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

>>Oh, on the subject of UG Miners, we also find this: "They don't all have the positions of editor, but they're much more important than the editors." on A1092502

Another mistake on my part. I wrote this pretty quickly pretty recently, I didn't intend for people to read them yet

Amy said-

>>There are people out there fervently hoping - indeed expecting - that the UG will supplant the EG. I wouldn't like that to happen because the site that I signed up for is the site with the EG at its core.

This is one thing we agree on. This is also the first I've heard of it. Who are these people hoping this? Certainly not any miners.

>>If the worst is true, then the UG editors are so disgusted with the Italics that they have decided to anoint themselves Subscripts.

I've spoken with GTB, and we both have the highest respect for the italics

If anyone has any further questions, I brought this to GTB's attention and we'll be happy to address them

(UG Editor)

>>There are people out there fervently hoping - indeed expecting - that the UG will supplant the EG. I wouldn't like that to happen because the site that I signed up for is the site with the EG at its core.


I'll just agree with Jodan here - that's not our intention for the UnderGuide, and I hope it's not anyone's. They'll be rather disappointed.


GTB

Jodan, not only did you write those words but you thought those thoughts. I find that disquieting. But the words have been edited so the matter is ended... provided that the thoughts don't resurface, of course.

There are people who have expressed a wish to see the demise of the EG and to replace it with something like the UG. I could find many quotes but I haven't the time just at the moment. Here's an example to be going on with. I won't give a link. The link is available from the UG pages for the determined to find.

'But my point is that there won't be a satisfactory Underguide as long as there's an EG. The Edited Guide is the problem here. It's premise is absurd, and its editorial standards (that means all of us, note) are dire.'

I am not aware that anyone on the dropdown list of UG organisers have said things of this sort.

Amy

I didn't think those thoughts. I mistyped.

>>'But my point is that there won't be a satisfactory Underguide as long as there's an EG

I'm not sure what this means We don't allow overlap.

Amy, I really think that the phrases you found so sinister (about miners being more important than 'editors') were the result of using the word 'editor' as shorthand for UG Editor in a draft document. (Jodan, correct me please if I'm wrong about that.) Rereading with that in mind, does it make sense? For the UG, the miners are more important - a group of motivated miners could always choose new editors, whereas a couple of editors could never do the work that a group of motivated miners can do. It's not a statement that refers to the Italics at all, nor was it ever supposed to, as far as I understand.


GTB

You're right GTB!

Jodan who is using this account to fix all the misleading sentences

Perhaps you should find an alternative to the word editor to avoid misunderstandings. Are Miners editors? Are gem polishers editors? Or does the organising group wish to be called editors?

I think the phrase 'there won't be a satisfactory Underguide as long as there's an EG' means 'there will be a satisfactory UG when there is no EG'.

Here's another quote. Same author.

'So, I guess I'd fall behind Ben's ideas and your development of them and help where I could, but I'd do so without much real enthusiasm. I'd rather try seize the project back from the retards who are spoiling it.'

There are six people who I know have expressed a wish to replace the current EG with fiction and/or opinion. Three are still on the site. Three are not currently active. They will never succeed of course but they could, I think, destabilise the good intentions of the UG.

And I'll challenge them wherever I come across them - just because I can.

GTB found the quote (), and this was from a long time ago, from someone who isn't an UnderGuide Volunteer.

The gem polishers are like sub editors, miners are like scouts that advise the italics (In the beginning, miners will influence the UG's processes etc) and the editors (GTB and I) are like elected

I'll challenge them too Amy, I don't know who said this, but I don't think the person that said that quote (I happen to know him pretty well) would want to abolish the EG. If no miners, polishers or editors want to replace the EG, what harm does 6 people wanting it to replace it do?

Jodan -

What about 'elected officers' rather than 'editors.' New people are less likely to confuse you with the Editors then.

Amy: "Perhaps you should find an alternative to the word editor to avoid misunderstandings. Are Miners editors? Are gem polishers editors? Or does the organising group wish to be called editors?"

Look, in the EG, you've got Scouts, Subs and Editors. In the UG, we've got Miners, Polishers, and UG Editors. The UG Editors run the Miner and Polisher schemes in much the same way that the Italics run the Scout and Sub schemes. They also have *editorial* control over what sort of material is featured in the UnderGuide, much like the Post Editors do for the Post. Should they not be called UG 'editors' then?

The chief difference is that the Editors of the EG are BBC employees and are the top of the food chain, as far as h2g2 is concerned. The UG Editors are just researchers like yourself, and still have the Italics to answer to. How else should it be?



As for your quotes, you're lifting them out of context (F110334?thread=246540) very adroitly, but what you fail to mention is that the author of those remarks is not currently involved in the UnderGuide, and that those who have stuck with it through the process spent that thread *disagreeing* with the voice that you seem to take as representative.

Speaking as one of two UG Editors, if it should ever seem to me that anyone is attempting to leverage the UG to help their own agenda of screwing with the EG, I will oppose them in any way I can. I joined this site two and a half years ago, I wrote a half-dozen Edited Entries of my own, and I subbed seventy-seven Edited Entries - because I believe in the EG. I believe there is a niche for the UG, and I'm helping to make it happen, but I will not be party to any designs against the fundamental purpose of the site - the Edited Guide.


GTB

"New people are less likely to confuse you with the Editors then."

Does Shazz have this problem? Do newbies confuse the Post Editor with the Italics? Why is this different?

If you can show me that this is a genuine cause for concern, I have no problem using a different name, but I like 'UG Editors' because it's straightforward and accurate.


GTB

I think the topic of subversion of the EG has been adequately aired for now. I did state earlier that "I am not aware that anyone on the dropdown list of UG organisers have said things of this sort" but it is nice to have such a clear statement of intent.

I still think that applying the term Editor to the elected representatives of the UG could cause confusion in a way that the roles of Post Editor and Subeditor do not. This is because the UG Editors have a similar role in the UG process to that of the Italics in the EG process.

Well, what alternative name(s) would you suggest for the position. I'm not fond of 'elected officers', because it's not at all descriptive of what we *do*, y'know?

Whilst I would love to be helpful I think you're in a better position to decide on a name for the role. You didn't seem to be short of inspiration when it came to the names miner and gem polisher. i'm sure you'll think of something.

I've thought of carrying the metaphor further with the editors names, but it could be more confusing. Plus I really couldn't think of any

I don't like 'elected officers' either for the reasons GTB said. If we're going to have a name it should use the word Editors. The nickname of this account is The UnderGuide Editors Team. Is this unclear?

Jodan

That title, to me, would refer to the group of Editor (Italics) who are in charge of running the UG back at the Towers. I think it is *most* unclear.

I'm sure a suitable name will occur to you at some point. There is no need to decide now.

I don't *want* to change it. I don't see it as an issue. I don't think it's unclear to anyone except newbies, and they might not know the italics anyway

"I don't want to" has never been a reason for anything. Is it the right thing to do? If you sign

Jodan
UG Editor

at the end of your posts does that cause confusion?

You know my view. Perhaps others will post here with their ideas too.