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

New page... I've been talking to a few people at the AGG, and it's becoming apparent that the UG and AggGag will have to compete. It's becoming harder to avoid overlapping scouting entries. WAR!!

Ok, hello everyone. I've been pretty much offline for a few days, and see that I missed a bit of backlog. It's made good reading.

Regarding this last post, Jodan (hello, Jodan ), is there any reason an entry can't be featured both in AGG/GAG/CAC and in the UG?



Regarding picking vs voting vs seconding vs thirding, I'm not certain I'm clear what anyone means by which word. When I wrote the procedures draft at A967115, I used the word 'vote' to describe what is sort of a picking, seconding, thirding process. The difference is that a 'vote against' could 'undo' a second or a third, thus requiring another 'vote for' for inclusion. To imagine a scenario (at an offsite (MSN?) group):

Miner 1: "I nominate entry X" (1-0)
Miner 2: "I second that" (2-0)
Miner 3: "I don't think we should use entry X; here's why:..." (2-1)
Miner 4: "Well, I think it's a great choice; here's why:..." (3-1)
etc...

At this point, the entry would not yet be picked, but one more 'vote for' would do it. It occurs to me now that a 3-vote margin should be maintained for some minimum period of time, like a day or two, in order for an entry to be picked. So, if Miner 5 comes along, says 'yes' (4-1), and then no more 'nay' votes appear in a day (or two), then the entry gets picked. It's been nominated, seconded, thirded, voted against, and had the 'nay' vote compensated. It's fair at this point to say that the community of Miners likes the entry.

Is this what people mean by 'voting'? 'Thirding'? I'm a bit puzzled.



The other main issue that I recall being brought up with the procedures draft page had to do with the mechanics of how an individual sub gets access to the entry for subbing, but I think that was being discussed in a different thread... Ashley had some ideas...


GTB

My issue with the against vote: if we do that, we could end up wasting a lot of good miner input, if they only get a certain amount of votes. If 5 votes are used where 3 would do the same, we just get less input from miners. The voting system includes the against, the nomination system doesn't. Is that what you mean GTB? (Hello GTB )

There is no real reason we can't feature old CAC entries, but we will end up competing with them for newer entries. It should all go down to what the author chooses if you ask me, if the CAC and UG have reserved places for this entry, we should ask the author which he or she chooses. But that's just my

Ok, I see what you mean about the 'against' votes meaning that fewer entries would be picked than would be with the same number of votes, all being positives, but I think the quality of picked entries would be higher. If we go with 'against' votes, then we could take that fact into account, and allocate more votes per miner per week. We could even say that each miner has X 'for' votes and Y 'against' votes each week, with X > Y. Would the fact that we have control over these variables address the problem you're talking about?

Whatever system we pick can always be tweaked once it gets rolling. If we aren't picking enough entries, then we change some variable or another, and similarly if we're picking too many.

Why not spell out a couple of different systems, ask everyone in this thread which they prefer, take the one that most people like, and call it version 1.0? If it has problems, we'll address them when they arise.



I'm still not sure why you're saying there will be a conflict with CAC. ~jwf~ was saying, in some part of the backlog, that 'there will always be an AGGland', meaning that the UG may catch some entries that would fall through the cracks in the EG, but that it will also have cracks of its own. You said you've been talking to some of the Chucklers. Have they said that they expect we'll be getting our fishing lines tangled, and why? I don't want to get involved in some kind of border disputes with the fine folks at AGG/GAG/CAC; is this something we should be addressing now?


GTB

I don't want to create a problem with CAC either, but I THINK (I'm just thinking here) it will create a problem. I hadn't heard that quote from ~jwf~

I'd rather address this now, but if we work closely with CAC, I think it could end up not hurting us. I bet that if the CAC and UG work well together, we could well coexist.

how could it not work?

the CAC scout the AWW, find entries that they like, and feature them in their article. Those entries will then get a little extra attention before they are or aren't accepted for the Underguide.

spook

Someone else said this first, but we don't want the UG to be a rerun guide. It sounds petty, but there is a point to it.

CAC would show stuff that perhaps is unfinished, or perhaps if there becomes an AWW and APR then CAC get AWW while we pick entries in APR. the UG wouldn't be a re-run.

They don't want AWW if they can get APR! DOn't you think that it's a bit unlikely we can force them to unfinished works?

AGG/GAG/CAC are the UGs forerunners, they smoothed out the path, or something like that. May there always be an Aggland .

I don't think we want to force anything on anyone, which is just as well because we can't. I'm sure AGG and UG can work together. Deidzob, having a foot in each camp could maybe advise on anything we need to do to avoid treading on each others' toes.
Waz

the ambassador, if you will

On another thread there was some discussion of where we're at on Underguide issues which have yet to be decided. Sprout suggested setting up a page to list unfinished business. I thought it was a good idea so there's a summary of all the Underguide unfinished business that I'm aware of here; A984486. It would be good to settle as many of these as we can, and make what progress we can on issues we can't settle, before Ben has her meeting at the Towers.

It would also help to have a complete summary of unfinished business to work to, so if people could let me know of anything I've missed I'd be grateful.

On the page I've put a couple of links to threads discussing relevant issues so the discussion can continue on those, if people choose, instead of switching to new threads. If people let me know where issues are being discussed I add more links.
Waz

My favorite explanation of the UG in breif is at F83805?thread=253131 posting 3