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

"I'm working on a project right now on this subject... "

Oooh... do tell

Have you ever heard of the Federalist papers?

At the risk of sounding ignorant, not really. I assume they're very much to do with American politics though. Why?

Alexander Hamilton, John Jay and James Madison wrote the Federalist Papers to argue for the ratification of the US Constitution - a radical change in the way the American government operated. Under the pseudonym "Publius", Hamilton especially buried his opponents under the weight of his words, and the large number of essays, as well as the clarity of his thought.

So what is the project that you are working on? Do you mean you're writing about the Federalist Papers? Do you think we need a "radical change"?

Ah... I was blind but now I see... Just found your entries at the bottom of your page. I'll give them a look over. Would still be interested in your thoughts in the context of this conversation though

That's what I was talking about, yes. I'm going to be gone for the weekend, by the way.

I do think we need a radical change. Absolutely.

Those are two excellent entries, if you don't mind me saying - I'd be fascinated to see what you do with them. If only (but certainly much more than that) for pointing out Jim Lynn's quote "We don't care what you say, as long as you say it with elan." If I'd been aware of that quote earlier on, and had Peer Review actually adhered to that, then I think I would have contributed so much more to the Edited Guide. It was after all the reason I joined in the first place.

Of course there are valuable things to say, and I wouldn't like to dismiss the importance of grammar and spelling - but they are nothing if the content and the way it is presented doesn't inspire people. And I would even go as far to say that as long as the style flowed well enough, or caught the attention enough, then certain gramatical constructs could and perhaps should be overlooked.

Anyway, I've probably said too much on this already. I bow to your greater experience and wisdom in regard to the Edited Guide and Peer Review - but I very much agree with the sentiments of the articles you have written. It perhaps might be overstating it (though I'll state it anyway ) to say that I am encouraged by your stance, and if sufficient people understand and take your stance on this subject then perhaps things can improve.

Have a good weekend, and I hope that when you return you will have more insights for the future of the site.

The reasons I don't write for the guide:

1. For me the community is the ground that the EG sits on. If the community suffers then I am less inclined to put energy into the guide. The downgrading of the community over recent years has affected the community quite negatively and I've felt those effects personally. That combined with Jimster's comments in the year before he left, that basically badmouthed the community and those who don't write for the EG really put me off alot. I'm not blaming that for me not writing (mostly it's to do with RL commitments and my time on h2 being an escape from work), but in terms of the hootoo aspects, those have been part of it for me.

2. I avoided PR for the first year or so I was here because it was such a hard knocks place to be. It had a very bad reputation (deservedly so IMO). I did eventually get involved, but that was after I felt very secure in terms of my place in hootooland. I also feel pretty comfortable with my own writing, so I don't see PR as a personal challenge in that way, but I totally get why other people feel intimitated or put off by the place.



The reasons why I write for the guide:

1. I love this place and want to give something back.

2. I enjoyed the satisfaction of getting an entry into the EG

3. With the latest round of enthusiasm for the guide, I haven't been feeling guilty or beaten into writing. On the contrary, I've felt a surge of positive, supportive encouragement, and a generally good vibe about being involved. It's that good vibe that got me to finish and submit an entry recently, when a years worth of Editorial pushed guilt couldn't.



I'll add to that that I don't have a problem with conflict or dissent (as anyone on hootoo who knows me will tell you). So my comments about the generally difficult culture in PR aren't about fear of rudeness. It's because I KNOW that people avoid PR because it can be an unpleasant place to be, and I think that is a large part of why we don't have the critical mass to keep the thing going. Writing is work, and if you want to get more people working they have to get something out of it.

And I'm not talking about PR being a big, uncritical lovefest.

I think it's possible to have both a culture of encouragement and support AND a place to critique the entries being submitted - those two things aren't mutually exclusive. One thing that seems essential to me is that when newbies submit an entry that has potential, that they get encouraged and that researchers don't use the same degree of bluntness that they might with an experienced researcher. This of course takes effort - to see if a researcher is a newbie, and then to think about how to talk to them in a polite, respectful and encouraging way.



I think there are some good ideas being discussed in this thread. I hope that people here can work with the people doing the good vibe thing, because I can't see how the EG will survive without both of those things working together.


One thing I am curious about is who controls the rules about the EG? Is it the Editors, or are they having to follow guidelines that we can't see? I mean, if the Eds wanted to change the EG focus could they do so on their own authority?

Why I write for the Guide:
If I find something interesting or exciting I like an excuse to look into it further and share it.

I like writing because I want to and not because I have to.

I like being able to write about whatever I want in roughly whatever style I want to. (As Jodan has observed, seasoned Researchers can get away with quite a bit "within" the guidelines).

I think it's an important part of what h2g2 is or should be about and want to contribute


Why I don't write for the Guide:

Nothing has captured me recently

No time

Lack of feeback - if something makes it through PR with only two comments and then off the FP with just one, it can detract from reason one for writing

U6292

Before you write for PR, read a few of these.
The project is what we make it.

Oh, and give those guys a badge, someone.

I don't know why but I love the fact that the first ever entry was on Ostriches A207

And was apparently written (or edited at any rate) by this woman : <./>http://artschool.newport.ac.uk/sp_ewestecott.html</.>

I'll try to write these reasons honestly, and resist the urge to use the occasion to make points about my vision for the Guide.

Why I Don't Write for the Guide:

1. Time and energy are always important constraints, though when I find a topic for an entry I find exciting, I can usually find the time to write and research it.
2. Peer Review comments are generally either pedantic or light, if there are any.
3. I have a hard time finding topics that interest me... perhaps partially because I've already covered a lot of the topics that interest me, but also because I don't like writing entries if I don't have something to say or learn in the process.
4. There's nothing new and exciting in the process for me. For my first few entries, the DNA Message and the sight of my entry on the FP really made me feel great about myself. Then, when I got tired of that, I got excited to get the "Editor's Pick" which meant a blob for the entry. Now, there's not really anything. There's nothing to strive for. It doesn't mean all that much to get an entry selected, because anything passable will get through PR. With 1 entry a day, every entry is the "Editor's Pick". Maybe Entry of the Month will fill this hole, someday.

Why I Do Write for the Guide:

1. There are a lot of small pleasures for me in putting an entry together. I like to have interesting titles, good quotes, good headers, linking... I enjoy that part, as weird as it seems, and the independence it provides.
2. I'm a big Douglas Adams fan, and I find the whole Hitchhiker's Guide idea to be very compelling. When I was away from h2g2, I might be googling around for some information, and my own entry would come up. That's always a neat feeling.
3. You can really only claim to understand something if you can explain it to someone else.

"I think it's possible to have both a culture of encouragement and support AND a place to critique the entries being submitted - those two things aren't mutually exclusive. "

Well said. The AWW, for instance, is proof of this. We've gotten decent at being encouraging and supportive to newbies in PR, but in all the wrong ways. Instead of encouraging good authors to write, they've encouraged to submit their entry elsewhere. Instead of critiquing an unconventional entry and responding, Peers tend to give it the bum's rush, almost automatically.

"One thing I am curious about is who controls the rules about the EG? Is it the Editors, or are they having to follow guidelines that we can't see? I mean, if the Eds wanted to change the EG focus could they do so on their own authority?"

I think the BBC only cares about content with regard to their policies on things like profanity. I don't know, though. I'm a firm believer, though, that the sovereignty of h2g2 lies in the community. The Italics are great administrators, but in the past, they've been lousy leaders.

"U6292"

I dunno, their baseball entry is pretty lousy

Ah I should really do my own version :

Reasons why I don't write for the Guide :

1) Because I feel I would not enjoy the process based on past experiences
2) Because I like to write in more colourful styles, and the only style that seems acceptable is of the Wikipedia/Encyclopedia Galactica style
3) Because every entry appears to have to be very long, and sometimes you can say as much in two/three paragraphs, and get more across (at least for interest purposes) than in 2 dozen paragraphs.

Reasons why I did write for the Guide :

1) Because its the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy! Who wouldn't want to write for the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy? (see above)
2) Because I found subjects of interest to write about
3) Because I wrote in a style that I found amusing, and motivated me more to write.

In the interests of assisting with data-gathering:

Reasons why I don't write for the Guide:
1. I have little enough time to do my schoolwork, much less spend time researching and writing.
2. I got fed up with my work not being critiqued or discussed, more recently. Some months ago I submitted what I thought was a relatively controversial entry to PR (not in style, but in content). The fact that this was not even commented on was mildly disappointing.
3. The style of writing I prefer to do now is that of the "personal essay", creative non-fiction type. This has never really been the focus of the EG, and so if I write something I want feedback on now, I submit it to the AWW.

Reasons why I wrote for the Guide:
1. I was attracted by the prospect of seeing my name in lights - this was more true when I was younger and hadn't had much experience of getting recognised in other ways.
2. I believed in the concept of creating a Guide to Life, the Universe, and Everything, and there was a time when this site's mission was sufficiently different from Wikipedia for that to be worthwhile.

However, I was never as big a writer as I was a Sub, Scout, etc. That was where I really focused my sense of "duty" towards the Guide.

I was thinking the other day, actually, that I would love to see a *greater* emphasis on personal "voice" in the EG. There could still be collaborative entries, sure, but allowing someone to express opinion and to treat a subject with their particular style would really allow h2g2 to shine in a way independent from Wikipedia's. With quality writing, it could be an amazing resource of information and writing.

I always felt that while if I needed to find out a specific fact, I'd go to Wikipedia. But if I wanted to read a cohesive article about a subject, I'd go to h2g2. h2g2 has the potential to publish things that are more enjoyable reads if someone wants to find out about something for fun.

Reasons I write (very occasionally)
1. It's fun putting the words together. And making something more than whatever the subject itself seems to be. It's fun playing with words.

2. With later entries I've wanted to share something I'd found out about that I thought was a bit Wow!. With the earlier entries I wanted to put the places around me on the www map and thought it unlikely anyone else would.

3. The researching, once I've got into it is fun.

A big reason for not writing, I'm a lightweight, is that the requirement for plain titles really flattens things. So does the pressure to lay out what the subject is right at the beginning. I like writing that catches a reader's interest, intrigues them, has surprises.

Plain titles don't catch my interest to read or review either - I'll read anything with an eye-catching title.

Another reason for not writing is that I need an angle on a subject to write about it, and don't often find one. I need to make it different from what could be found quickly via google. If I can't do that, I just never get beyond collecting a few facts in a Word file.

Peer review is a mixed experience. I know I take comments or lack of comment too seriously and I'm wimp enough to be nervous, and follow that up with being defensive because I worry about making some changes I don't really want to. (Though some of which later I might agree with). I'm not frightened of it though, everyone's human in there. It would never deter me from an entry I really want to write. At the same time, it can be a dampening experience. If you've written for fun and out of enthusiasm for a subject, a reception that doesn't share that makes it all fall flat. So Peer Review's not a deterrant, but the prospect of it's not an incentive either.

You could say it's not its purpose to be an incentive, it's not really, but when you're writing for free and to share a subject, feedback's the only reward and there's little feedback other than in Peer Review.

I wish I could find more to write because it's a real buzz doing it.

I have the same problem, Waz. Finding the right angle is what often makes me abandon an entry before it begins, or worse, half-way through.

I don't think there's a requirement for plain titles though. Some entries in the EG have unusual titles.

Thought I'd ask an up to date Scout

To quote GB, quoting Jimster. "The instructions are: plain meat and potatoes for efficiency - "does what it says on the tin" to quote Jimster."

I reckon interpretation of plain varies. Bit of pot luck with the tin labels.

Have you looked a label lately ?

Calories - Sugar - Fat - Saturates - Salt - weight - BBE date - contents - preparation instructions - country of origin - picture with "serving suggestion"

You're better off removing all the labels and picking your meals by pouring any three tins in a pot.