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

("cutting an argument off at the pass" )

Pin, I know that h2g2 does sometimes seem like a war, but I'd worry about using terms like firing off, ammunition and especially 'enemy'. We are not enemies with those who disagree with us. We are all brothers and sisters and we all have the best intentions.

It's my belief that we have to work together to convince people that there's a problem first, and then present a solution. I don't know if anyone here has the best solution. It would be arrogant to contend that though only a small portion of the community has voiced its opinion, it is correct simply because it is the only to stand and speak.

(Which, incidentally, is why I would prefer debate right now as much as planning - it looks like we're plotting a coup rather than trying to teach)

I am not a good writer - I do not expect to be able to do anything but my best. I asked if I could help Pin because I thought I was better at organizing and working within the system to change it than Pin. Now, Pin, if you deny letting me do those things, you're not only hurting the cause but hurting an old friend

I don't want to see fighting amongst each other in this thread. We're going to work to succeed, not to win or to prove ourselves, and we're going to need to cooperate.

But Pin does fire off Bro Jodan ...where'd be be if he, and others, didn't, hadn't, couldn't.

db, I'm not nearly organised enough to summarise. I needed to reread because I dived (dove?) into this with my own concerns or preconceptions or something and didn't get in tune with what they're (Jodan and Pin) actually addressing in PROD. I expected, and read into it, much more about the scope of the EG than is there. Reread as preconception free as I could manage, PROD now comes over as being about how PR shapes entries. Other than the exhortation that anyone signing up to it write engaging stuff themselves in the first place, better entries are encouraged by looking at PR's reception of them. Any widening of scope would a secondary effect from a change in PR attitude. Mind you, it's interesting that sprout (I think) saw a lot of boundary widening in it too.

I don't think it's a problem that it's an opinion piece; it's to find out how much that opinion is shared. It may well generate the sort of responses db and sprout outlined up there, but those would then be the start of discussions. We needn't pre-empt all the arguments. This way is riskier of course than db's way, but it addresses quickly a specific current problem and starts (hopefully) a ball rolling.



Examples: I'm changing my mind on that as regards old entries. They relate to the scope debate and PROD is addressing how PR is shaping entries. Also, any reference to past examples risks going into past discussions.

I can see sort of how a 'sample' entry could fit in. Though again, it raises scope issues, rather than how entries are shaped once in PR. If we use Pin's glorious Engine piece we're handing the 'Pin's personal crusade' attack (and it will be an attack in some quarters) to people on a plate. This is a bit I still need to think about. Other than that, I'll sign up to this as is, bar the 'vindictive' word and taking the suggestions I'll post next into consideration. And I do just mean consideration - not my soap box either, is it .

Waz

(PS db, your point about 'how about we create a space for people who want to write adams tributes to congregate, and collect their pieces?' . But you're right about the problem. Imo the solution lies in reviewing the design of the various workshops and the relationship between them but probably requires site changes that we've been told are not possible at present.

Although... if we relabelled the Flea Market 'Hitchhikertastic Entries!' that might do it . That wouldn't take much trouble. FM should be merged with Collaborative anyway. It's what the result is.)

OK, suggestions for consideration;

replaced by something with more oomph. 'This is an invitation. An invitation to invigorate the Edited Guide.' maybe.

To add 'We're looking at how PR is shaping the Guide.' for those with too many preconcepted expectations.

In 'Mission-Drift' 'is' needs to be was.

In' The Next Generation' This is chastising isn't it? What we said we weren't doing in the intro. This sentence and this one 'We aren't seeking to chastise Scouts or experienced critics' need to be compatable. Probably the latter needs to come out, we're asking for change, that's criticism of current practice. In which case can we replace 'more vindictive low-numbers' with 'old-timers'?

'Stimulating. Varied. Inclusive'
Replace with 'Persuaded? If so, please read the 'What can I Do?' and bit below and sign up. This matters; it really does.' solves the petition wording problem.

That's it.

And.

(wish we could use GML in posts and have headers and insets)

db;
"4. start finding/writing entries that challenge boundaries/lie on them
5. encourage people to write EG-style entries (care of db)"

4. Yes. (Says me, not having written a new entry in ages .)

5. Slightly uneasy in doing this while PR is as it currently is. It's your call though. You might need to tread carefully with any suggestions to convert non EG pieces in the AWW to EG ones where the writers have already been bounced out of the EG. The ideal place to catch suitable entries for this, and encourage them, is when in PR when they hit first time round.

moreWaz

>> 5. Slightly uneasy in doing this while PR is as it currently is. It's your call though. You might need to tread carefully with any suggestions to convert non EG pieces in the AWW to EG ones where the writers have already been bounced out of the EG. The ideal place to catch suitable entries for this, and encourage them, is when in PR when they hit first time round. <<

I do mean to tread carefully. Only a miniscule portion of the entries in the AWW will be actually convertible to the EG. Sadly, most of them will probably come through PR first for that same reason. What I want to do is to make people think about how they can write for the guide. I'm not sure whether them coming to AWW later is really that much of a problem, since their entries will require modification anyway, and besides, it's a great way to explain to the writers what this EG/UG division is about, too. I'm also hoping that there will be people who've written well enough that they can be encouraged to write similarly for the EG. Not planning to become an evangelist, though

~ db

"people who've written well enough that they can be encouraged to write similarly for the EG" OK Go! db, on that one

Got to

Jodan - I am not denying you the opportunity to do what you're good at.
I'm imploring you to get on with it.

As for fighting, it's a figure of speech. I'm not going to hit anybody. There might be an argument, and if there is I don't intend to roll over and die again, that's all.

I read all this stuff and it's fine and sensible, but it's not action. Our site is dying, guys.

Tell me something, then. If I was to stick the Engine in PR and see what happens, would that be hurting the cause and hurting old friends?

No, sticking Engine in PR wouldn't hurt the cause. Thinking of it as fighting does. I think we underestimate who's lurking in these threads. I know that if I weren't participating in this thread, I'd be lurking.

We need to prove to people there's a problem before we debate the solution, I think. All while being optimistic. We may not have the solution. What we've got is the knowledge that there's a problem, and that's what's valuable here.

So what do you want us to do? Are we ready?
Journal entries? Post articles? Using the UG for exposure? The engine article? Community Soap Box?

<>

You bet you are.

I don't have the slightest idea which of those things to do. I'm not calling the shots here. If we were doing this my way, we'd have done something else quite some time ago. You call it, please.

I never underestimate lurkers. I just say it as I see it. Most people appreciate that. If I'm in a fighting mood (and I'm not, actually), it's because I expect to get attacked. I got attacked before, when I came in peace. The only thing that's changed since then is that the people I offended might have got even more defensive. This time I'm ready for a fight, but I'm not out to pick one.

It's probably going to get heavy whether or not we call it fighting, so let's just do something. I'm going to post the Engine to PR, late Wednesday night UK time if I'm back home by then, failing that Thursday. Till then, I won't have enough access to answer comment.

In the meantime, you've got a while to do what you decide. Don't worry; I'm not going to be confrontational.

See you on the other side (or possibly later today, though that doesn't sound half as exciting)

Pin

I say we finish up the PROD page (which is significant - it's not done now), then we advertise it.
Put it in our nicknames, journals, PR threads, The Post (not sure how many people actually read the Announcements section, but... Maybe something else in the Post?), Community Soap Box. Talk to your friends about putting their name down in any major conversations you have with them. Encourage them to do the same. Leave messages on our friend's personal spaces who might be receptive.

That'll be a way to grow the grass roots end of it. The Revolution part comes slightly later when our support is strong enough and we have had enough debate to be considered legitimate. Y'all can let me handle that part.

First, finishing up the PROD page. Anyone want to try a new draft? I don't have much time during weekdays to do this sort of thing.

Why not submit the PROD page to shazz as an opinion piece for the Post, as well as put it in Announcements? And all else you mentioned Jodan. We should mention it in the UG group too.

Would it be spamming to point to it from Ask h2g2 as well?

I could do a revised draft on Wednesday. If we want to get things moving we need to draw a line under it soonish and that probably means going with it substantially as is.

Who would be happy with that? db? LadyP? sprout? Any other lurkers want to go in the co-credits?

I'd like to add this

"It's also all too easy for the Peer Review process to 'committee-write' a piece with originality and flavour into something safe and samey, all-be-it with added fact. There is a House Style in terms of presentation but does there need to be in terms of language usage and the quotient of facts? Of course reviewing in such a way as to allow for style is more difficult but who said a Quality Edited Guide would be easy?"

at the end of Challenging Ourselves. I'm conscious the piece is on the long side, attention-span-wise already though? Any opinions? Is it worth it?

That's good.

But the whole thing is indeed too long. You need to halve its length.

I'm going to mail you a last redraft. It won't contain any of Jodan's stuff, but that's all padding anyway. Then that'll be my final word.

It's up to you from there, OK?

Pin

We await agog. But I'll leave reading it til tomorrow, I need an earlier night tonight.

Shortening the current (the one here) draft would be difficult. I was looking at it. Your writing doesn't precis easily - not enough fat.

Yeah, well. I just lopped a few limbs off.

It'll be with you in about 2 minutes.

You should have it now.

Received and replied too. I quote "Copy for upcoming editions should arrive in our post box no later than
midnight GMT on a Monday."

But in the interests of coinciding with the Engine, and with making this plea sooner rather than later, I'll give it a try.

Thanks.

I know it lost that stuff. If people wanted it in there, though, they should have pulled instead of puffed.

No regrets. Go for it. shazz'll understand.

And, yeah, you can go to bed now.

'Night then. See you Thursday, maybe.

Pin

"shazz'll understand" I've just quoted you to shazz on that.

Night Pin