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

Fate and coincidence - should I ignore it? No.

Firstly, I was surfing around trying to find out some information for Oberon2001's (U204088) History of Film - A864245. In the University of Houston excellent Engine's of our Ingenuity ("I'm John Lienhard, at the University of Houston, where we're interested in the way inventive minds (pause) work") web site (http://www.uh.edu/engines) where John Lienhard eloquently weaves together engineering and science with art and literature, I stumbled across the name Hieronymus Bosch. It was in http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi941.htm which had come up when I'd used the UH search engine to search for 'movie'. I paid no attention to it, but the name obviously stuck somewhere in my id.

Next, mere moments later, I was back in H2G2 and found, having seen that you were on-line, your Entry "Entries I Would Have Written If I Could Have Been Bothered". Again Hieronymus Bosch ... I went back to the UH site to check that I wasn't mistaken. I wasn't.

Twice in two minutes? What's going on?

So I've decided to venture into the unknown and tackle Hieronymus Bosch. In advance, I'm grateful for the pointers you are going to provide. We'll make it Collaborative; then you can just throw stuff out willy-nilly and I'll 'edit' it into something grammatical.

To begin then, how do you want to deal with him? As a twisted genius; a heretic; a scientific diarist; pessimist, satirist, or time-traveller? Did he ever leave 's-Hertogenbosch; did he ever meet Leonardo Da Vinci? I don't think a dry biography is really going to wash here is it?

Trout

"I'm grateful for the pointers you are going to provide."

Presumption, my dear Trout. Read the title of this entry again. It is not "Entries I Would Have Written If I Could Have Been Bothered". It is "Entries I Would Have Written If I Was Still Bothering". Rather the point of the thing is that I wish to have no further input to the Edited Guide, as author, prime mover, collaborator or whatever.

Good luck with your entry.

H.

Please can you explain ...

"I'd like to read these entries, which is why I'll be writing them, possibly."

Trout

Gladly.

A650675 , A656859 , A676316 , A685055 , 742655 .

Just a few of the entries I've written. All those and others I wrote not so much for the benefit of others, but for my own curiosity. I wanted to see how I would express the ideas I had about them, such as - how do you describe how to make a working paper plane in plain text?

Possibly for that reason, they are the ones which change the least between my original and the final Edited version.

(Aside: where would the site be without professional journalists as paid Editors to add (and yes, I *do* mean "add", not "remove") spurious and factually incorrect extra examples, spelling and grammatical errors, and to ruin punchlines by sticking too close to the letter of the style rules?).

The entries on the list are the ones I may, at some point, write for my own benefit for the same reason. I may even submit them for publication somewhere. Just not here.

Sufficient explanation...?

H.

Although I don't know why some prank-caller with a grudge was phoning you up in the middle of the night perhaps you shouldn't take your day-to-day efforts so personally. There's no glory in it for you or I whether our stuff gets picked or not; or edited badly or not. Perhaps that is what you've just told me above - that you use the site to practice your style. Same here. It is good to try to write stuff which people find (if not amusing at least compelling and) informative. I think you have proven success there. Then again, a PR thread that doesn't make 20 posts (including all the fluff) is somewhat uninspiring. Much better to stir the pot a bit. But no need to get hot under the collar. Sit back, have some suitable libation and practice your diplomatic skills instead!

Trout

"Although I don't know why some prank-caller with a grudge was phoning you up in the middle of the night"

And trust me, you don't *want* to know.

"perhaps you shouldn't take your day-to-day efforts so personally."

If by 'don't take it personally' you mean 'don't get upset', then be assured that I do not - this is merely a website, peopled, as far as I'm concerned, almost entirely by rather well-programmed Turing machines (in some cases better programmed than others...).

If you mean 'don't take it as related to you personally', then I'm a bit mystified, as there's no other way I can see to take it. But hey, waddayou care?

"There's no glory in it for you or I whether our stuff gets picked or not; or edited badly or not."

Never suggested there was, re: picking. Getting something picked is in some ways depressingly easy. I was really, really chuffed when my first entry was picked. I thought then that that meant it was something special. Suffice to say I don't think that any more.

But bad Editing vexes me. Note: not subEditing. Those guys are volunteers doing it in their spare time for nothing, and my experiences of them have been 100% positive.

But look at my space, at the things which DON'T amuse me, and you'll see "people who are reluctant to do the job they're paid for". The Editors of this site are, as one of them recently saw fit to remind me, professional journalists. One would therefore expect them to be able to construct a grammatically correct sentence in English without help from an engineer. And one would expect wrong. One might also expect them to correct things which are wrong, rather than repeatedly and despite loud protests taking things which are right and making them wrong. One might expect that since they're getting PAID to edit, they'd at least do it with some degree of detectable competence. Five entries go on the Front Page each day - we're not talking War and Peace here, and remember these people are sitting in front of machines equipped with spelling and grammar checkers...



"Perhaps that is what you've just told me above - that you use the site to practice your style. Same here."

Good-oh.

"It is good to try to write stuff which people find (if not amusing at least compelling and) informative. I think you have proven success there. Then again, a PR thread that doesn't make 20 posts (including all the fluff) is somewhat uninspiring."

Depends... you could take it that you've just written something near to perfect. Admittedly, it's only happened to me once...

"Much better to stir the pot a bit."

I would have agreed, three weeks ago or so. No longer. The pot, such as it is, has, as far as I can see, congealed into a lumpen mass which resists further stirring. Much better to take your wooden spoon out and leave it to burn. As I'm sure you're aware, I'm not the only one who thinks this way right now...

"But no need to get hot under the collar."

I'm not hot under the collar. I'm simply don't care enough to get hot under the collar. As little as a month ago I might have been hopping mad. Now I'm in a state of resigned ennui.

"Sit back, have some suitable libation and practice your diplomatic skills instead!"

Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a stick. Well, I'm not looking for a stick. I'm leaving the dog to bark and growl and drool and lick its own b*****ks and I'm just not bothering. Why would I? It's not worth it, is it? Like you say above, there's no kudos to be had, and what entertainment value the place had is waning fast, for me. This is not a big thing, of course. Most people come here, read, and leave. Many join, make one posting, and never return. I just hung around a bit longer, is all. But that time is coming to an end, as everything does.

TTFN.

H.

"... where would the site be without professional journalists as paid Editors ..." and " ... bad Editing vexes me."

Yes. But perhaps you should console yopurself with the fact that if they were proper journalists, they’d have proper journalistic jobs, writing for The Telegraph or The Guardian or whatever ... they wouldn't be shoved into a darkened room to edit the crap the likes of you and me churn out.


"One would therefore expect them to be able to construct a grammatically correct sentence in English without help from an engineer."

Music to my ears. No need to prove to me your off-the-cuff 'sang-froid' again though.

"Diplomacy is the art of saying "nice doggy" until you can find a stick."

*ollocks. Diplomacy is a matter of divide and conquer. That doesn’t need a stick, not even a metaphorical one.

Perhaps it can be argued that your use of such a trite and profoundly absurd statement to justify your subsequent argument smacks of the desired intent of those who would seek to justify their faith by professing that it is prescribed in their own preferred magic book.


"I'm not hot under the collar."

I suppose I was taken aback (excuse me if I'm wrong) by your assertion (to my recall) that someone was an Oik (or more) for not understanding chemistry. If you didn't post the insult, or one similar, then I withdraw.


"Why would I? It's not worth it, is it?"

It depends on what you want. Maybe creative writing is a hobby for you because, at work, you are trapped within the codified strata of an engineering environment. This is your release, your pressure relief valve. Yes, no, maybe ... you’re private, I know. Either way, if you think you should have done journalism, then perhaps you should go and prove yourself in real life.

Trout

"...perhaps you should console yopurself with the fact that if they were proper journalists, they'd have proper journalistic jobs..."

I must admit, that thought has crossed my mind once or twice.

My sister happens to be a journalist. Became one after failing some exams. She's worked on a number of national publications, both staff and freelance, and she's never once had what I'd call a "proper job". In fact, I think she became a journalist in order to avoid having to get a proper job...

"Music to my ears. No need to prove to me your off-the-cuff 'sang-froid' again though."

That sounded good. I wish I knew what it meant.

"Diplomacy is...."

******ks. ...

Perhaps it can be argued that your use of such a trite and profoundly absurd statement to justify your subsequent argument smacks of the desired intent of those who would seek to justify their faith by professing that it is prescribed in their own preferred magic book."

Or perhaps it can be argued that that was the first one line gag about diplomacy I pulled out of my memory and stuck in a post. Not everything I write is significant, and not everything I write is a dogmatic statement of something I believe.

Dogma's b*****ks. That's something I believe...

"I'm not hot under the collar."

"I suppose I was taken aback (excuse me if I'm wrong) by your assertion (to my recall) that someone was an Oik (or more) for not understanding chemistry. If you didn't post the insult, or one similar, then I withdraw."

I didn't post that someone was an oik for not understanding chemistry. Most people don't understand chemistry. But then, most people don't claim to.

I DID call someone an oik. Said person had posted, in several places, something entirely fatuous and factually incorrect, something they stated as though an authority on the subject. When someone mildly challenged them on it, the response was patronising - phrases like "I'm keeping this simple for you, OK?". All designed to make the original author sound like some well-qualified genius deigning to share his erudition with the ignorant masses. Except - said "genius" couldn't answer the simplest, most straightforward questions on his chosen subject. Note: HIS chosen subject. Something HE decided to come here and pronounce on as though an authority. So, yes, I pointed out that he had feet, and apparently also braincells, of clay. And yes, I used the word "oik". So sue me.

"It depends on what you want. Maybe creative writing is a hobby for you because, at work, you are trapped within the codified strata of an engineering environment."

If only the engineering enviroment were as simple as that. If only it were codified to the point where there is no need for creativity, there'd be no need for engineers. Maybe this time next century...

And I just did a calculation to work out roughly how much of my time I actually spend at work, and to my surprise I'm in work for less than 51% of the days in a year. Put another way, on more than 180 days a year, I don't even go to work. That fact has just cheered me up!

"This is your release, your pressure relief valve."

The day I need a website as a pressure relief valve is the day I need locking up. Not today...

"if you think you should have done journalism, then perhaps you should go and prove yourself in real life."

Whatever gives you that idea? Just because I think I can do someone else's job better than they can, doesn't mean I WANT to. I see people every day and know I can do their job better, more efficiently, more helpfully, with less effort. I expect most people do. Who hasn't stood waiting while some low-level functionary finishes doing something unrelated to their job before getting on with what they're paid for?

I don't think I should have done journalism, for the same reason I don't think I should have done teaching, or joined the army, or worked in McDonalds. Because I *passed* my exams, and got the job I wanted, that required that I had.

I know personally teachers, policemen, soldiers, firefighters and, yes, journalists, who are in those jobs because they failed, either in exams or later, to get the careers they'd set their hearts on. I don't know ANY engineers who do what they do because they wanted to be something else and failed.

Significant? I doubt it. It's just an observation. I could say the same thing about doctors, fighter pilots, professional athletes, mountaineers, scientists.

This place is a diversion. For a while, it seemed important. But as the old saying goes, this too shall pass. Someone said to me the other day that this place was once cutting edge, but isn't any more. I agree. It's a little too cosy, too comfortable, too... pedestrian, for want of a less controversial word.

Well that's my rant for the evening. I have only one question.

What's it to you?

H.

"And did a much better job than I would have, too."

Flattered, not convinced. I reckon your input would have made it a true belter.

DMT

bookmark

What happened to HVL?

Surely you know?

Hoovooloo has 'nuked' his personal space and deleted his nickname, removing all links to previous conversations. It must have taken a while too.

This is clearly in protest at his edited entry on 'A Gentleman's Guide to the Use of a Camcorder' being deleted from the site. There are a number of threads discussing this issue. Concensus seems to be that, while Hoo was treated very shabbily, there is nothing that can be done to reverse the decision.

Hoo may still be around under his alter-ego of Frumius Bandersnatch though.

I believe he has also suffered some kind of harassment, on and off site, and has had some well publicised run-ins with Justin and Tango which were not exactly resolved to his satisfaction. It may have been a combination of these factors which led to his dramatic exit.

Reading between the lines I suspect Hoo may also have got bored with the place and the way it is going. This is a pity because his kind of direct and pithy commentary is sadly lacking in this [increasingly?] politically correct space. There are very few researchers who have contributed as much as Hoo and the place is very much the poorer without him. When you put as much of yourself into something as he has here it must hurt a lot to encounter such apparent rejection. Hoo should know he has a lot of supporters, even if he called them 'stalkers', so I hope he will reconsider.

F

I like him, mostly because he's quite clearly neither d**b-a**e nor sycophant.

Blandwards here we go.

Trout, Montague