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

This would be a good time to finalize the official appearance of this group's name. Should the letter G in the middle of UnderGuide be capitalized? Researchers are going to write it dozens of different ways, but we ought to keep it consistent on all the pages we make, and we need to agree one way or the other. Should it be the "Underguide" or the "UnderGuide"? [underGuide? nah. Too 1999.]

I favor capitalising the G, but could be swayed to the other way. People are going to abbreviate this thing as UG no matter how we write it. Which brings me to my next point...

I don't understand why the abbreviation should appear in the title "UG: The UnderGuide." Homage to ET? Just "The UnderGuide" would be better.

Minor complaint about layout: to make the title more prominent, I'd suggest using a subheader for "What is the UnderGuide?" instead of header.

I'd suggest deleting the section "But, what is happening now?" I don't think people will be interested in what we're doing while the group is under construction. They'll want to know what we are, what we can do for them, how they can participate.

First paragraph under "So, what can I do to contribute to the UnderGuide" is confusing. How about this: "You can help the UnderGuide by submitting your entry to the UnderGuide Forum . Or if you don't feel writing is your forte,..."

"UnderGuide Miners are there to 'dig out' new and interesting gems that are currently going unrecognised. It is also possible to go onto 'polish' these gems, and to take them to their new home in the UnderGuide."

Most researchers already know what the scout and subed roles do in the Edited Guide, so we could use them as examples here. "UnderGuide Miners are there to 'dig out' new and interesting gems that are currently going unrecognised (similar to Scouts in the Edited Guide). Some Miners also 'polish' these gems (like Sub-editors) and take them to their new home in the UnderGuide." Something like that?

I really truly hate capital letters in the middle of concatenated words with the sort of coldly concentrated loathing that Vetinari reserves for mime artists. It is MarketingSpeak. It is a BastardOffspring spawned by CommercialGreed out of LinguisticInsensitivity; it is indulged in by those who have a TinEar and a BankruptSoul.







Having got that little rant out of the way let me say that I - clearly - have a preference for the term Underguide over the term UnderGuide. Though I hate to admit it, internal capiltalisation does occasionally add something to a word, and it does enrich the language I guess, or broaden its scope at least. However I don't thing it does any of the above in this case.

Since I am not exactly rational and dispassionate on this subject, I will go with the majority decision. There may be excellent and cogent reasons for an internal capitalisation, which I am too far out on the edge of the bell-curve to see clearly.

So at the moment, it looks as if you have one in favour and one against.



I felt that it could do with a sentance about the scope of the Underguide - I have been using sentances like:

"The most obvious differences are that Underguide entries can be in the first person, and that they can also be fiction or poetry. The scope is far wider than that: entries considered so far include travel writing, personal theories and political opinion, character studies, and deeply personal pieces.

"It goes with out saying that an Underguide entry should be well-written. It should hold the attention, and it should work. If it is intended to be funny, it should make you laugh. If it is written from the heart, it should move you. If it intended to be provocative it should make you think.

"We are starting off with broad-brush-stroke Guidelines. Some people will love the freedom, others will hate the apparent imprecision. We are supplementing the Guidelines with a list of sample entries, to give a clearer idea of what is suitable for the Underguide.

"There are differences between the way that Underguide gems are nominated and polished and the way that Edited Guide entries are picked and subbed. The best ways of doing this have been debated at length over several threads."



Sorry - the above turned into more than a few sentences, but I do think it is worth acknowledging process (but not describing it) and outlining the Guidelines, (or lack of them!).



WELL DONE fwt! What you have written is excellent.

Ben

OK..a to-do list:
Get rid of 'UG:'
Make it into a subheader
Add to 'what is' section
Cut out 'What's happening now' section
Did I Miss anything?



You're all going to make me late for verk aren't ye?

Capitalisation: I'm not bothered either way, so I abstain.

Thanks for commenting: did you all find it difficult to write UG admin entries?

Oh, and did you want anymore links to different parts of the UG infrastructure?

But h2g2 is more important than work.... no?

I am running late, too, as it happens.

Without re-checking the links I think we should have links to:

The Miners' Home Page (that has internal links to the other volunteers' pages)

The Underguide Guidelines

Subcom's Plan D

Waz's most recent page, and I cannot remember what it is

I think that we should also say that the UG will start small and slow with some sort of pilot scheme - details to be decided, and that we have the cautious approval of the Editors, but that they are operating under major time-constraints.

Did I find writing the pages difficult? Well, I cheated and stole wholesale from the other Volunteer pages, but I do this sort of stuff for a living, so I can do it at the drop of a hat. In fact I spent two hours of my weekend doing a brain-dump on the business functionality of some software for the guy I was with. He only wants me for my skill-set!

B

It is indeed!

I was late, incidently though this didn't matter as I am supply at a local special needs school [job no. 2!]

Links: Check, Cross, Cross, Check!

Will add later...maybe. Maybe I'll just keep you in suspence. Like a puppet on a string

Don't we all?

I have always written it UnderGuide, but it doesn't really matter to me. Just an excuse to this thread

I have a slight preference for Underguide, but am not ready to go to shovels at dawn over it...

Good stuff FWT.

Sprout

*ahem*

Any UG homepage must fully acknowledge the reason for the UnderGuide's existence. And it most certainly must record the historical struggle to realise it:

The Post was first, and VERY early on, to recognise the need for a platform for writings other than EG entries.

<./>AggGag</.>/CAC emerged for the same reasons and found a home in . Our homepage explains the diffulties the Edited Guide presents for many writers and offers the 'unofficial' solution of being included in an issue of CAC and there-by immortalisation in the AggGag/CAC Archives.

H2g2Fiction and several other forums were also established and while a lack of official support and promotion has rendered them subject to the vagaries of the passing parade, many are more or less active. They all have a rich treasure trove of past entries. These legacies ought not to be ignored. There should at least be links from any UG homepage to these earlier efforts and especially the surviving and more vital ones like and AggGag/CAC.

For the record I like UnderGuide or Under-Guide in title or header applications because it allows the UG abbreviation. In regular conversation, like Ben I would probably write it as Underguide.
And while TURF is interesting I believe Underguide Review or UR is a nice parallel to Peer Review.

To sum up:
Edited Guide = EG and has PR
UnderGuide = UG and has UR

The many creative allusions to mining and things subterranean have been a delight. Keep up the good work, just don't forget the past or try to re-invent the wheel.

peace
jwf

Interestingly, the name Peer Review doesn't really specify that it's only for EG. But that's another conversation.

I disagree with ~jwf~ (. Earlier suggestions seemed more descriptive, because if they aren't going to keep the AWW, it's inevitable that and agggag will still use it. If we suggest the title with the word UnderGuide in it, it's running counter to The Post and AggGag. PR isn't called EGR is it?

rambling

Hey ~jwf~

I disagree: I think the essence of any introduction is to be accessible, and an indepth blow-by-blow account of how the UG came into being I would say not accessible, and may put a newbie off. What I would suggest is for someone with greater knowledge of the history behind it to write a full account, meaning those interested can read it if they wish...

Sorry :-S Just my opinion [though I will of course bow to popular opinion!]

FwT

No one is more willing to bow to popular opinion than I. Having seen that democracy really does work and that mob rule always wins, I would never stand in the way of any popular movement. Especially if there was a fire.

However, I am at a loss to understand how one can explain the "why" of an Underguide without explaining the "how".

If the Underguide is meant to offer opportunities which the Edited Guide prohibits, then it has to explain that it exists because there has been an ongoing demand for such opportunities. It has to explain that the parameters of the 'edited guide' are inflexible and that an alternative forum is necessary to accomodate this inflexibility.

Yes, of course, History is always secondary to current rules, laws and conditions and much of it gets lost, but even the almighty US government occassionally acknowledges the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights and the Gettysburg address as being the foundations upon which all the present power rests.

The h2g2Post, h2g2Fiction, <./>AggGag</.>/CAC and a dozen other attempts to build a forum for non-EG entries, are the philosophical foundations upon which the Underguide will be built.

I seek not glory for myself, but justice for ALL who have hurled themselves against the barriers of EG for the past three years! Many, like Looneytunes, Lucinda and a very long list of others, are no longer able to join your campaigns or even be here to see the victories you are accomplishing. These heroes must not be forgotten.
You stand on the shoulders of giants!


~jwf~

fwt.

On Underguide/UnderGuide I'm not really bothered 'though I marginally prefer Under-Guide to UnderGuide. (My spellchecker prefers Underside, which is tempting ... but I think not.)

I don't like TURF, UR is better.

I'm with jwf on acknowledging the Underguide's history on its homepage. I think recognising it grew out of previous efforts and now works along side them is something anyone involved with it should know. It doesn't need to be in depth - a link to a page with more detail is a good idea.

How should it finish? One day with a link to its archives perhaps .
Waz

As I have said on more than one occasion - the Underguide is merely dandruff on the shoulders of giants.

B

I hate to think what that makes me...?

feels like... lice

I see it more as a wetspot, at the scene of a most heinous crime.
Kinda like that puddle of deep Inc, our old friend Guttenburg must be standing in for Satan's amusement. Once he started printing something else besides the Bible, the whole world went to hell.

No, I don't blame the Italics for guarding the line in the sand as prescribed by the Founder. I've even forgiven them for drawing it as a circle. Took me a year to figure that one out.

~jwf~

Hey Everyone!

I'm not saying there shouldn't be something, perhaps more than there is now. I'm not saying there should be no 'how', but that it ought not to dominate the entry, or push out the 'why'.

I also think that making it easy for possible Elvises to dip their toes into the UG process is of an essence.

I also reckon that we should refrain from saying the EG is inflexible etc.: I've tried to keep EG-bashing to a minimum because for them to coexist, I don't think this is the right course of action.

Don't add a hyphen: nooo! Not more choices! Seriously though: we need to decide what terms we are using for definite.

A link to the archives: what a good idea I'll see if I can mobilise Jodan and we'll do it together.

I'm just trying to justify what I wrote, and why I has wrote it.

FwT

I'm mobile. Have you made an archive page?

is off to check

The great archival record of all '42 Issues of AggGag' has its own named link: <./>AGGGAG-Archives</.>

So does the <./>AggGag</.>/CAC homepage which explains the reason for AggGag's existence, complete with more EG and Italic bashing than y'can shake a schtick at.


How-oooo!

jwf,

Could you write an entry on the history of attempted alternates on h2g2? Then if we like it, we could give a link to it from the main Underguide page? This compromise would keep it from dominating space on the Underguide page, yet allow interested readers to see a detailed account of the subject.