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

You're right Spiff. Sorry if I threw all in one big pot.

However I think this is the perfect moment for *me* to leave.

Looking forward to seeing you all in PR with fresh joy and patience,

Hi Cefpret,

Thanks for that. Likewise, onwards and upwards. See you there, I hope.

Spiff

Barton wrote: "Hoovooloo whose opinion once had value".

This calls to mind a joke: "I like work. I could look at it for hours."

A brief look at Barton's personal space shows that the last Edited Guide entry he contributed anything to was posted on August 30th. Interestingly, I know *exactly* what he contributed, because I wrote that entry. I credited Barton for a single insight in PR which improved it. Since that, he talks. A lot.

A quick look at my personal space will show one or two (or eight...) more recent Edited Entries, a couple of H2G2 post contributions, and an official policy of the site wot I wrote myself and got the Editors to adopt.

These observations are made merely to point out that you may wish to take into account an individual's level of contribution to and experience of the site before deciding how much weight to give their opinion.

My opinion "once had value". I'm forced to wonder what happened to change that state of affairs. Links?

Cliches become cliches because they're true, so here's a cliche. "Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach. Those who can do neither, become critics."

I'm an engineer by profession, and I like writing Guide Entries in my spare time. I don't teach engineering, or writing - I just do them.

Barton is a teacher by profession, and a critic by inclination.

If I were to characterise him as "worthless" for that, it would probably be a little unfair, so I won't (he likes counterfactual clauses, too).

H.

Spiff,

You are correct, I had lumped you in unfairly with the rest of the discussion, though some of what you took issue with was more properly aimed at the group as a whole and not at you. I still admit it was my fault that it could be taken as you did take it. Most of it, however, was a failure on my part to properly differentiate. I apologize. It appears that I, too, am guilty of allowing my emotion to overtake my reason.

Thank you for your kind nomination, I shall cherish it even if I do not win the award. I try to most gloriously and imaginatively split any overly affectionate infinitives I can, simply because they are there.

Hoovooloo,

You know, I had never thought to keep score that way. How wonderfully creative of you. It makes me feel so humble just to be in the same thread with you. Please, feel free to apply to have my name taken off your entry on hard and soft science fiction.

I hate to embarrass you by the association and the contribution I made toward showing you that you were thinking poorly, to say nothing of the vast contribution your article makes to the critical tools available to the serious scholar of science fiction.

I also suggest that you do a bit more investigation before you choose to apply that gimlet-like and most singularly focused 'intellect' of yours in developing such 'original' arguments, citing 'facts' that aren't true as proof positive that you can out think and out pompous me.

I'll happily cede you the title for pomposity, I was never really comfortable with it in light of your superior performance.

Barton

I'm sick and tired of being told that I don't know what I'm talking about because I'm young, religious, and from the United States. I'd like to have more people examining my work objectively.

Josh,

It has nothing to do with your youth, creed or nationality. I hope you'd realise that. The criticism of you work came about because it is factually and logically flawed. The details of which have been gone over many many times, so I won't repeat it.

The article was examined objectively and found to be lacking. There is no conspiracy nor hidden agenda. If you disagree with what people were saying about your article, protest. Debate. Argue your corner. Just sitting there saying "I won't change" will just make others mad and we end up with the situation we have now.

Basically, If you had engaged us then the objective criticism of your work could have continued, not spiralled into the mess it is now.

I'd be *very* interested if you could write an article in Hoovooloo's University Project. I look forward to seeing what you come up with.

All the best,

Ste &

Thanks, Barton, for saying some of the things I should have said.