeared, it was Keresley Springfield, in Bennetts Road. A lot of the kids from there later went to Copthorne which also has been pulled down.

Copthorne school playing fields used to be opposite The Shepherd & Shepherdess pub - which is now called The Old Shepherd - What's that about eh ? Why re-name your pub ?

Working for the BBC I assume you are aware of h2g2, the Hitchhikers guide to the galaxy. I've been doing my bit to get a lot of Coventry info on there - here's a few links.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A32619693 - Coventration

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A30652616 - The Coventry Martyrs

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A2398827 - CCFC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/A892190 - A History of the City

We're trying to get more publicity for the site, in the hope of getting the BBC to spend more money on it, and I see no reason why local radio can't mention one of the BBC's own sites, so it'd be great if you can give it a plug.

Think you're a nutter Butler, but it's good to have our own nutter's on local radio. Keep up the good work.

Stuart.

(Also know as McKay the Disorganised)

Good luck with that! He's not related to the legendary Tony Butler from BRMB, is he? Jasper Carrott did a great skit on his football phone-in show.

Butler - who is still on BRMB wasand is a local legend.

I used to work in Birmigham and we used to quite often see Butler in the pub Friday evenings.

There was a fantastic sequence with Tony Butler, Tony Godden, and Butler's "man on The Road" Tony something else.

If that's the Carrot skit you're referring to then it's true. (Though slightly exagerated)

Sow c'mon you Saddlers - On Yer bike !

I was a student in Birmingham in the early Eighties, and we loved BRMB.

I have a vague recollection of Tony Butler once getting into trouble for assaulting someone in a wheelchair.