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

New page...

Anything new? I've been jotting down a few ideas that will only be useful when this scheme gets going. Are we wasting momentum or are we trying to prepare? By the way, so far, here are the results of this so far-

1- A,D,A,D,C,A,B
2- A,C,A,A,A,A,A
3- A,A,A,B,A,B,B
4- B,A,B,B,A,B,A
5- B,A,B,B,*,C,C
6- A,A,A,A,A,C,A
7- B,C,C,B,B,B,B
8- A,C,A,C,A,A,A
9- C,D,C,C,C,C,C
10- B,C,A,B,A,A,A

*Where GTB abstained



PS, I've been thinking about the way we're choosing the candidates for the UG editors persona, and I think it ought to be rethought

Seven out of 15 miners voted? Where's our Sargeant-at-Arms to press delinquent members into voting? I counted 15 miners signed up on one of our pages.

Seriously, though, I know what the word quorum means, but I'm not entirely sure how it works in standard practice. Is there a set percentage of people voting that forms a quorum according to Robert's Rules of Order, or would we have needed to agree on a number before voting in order to claim a quorum?

I could go to those other volunteers and shame them into voting, if necessary.

Vote or get off the pot, people!

I believe Sir Mort went to all of the UG Miners Personal Spaces and sent them a link to the 'Why is AWW...' thread. Post something on that thread and the miners might come here.

>>I counted 15 miners signed up on one of our pages

Was it A1000242? One of my only pages...

Yep, that was the one. I'll try to find Sir Mort's posts and add it to those threads. Thanks.

A quorum is usually a half (rounded up) or two thirds, I think. 7 out of 15 doesn't cut it, unless we cut corners by defining an active miner as one who bothered to vote, in which case we have 100% of active miners reporting.

From the votes so far, questions 2, 6 and 9 seem pretty clearly decided, and 7 and 8 are only slightly less clear. Let's see what that actually means...

2. Will Miners have quotas for nominating/voting?
A. Yes, to be determined by UG Editors and/or Italics later as we ramp up to full steam and understand how many entries are required.

6. Entries should gestate in our forum (hopefully collecting comments and suggestions) for a minimum period of:
A. One week, so that even the best entries will have a chance for reviewers to comment.

9. Do we maintain official UG archives (categorised and maintained by the Italics after they accept entries), unofficial archives (by UG miners), or both?
C. Both, so that UG entries will be integrated into the h2g2 system but also have an archive devoted to them.

Those all sound fine to me.

7. Should the email group for the Underguide be open for everyone to read and participate in, or closed (available only to miners)? Note that Italics suggested closed.
B. Closed.

8. Should we put off answering "How will Underguide entries be shown to be Underguide entries?" and let the UG Editors figure it out with the Italics later?
A. Yes.

Those seem fine, too. Can we declare these 5 issues decided, and get on with the others? Unless someone else comes along and votes, that is.

Of the remaining questions, #4 concerns the role of the UG Editors, and the others are more technical details. I suggest that we clearly define a role (or roles) for the editors, announce a deadline for receiving nominations, have a vote, and then let them decide the remaining issues amongst themselves.

Any seconders?


GTB

Yes i agree with those 5

#4 concerns the role of the UG Editors, and the others are more technical details. I suggest that we clearly define a role (or roles) for the editors, announce a deadline for receiving nominations, have a vote, and then let them decide the remaining issues amongst themselves.


Sounds fair enough - voting protocol suggested at F118456?thread=278663&post=3488422

3 threads already!

Just the roles left to discuss then?

Yeah, I saw some discussion of voting protocol going on... need to read b'log.

It's also been suggested that we shouldn't declare the voting on these 10 questions complete, as we've yet to make any kind of quorum. I wouldn't be averse to spending one more week gathering votes, counting from the time the 8 miners who haven't yet voted are reminded. Did someone say they were going to do that, or do we need a volunteer?

In that case, the order of business would be:
1. One more week of voting on these questions.
2. Tabluate the votes, close the closed issues, set the open ones aside.
3. Define roles of UG Editors.
4. Set up nominating/voting protocol for UG Editors.
5. Implement that protocol.
6. Let UG Editors deal with remaining open issues.

As far as who sets up and runs the elections, I'm perfectly happy having it done by whichever energetic soul takes it upon themselves, as long as they maintain some reasonable level of transparency and responsiveness. Anyone who can doing without getting booed offstage, basically. I'd give it a whirl.


GTB

well if you count post 26 as my vote - I agree with waht has been so far agreed as listed in your post (consider me chased up!)then that is only 7 left.

After Sir Mort put wake up calls on all Miners' personal spaces, I jumped into the same "Underguide Update" threads and asked the delinquents to please vote on this thread. Can we assume that any Miner who has not voted or made an appearance by 28 May 2003 has forfeit their vote on these matters?

OK since I am a new (and delinquent) miner here are my votes

1. A. Three heads better than 2
2. A.
3. A.
4. B.
5. C. Going Underguide Review
6. A. (Best to keep it in line with PR)
7. B. (Once I am in it )
8. A.
9. C.
10. B.

(I thought I'd had my last multiple guess exam when I left Uni )

Hmm, looks like we're making some progress.

I agree with GTB and Deidzoeb on... just about everything. I'm glad that the wheels are in motion

1. How should UG entries be chosen?
***A.


2. Will Miners have quotas for nominating/voting?
***A.

3. Will Miner/subs have quotas for how many they must sub?
***A.

4. The role of UG Editors should be
***C. under discussion

5. The review forum devoted to the Underguide should be titled:
***B.

6. Entries should gestate in our forum (hopefully collecting comments and suggestions) for a minimum period of:
***A.

7. Should the email group for the Underguide be open for everyone to read and participate in, or closed (available only to miners)? Note that Italics suggested closed.
***B.


8. Should we put off answering "How will Underguide entries be shown to be Underguide entries?" and let the UG Editors figure it out with the Italics later?
***A.

9. Do we maintain official UG archives (categorised and maintained by the Italics after they accept entries), unofficial archives (by UG miners), or both? Note that Italics said they planned to add UG entries to the 'World of h2g2' section anyhow. Also note that Jodan and fwt have begun working on an unofficial categorisation system, taken on the mantle of UG Archivists, and could carry on a guerilla archiving campaign even if we didn't officially sanction their unofficial activities.
***C.

10. Should keywords be listed at the end of UG entries to aid searchers?
***A.

Eep! I read other people's choices a while back, but forgot to vote myself...

I. How should UG entries be chosen? A

II. Will Miners have quotas for nominating/voting?
C [To begin with yes, but as the scheme grows this can be dropped]

III. Will Miner/subs have quotas for how many they must sub?
C [As Above]

IV. The role of UG Editors should be
B.

V. The review forum devoted to the Underguide should be titled:
C [Underguide Peer Review?: as this puts it on a par with PR, but does what it says on the can!]

VI. Entries should gestate in our forum for a minimum period of:
A.

VII. Should the email group for the Underguide be open for everyone to read and participate in, or closed (available only to miners)? Note that Italics suggested closed.
C [As everyone else has said!]

VIII. Should we put off answering "How will Underguide entries be shown to be Underguide entries?" and let the UG Editors figure it out with the Italics later?
B [With reference to the main body of miners]

IX. Do we maintain official UG archives , unofficial archives or both? C: Fight the Power! Ya Basta! etc. etc.

X. Should keywords be listed at the end of UG entries to aid searchers?
B