This is the Message Centre for Pinniped

Hapless Charlotte?

Post 1

aka Bel - A87832164

Hi Pin,

I've just read your post in PR.
I've seen there's currently an UG story on the FP which links to an EG entry, but not vice versa. Is that what you were referring to?
I think it is a splendid idea, maybe worth trying again?

Bel


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 2

Pinniped


Yeah. Babbacombe Lee, the first time it came round, was the model for the idea.

I could dig out the old thread-links, if you think it's worth it, though from memory they're all mixed up with other Slant-poking, which probably explains the idea's rejection last time. If you want to fly this for Community Consideration (and I hope you do) a fresh and history-free Post-proposal would maybe be the best way.

A qualifying Entry has to be accepted in both EG and UG, meaning it's peer-reviewed and thus quality-stamped in both forums. Most important, it also means there are uneditable copies of both halves of the Entry-pair that can be cross-linked without any chance of subsequent tampering. Whichever of EG and UG comes later in time, the cross-link is then retrospectively added to its predecessor by Sub-Ed or Polisher as appropriate.

Charlotte, I guess you know, is Jimster (because some bizarre thread had him body-swapped with Charlotte Church, but that's another story). I don't know for sure why he eventually rejected the idea. It might have had something to do with the ridicule that was heaped on him, though, and I confess to being a major heaper.

His parallel sin IMO was changing the Guidelines to explicitly exclude dramatised Entries (like Three Times and True, but more doubtfully the strictly-factual Orgreave among my own) from the Edited Guide. Not everyone would agree with including such as Orgreave in the Edited Guide though, and I respect that.

I don't think anyone would find fault with the EG/UG cross-linking idea, however. Except Charlotte that issmiley - erm


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 3

Pinniped


Should have pointed out that there's no requirement for a single author or even for any prior awareness of the other Entry by the one's author.

We should, of course, make sure that still-active researchers are happy for their Entries to be cross-linked.

A separately-written example pair that should be cross-linked IMO:
A246386 and A4177280
Hunter S Thompson is iconically genre-spanning and so an easy case to make. When I floated the idea before, though, I had a dozen possible candidates and I bet there'll be more now. I might go dig.

It also gives a nice alternative to the (for me) rather unsatisfying practice of Updating old EG Entries. It's a work-around for the sad rule saying that subjects already in the EG are no-go areas. And let me tell you, Bel, any Guideline that tells people NOT to write something is a Guideline h2g2 doesn't need these days.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 4

aka Bel - A87832164

I had no idea about the Charlotte/Jimster connection, so thanks for explaining. smiley - biggrin

I think this UG-EG interlinking is a brilliant idea.
I'll happily write about it in my next RR, but I doubt anybody will react to that - there are hardly comments from readers (bar GB's), no matter how provocative, and what the content. So either the volunteers are lazy and not interested, or they don't read my column. I suspect it's the latter, and I can't blame them.

With the explanations form the very patient dmitri, I'm just starting to grasp the basics of the UG. I guess it's a mystery for many (especially for die-hard EG people), and the 1-2-1 interview with dmitri shouldn't be the only one. Why don't you write something about your work for the UG for the Post?


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 5

aka Bel - A87832164

I nearly missed your second post.

>>We should, of course, make sure that still-active researchers are happy for their Entries to be cross-linked.<<

I would say that would be a nice gesture, but common EG practice as you know, is to link to anything suitable which has either edited status, or is an external link. I don't think linking in articles for the AWW (and ultimately UG if they make it) is very common, is it?
I know that GB often posted links to Stretcher articles in the AWW, and I always thought: just why does she think that AWW people would want to link to EG stuff? If this was reciprocal, I couls see the point.
It's funny, I only studied the UG guidelines very thoroughly last night. I don't remember when I last looked at those for the EG.
I'm just so unimaginative that I don't think I'll ever have trouble with the EG guidelines. With a few alterations, I'm sure I could even have made my last piece suitable for the EG - but I didn't want to.
I think that the Stretcher has helped to soften the interpretation of the EG guidelines somewhat - aren't you happy?


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 6

Pinniped


I will if you want. Actually, I already did, in a way: A4053412

PROD is the manifesto, only from the other side.

The main and only significant argument, Bel, is the one about elitism.
I believe in a single Edited Guide, accepting quality writing of any kind (poetry too, for example. Anything).
Others in the community value inclusivity more highly than I do. They want to encourage people to write, regardless of ability. They want to reward them with community recognition through an Edited Guide.

I'm OK with that second idea, except that in order to level the playing field, we've got Guidelines that dull the quality writers. And also we make no attempt to raise people's standards. Fine, let a first lightweight (see PROD for definition) Entry into the EG, but then demand improvement for any subsequent ones. Why not?

One of the counter-arguments, relevant to you, has been that my version of the EG is unfair on those writing English as a foreign language. I have two things to say to that one. The first is that such Researchers all seem to be capable of writing quality Entries in English, and moreover are highly motivated to do so. The second is that Entries in, say, German should be eligible. The reason they're not has nothing to do with reader comforts. It's all to do with the same thing Jims and I clashed over, the BBC's insistence on pedantic editorial control and its irrational fear of being an unconscious mouthpiece for views it doesn't hold itself.

Oops. Seem to have gone a little off-topic heresmiley - smiley.

Tell you what, I'll draft a Post-piece on my-UG and you can edit it for human consumption. I wouldn't even let Rich do that, please note. But you're more sensitive and intelligent than he issmiley - winkeye


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 7

Pinniped


That was to your previous Post, but kind of answers the second one.

Other points: The UG Guidelines are pretty short, but even then we managed to include a stupid one - the requirement of unsuitability for the EG. It was a concession to the Slants, who feared that the EG might no longer be the central project. That Guideline of the UG effectively acknowledges the EG's precedence, but I don't. There are Entries in the UG that surpass anything I've ever read, or expect to read, in the EG. The best of the UG (and yes, there is an Elite of the Elite) utterly blows the Edited Guide away.

Happy? Not really. We're improving, and there's an AWW-crew who are flying the flag. Dmitri is obviously one, but around him there are others, not quite such proud peacocks but very gifted nonetheless.

We need a step change, though. h2g2 needs re-energising, or it may slip away. I think there needs to be some challenge before it's too late.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 8

aka Bel - A87832164

You know what? You're running in open doors with me (can you say that in English?)

I don't know how and when the guidelines for the EG came about, I've not been around for long enough.
I've just had a look at the recently updated guidelines.
I agree, they are quite suffocating for those, like me, who care.
And if I have a look at the entries given as examples for the various points made, I distinctly get the impression that I should never have written for the EG. I can't live up to the examples given.
And I think that's where your asking for high quality entries would put a stop to many entries (not just mine) were it common praxis.
So OK, you say:
>>Fine, let a first lightweight (see PROD for definition) Entry into the EG, but then demand improvement for any subsequent ones. Why not?<<
and again, you have a point. There's always room for improvement, but it needs a functioning and active PR for that - and currently, PR seems to be anything but that.
I've told you before that I appreciate your Stretcher comments because they actually point out the flaws of a piece and make suggestions on how to improve it.
Unfortunately, there don't seem to be enough people who are able to do that, so it's not only the guidelines that fail the writers, but the PR system, too.

As for the 'Elite of the Elite: yes, I am aware of it, and it's what *I* find scary and off-putting. Fortunately(?) there aren't many who react like me, or else you'd have to rely on a handful or so of people to write.
I feel that the first steps towards your ideas of the Ultimate Guide have been made with the Stretcher. You've cooked up a very clever scheme to make people write and submit entries to the EG which they wouldn't have done otherwise, and the reactions from the Peer Reviewers and Scouts have been positive on the whole.

As for:

>>I wouldn't even let Rich do that, please note. But you're more sensitive and intelligent than he is smiley - winkeye<<

Yes, you got me, hook, line and sinker. smiley - winkeye


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 9

Pinniped


I haven't forgotten Bel. Just a bit short of time right now, and gathering my thoughts because a piece about UG/Stretcher/future Guide should say something new. I'll try have something by Sunday.

You've really got me thinking about elitism. Maybe it's not the indisputably good thing I thought.

The English idiom is 'pushing at an open door'.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 10

aka Bel - A87832164

No need to rush, Pin, I'll be away for the weekend anyway (there's an h2g2 meet in London A44864058, hint, hint), so Sunday is absolutely fine as I won't be anywhere near a PC before late Sunday afternoon.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 11

aka Bel - A87832164

In case you missed it, the new smiley - thepost was published on Thursday which leaves you with another eight days if you want to make the next one. smiley - winkeye


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 12

Pinniped


Skanky thinks I missed it, obviouslysmiley - laugh

I wrote something, but it's not good. Too negative. Will try again.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 13

aka Bel - A87832164

Try bringing it in line with the latest Stretcher challenge. smiley - evilgrin

I guess that has to be the most evil challenge so far. I mean, how do you write a humoristic or even funny entry if 'funny' just is something you couldn't do to save you life?


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 14

Pinniped


We need to demand all the styles, don't you think? So whoever wins has to have proved they can do them all. Though in a given week, it's easy for some, hard for others.

We also need to keep the mood for the community too. The last two Challenges were dark. We had to go upbeat.

I decided to let Skanks have his way, trying to save the EG. I really think we've missed a trick with the Stretcher, though, because the finest skills in writing are those that the EG bans. Maybe next time we'll be genuinely general with our Challenges. Or maybe, who knows, the Guidelines will fall, and we'll all become a true community of writers.

If it's in the Edited Guide, it's implicitly less good than the author can be, whoever writes it. This sentiment from someone on the FP right now, with a piece of rubbish way short of my own abilities. I'm really ambivalent about lending my weight to the feeble central project, you know.

Like it says, Hapless Charlotte.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 15

aka Bel - A87832164

>>We need to demand all the styles<<

You may have a point there, but I'm not sure. I wouldn't say somebody is a bad writer because he/she can't write in every style.
Regarding the peer reviewer's feelings is a point I can accept, though.

Personally, I'm disappointed there hasn't been an AWW or at least a 'forum-open' challenge for weeks now. I applaud Rich's attempts to save the EG, but he should have pointed it out right from the start then. I feel it is unfair to those who are brilliant in the non-EG area if all they get are EG challenges. But then I'm just a reader, not involved in any way, so if the participants don't cmplain, who am I to do so?


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 16

Pinniped


I wouldn't say somebody is a bad writer because he/she can't write in every style either. But I think the winner of the Stretcher should be able to.

As for who you are, you're Rich's equal at the Post. You should tell him if you think there should be some more non-EG Stretcher Challenges. It's not too late, and it would improve the competition.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 17

aka Bel - A87832164

>>But I think the winner of the Stretcher should be able to.<<

You are right. smiley - smiley


As for the rest: Rich has made it very clear, right from the start, that the Stretcher is *not* a Post feature. The Post is the forum which hosts and publishes it, but it's the three of you who are in charge. I could tell Rich as a friend, but not as Post Editor.
Trouble is, Rich is incredibly busy all the time, I'm glad if I can get hold of him for Post stuff.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 18

Pinniped


Of course it's a Post feature, the silly man. If he wanted people to see it as being separate from the Post, he should have done it independently under it's own Entry, with a calendar different from the Post's publication round. As it is, the only person who thinks that the Stretcher is not part of the Post is Rich.

He works hard, though, and his commitment (particularly when he's having a hard time) makes him difficult to challenge. You work as hard as he does, though. He'd listen to you, I think.

I might try persuade him again too.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 19

aka Bel - A87832164

He's a great Post editor and a wonderful friend. I'll email him. If it was a Post feature, he'd have let me in on the details, but as it is, I don't know anything. I only get the Stretcher columns to edit once they're written, so a day or two before publication.
I thought the three of you had every challenge planned and agreed on already.


Hapless Charlotte?

Post 20

Pinniped


It's not like that. We have a small bank of ideas, but what we actually go with is decided one round at a time, by an exchange of e-mails in the week beforehand.


Key: Complain about this post