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

*stands up*

My name is Wilma and I am a Waz lurker.

*sits down*

D'you mind terribly if I make it official and add you to my friends' list? </>

A Waz lurker!

I the opposite of mind.



Odd that lurking is sometimes, not by me, regarded as questionable on h2g2 when out in Blogosphere and webland the main aim is as many lurkers, aka subsrcribers and linkers aka web-site hits, as possible.

The PTB made a mistake calling it a friends list and not 'journals subscribed to'. I didn't use it for ages because of the implication that people not on it aren't friends. Actually, I've just got re-annoyed by that, thinking of it.

My list needs looking at again. There's lots of people I'd like to add, Matt, Trin, you, sprout, Rev Jack, Phred ... more ... but then there's the implication people not on it aren't friends . Bother, bother the PTB.

Sorry .

I usually lurk via the info page and then surfing.

Why 'toc' btw? RL I have a new doorbell set to "cuckoo ........cuckoo..cuckoo". Pete-over-the-road demanded I got a doorbell. Now it goes cuckoo when he rings it , which is neat, but I do keep opening the door to ' does your doorbell work?' from other people.

I have people on my list who expand my mind. People I just simply like don't go on. The have to offer me more Mind you, 2legs is on there I got past minding people minding, if you see what I mean

*toc*toc*toc* is what a door being knocked on sounds like when the knuckles are Lebanese, I guess. I could have said *rat*a*tat*tat* or *ding*dong* but it didn't occur to me to...

I am presuming the answer to my quetion is yes, then

Oh yes, it was yes.

Just tried knocking the table - toc is better. The t's a little shap but 'rat' and 'tat' are not right at all. Though they might be on a flimsier door... further testing is required.

That way of viewing the list is an excellent one.

Strictly Dancing's on...

Hey Wilma, I was going to post this on the other thread but ... well ... didn't. It's backlog if you're interested -> A4053412. I still sign up to it 100%. PR's tone is different now - but I don't think much else has changed.

The problem is, I think, that doing it right is not easy. Not simple, it takes time and thought and that doesn't fit today's world. Clear, easy, definite rules are ... efficient.

We have the same problem in the UG, lickety-split, skim-read, done in 5 minutes just won't work there.

We took a fair bit of flak over that article, messengers lined up for shooting - well I think so... maybe Jodan in paricular.

It's chicken and egg - does dissatifaction cause the problem, or does the problem cause the dissatifaction.

Hi Waz,

That's an excellent article and I agree with all of it. I think you *should* post it to that thread. It is not the guideline that is incomplete or incorrect, it is the use of it. As you said, the interpretation. That does not only mean by the italics, it means the reviewers as well.

My pet peeve with regard to PR and the EG is the reviewing. It is not robust enough. For example, I have made it my job to check for plagiarism and caught out a few entries just with that. I also feel that some writers need a little bit of a boost in the beginning. I have only been here a year but I have seen - for example - B'elana go from just chatting to writing excellent entries and now being a sub ed. She did not have the confidence initially. People can develop their writing skills. My first entry reads like Kafka, for gawd's sake!

Another example I can give you is Pilgrim4Truth's first venture into PR with his Truth, Faith and Tolerance entry. He was pretty much slaughtered as soon as he came in. I could see where he was coming from and insisted on guiding him, pushing a lot of vocal reviewers out of the way. I felt very odd doing that because they were 'oldies' but my lord, how vociferous they were! Totally unnecessary. I have been working with him alongside a couple of others for weeks now in the EGWW and that initial entry is now four pretty important WIP entries. That is what I mean by people slamming potential gems down. It is wrong, imo.

My opinion is this: it is not the Guidelines but the behaviour of reviewers that is the problem. Writing is a creative activity. You cannot create in a negative atmosphere. Reviewers are honour bound to at least be polite. It is possible to criticise politely. I have done it many times, I have received polite criticisms many times. Get the egos and stroppy gits out of PR and get more people reviewing constructively. I have suggested a little more humour in PR, I have said 'your readers are intelligent, they just don't know of this topic'. I think that proper reviewing can do it. Just that.

*shrug* I get tired of arguing the same mantra over and over, you know? When I see the same crud being dished out and the same chips perching insolently on the same shoulders, I just want to walk away back into my own little familiar threads and leave well alone. Unfortunately for me, I love this site, I believe in the power of the community. I see fantastic green talent everywhere and threads like *that* one *points head that way* really wind me up.

Agreed about the reviewing. Friendly and fluffy seem to get equated - they are emphatically not the same thing. By my definition, anyway. Fluff, I've little time for.

Pilgrim4Truth - I saw, he was lucky. Hats off to you. I understood so little I couldn't comment with any honesty.

I seldom get to PR, just dip in at random occasionally, because the AWW takes most of what I've got. PR would actually be a more natural environment ... but I see a basic lack of value given to authors on h2g2 that I have a real problem with. They're the golden egg laying geese and get next to no nourishment. The site seems to treat them as if it's doing them a favour. It always has, and when DNA was around perhaps it was. But that's not so anymore. It's something I can't get past, the UnderGuide's set up to work differently. The Profanity Filter effects aside, we have control over how we treat people.

Don't get too wound up... I won't say the 'just a web-site' line, it's not, and there's a suspension of disbelief thing going on here that's important to h2's working and that line damages it. But, periodic storms have been h2's way and often seem to revitalise the place. I do get wound up - but more by the occasional private but visible stuff, rather than the big 'hoohaa' which leads to lots of discussion and that greater understanding and cleared air can come from.

Oh, the link. Don't know. It's Pin's storm and he won't have forgotten that page. Plus the time for it has maybe gone. I'll think about it though.

Well, seems like some good is coming of this. Rich has a cool thread going and the IID 'experiment' thread is flourishing. We'll see how it develops.