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

Entry: Making Babies - A16280453
Author: Fizzymouse - Life is Fatal - normal service may be resumed at some point in the future, then again it may not - U1899683


Hello, I've never been here before, but my chums at peer review thought I should shift this entry sharpish

Did they? Seems pretty sound advice to me, and I guess it is meant seriously. Seems a little mean...

But you're welcome in the AWW anyway, of course.



sprout

Nah, sprout It's a brilliant piece of writing but there is already an EGE on getting preggers and we didn't want this to just go back to Fizzy's PS. It's far too good to languish.


W

Why thank you Wilma, not knowing the form here, should I add links then

You could do, but it is not expected. The thing to remember is to forget the EG guidelines while in the AWW This is truly your baby and you can do what you like with it. First person references, poetry, fiction, it's all go in here. Total freedom!

This is a really difficult one, UnderGuide-wise. It's well written, alright. And much of it reads with an excellent zip and zest... but there's a but. One thing the UnderGuide has no choice over is that it can't take entries that are EG-fit, and this is so close to EG fit, barring the duplication issue... Duplication on it's own doesn't make it EG unfit from an UnderGuide point of view. It wouldn't make sense to have a part of the UG that developed into a kind of parallel of the EG.

Fizzymouse, what Wilma said there is exactly right - there are no restrictions on this now. From what's already in this piece of your style, I think you could take this further, put more of yourself in it, more tongue in cheek stuff, more extremes, more opinions... that kind of thing. For instance, on smoking, do you really want to say 'it is advisable' or would you like to yell, 'Just quit now, the pair of you!'?

That's what it would need for UnderGuide consideration. It would get consideration, it already has the attention of a couple of miners, and that's half the battle although there are no guarantees of course.

In the EG it's a case of reaching a certain standard and you'll be in at some point. With the UG it's a case of reaching a certain standard and beating the competition to catch the eye of a couple of passing miners during the monthly voting week.

All a lot more chancey. Which is why we don't normally post about what changes a piece might need to qualify. But we would if asked directly and in this case the subject came up on the PR thread.

Are you up for/ are you interested in having a go at making this more EG-unfit? More alternative? Like Wilma also said, it would be a shame for this to go back to your PS when it's got potential. Being unfitting can be fun... It wouldn't mean it couldn't have serious advice underlying it. Sometimes an approach from a seemingly opposite viewpoint, or a rant, or a very personal one-on-one with the reader, or a personal account can be very effective in giving advice.

An UGed (crossing fingers that you'll give it a go).

Thank you for your kind words and encouragement. I sorta forgot about this, and having revisited it again this evening I suppose it's really the sort of thing you've got to be in the 'mood' to do - no pun intended.

I'll give it a go this weekend when I've more time and hopefully the motivation

*puts on some low lighting, opens a bottle of and puts the light classical on in hushed tones*

Has the mood taken you with this one yet?

Not really, I revisited for a while on Sunday, but to be honest I'm not in the mood.

I will get back to it, I promise, and post when I've finished to my satisfation.

I await the triumphant climax

I'm sorry, but I think I must be too Presbyterian to take this any further, I have tweaked it, but in the end its not much different than it was.

two things :

1 - natural method of copulation appears to
have the female bend over while standing, her
mate then entering from the back - it must
have been the female's idea to lie on her back
and sucker punch the man with her beautiful
eyes

2 - the resultant offspring of a turkey baster
must be turkey bastereds

Thanks for the help langsandy I'd forgotten all about this.