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

Apologies for starting a new thread but I couldn't find the relevant one where this was asked.

Someone was concerned that the BBC Trust document on the BBC's PQF proposals said that H2G2 would close. I contacted the Trust and it turns out that later in the document (page 12) it says:

"The BBC Executive proposes to remove the h2g2 product from BBC Online by divesting ownership of the brand and site to an independent third party."

That will teach me to read documents properly.

I hope that helps.

Thanks

Good good, glad the higher-ups are thinking along the same lines as you.

Here's a bit more:

>>
h2g2

The BBC Executive proposes to remove the h2g2 product from BBC Online by divesting
ownership of the brand and site to an independent third party. The h2g2 product is a mix
of social networking, knowledge repository and discussion group based on the Hitchhiker’s
Guide to the Galaxy. This is unlikely to have a material impact on other online
organisations and on the market as a whole.
<<

http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/online_strategy/online_strategy.txt

Hi Nick. Your original answer is here: F77636?thread=8045490&skip=53

To the question posed here: F77636?thread=8045490&skip=19



(And, should you even need it, the "Where's that thread?" thread is here: F19585?thread=612457 )

Interesting reading Kea.

Can&#39;t say I understood it all, but would need to spend a couple of hours on it!

GT

>>BBC Online’s mission, like that of the BBC as a whole, is to enrich people’s lives with products and services that inform, educate and entertain.<<

Apparently we don't fit into this description of the BBC Online mission.

Or we fit it to a T and they're blind.

I am starting to feel like the move away from the bbc is going to be a Very Good Thing (assuming it works out well ).

PDF Version: http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/assets/files/pdf/our_work/online_strategy/online_strategy.pdf

>>
In addition to the changes above, it is proposed to move H2G2 off BBC Online, with the possibility of return to its community or originating foundation.
<<

Originating Foundation? The Digital Village? Do they still exist?

TRiG.

Well, h2g2 researchers have come up with more ideas in the last two weeks for developing the site than the Beeb have since they took it over back in the day!

Shall I start a rumour that the original agreement between
the Beeb and Digital Village was a ten year lease and when
they went to renew it someone like Jim Lynn said "Hey hold
on! I own the h2g2.com domain and this project has proved
its viability over ten years. I can now make a bob or two by
refusing to maintain that domain as a forwarding server."

I suspect some of the originals at DigVill have already begun
plans to incorporate a lot of the ideas we've been coming up
with. Like, it's probably time for a 'Best of h2g2' book with 100
of our best Edited Entries and 42 from CAC and Underguide.

Nothing like a death notice to put life into a community.


~jwf~

wOw.

or alternately

WoW

We is moving.

""BBC Trust document about H2G2""

question is!!!!!!!

do we Trust the BBC??????

>>I am starting to feel like the move away from the bbc is going to be a Very Good Thing (assuming it works out well ).

Starting?

I was wary of the BBC since the first announcement. We'd have not made it past October 2001 without them, and huge gratitude to Ashley Highfield for that. But we'd have been better off any time after 2005 or so, once people really got the hang of open source code and monetising websites and free of their very limited (lack) of vision. It must have been heart-breaking to be an Italic.

Exactly. Although the BBC saved h2g2 when they took it on from TDV, they were never the ideal home for the community. Some of the changes they made were obvious and unpopular at the time (stricter moderation, banning of non-English postings), but the lack of development since then has been surprising. As a trivial example, I'm posting in alabaster, and I'm looking at the same fish-on-a-bike advert for the peer review system that was there in 2000! (TDV used to use it as a place-holder if they didn't have a paid-for advert available).

A new owner may be better than the BBC, or may be worse. And there's always the possibility that a new owner will close it down in the future. But it's in no way a guaranteed disaster.

You know, this is the first time I've seen it mentioned, but I've been wondering if some of the original founders/staff are (or would be) interested in taking it back on...

Lets face it, it _needs_ a lot less work doing on it than it did when they started up... The infrastructure is already in place, the software works (or did until the beeb decided to try and integrate us into the rest of their website) and the community support groups (aces, scouts, curators, etc.) are up and running...

Hardware is cheaper than it was a decade ago, webhosting is cheaper...

Ok, the more staff you have then the more development you can do, but it could be kept running on a relative shoestring.

My dream is that an announcement comes through saying the site has been taken over by a group of private individuals, including Jim Lynn, Robbie Stamp, Peta Haigh & Mark Moxon...

>>Starting?


Yes, well, I am feeling a bit slow at the moment. I guess I saw us as making the best of a bad situation, whereas now I'm wondering if this is just what we need.

Nice dream team Whisky.

>> My dream is that an announcement comes through saying the site has been taken over by a group of private individuals, including Jim Lynn, Robbie Stamp, Peta Haigh & Mark Moxon...


I love it when you talk dirty, Whisky. Sadly I suspect that ten years is too much time to turn back for a sentimental gesture.

Kea, it was noticable that the Brits were less whelmed by the BBC announcement way back when than the non-Brits. If you knew auntie like we knew auntie.... Less flippantly, we needed the BBC at the time, but then we and the internet grew up.

Ben

Crossposting from the 'Stockholm' thread because it's better in it's place here:

From the "Putting Quality First for BBC Online: Summary of
Executive Submission" :
"We understand that no independent content is commissioned for the h2g2 site, and therefore the closure and sale of h2g2 to a third party will have no significant effect on suppliers to BBC Online."

I think this means to say, from the context of the report, that there is no third party involved in the way of suppliers such as advertising and paid-for content.

So no old ties and commercial links to be severed before h2g2 is disposed of.

---
"The offer will strive to meet users’ appetites for inspiration, serendipity and new experiences through superb user experience and navigation."

Ummmm... Isn't that what h2g2 does?
Oh well, at least we can hijack that phrase for our own purposes.

---
"The Homepage will be the discovery engine for the BBC, offering a consistent experience on whatever platform or device is chosen by the user. Future versions of the Homepage will deliver a more relevant and personalised experience for the entire audience."

Whut ?!
Finally they listen to us and then...
Never Mind.
We'll do it ourselves, and better


Cheers!
Martin
---
Free?! Does that mean I can't get a Discount?
I thought I heard a Dolphin Wistle ...

Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to (insert destination here once decided) we go, hi ho, hi ho...