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

On my morning walk yesterday I passed the innersole again. It's been lying in the middle of road for a week, its position changing slightly each day, a sign of either ambition or traffic. It's very large, white and grubby. Mostly I try and ignore it, but yesterday was day two of interNaJoPoMo, and things to write about were popping up at me all over the place.

I looked at it and immediately thought: I could take a photo and post around that. Then I remembered we can't post photos (), which got me thinking about if that was a good thing or not. I think it's a good thing. If a picture is worth a thousand words, and I take a photo to journal with, doesn't that lessen my writing? On a writers' website?

There are many writers for whom journalling around a photo would extend their writing. But what about writers for whom that is not true, especially ones who are learning or need to extend their writing skills or lazy ones like me. In a multi-media worldwideweb, shouldn't we be encouraging written words not just with our attitude and intent but with the very structure of our site?

There's something there to say about how the Luddites were right, and how invisible loss can be in the face of the shiny new. I'm fairly sure there was at least one easy pun to be made about the innersole. But I'm heading out the door….

I'd quite like to be able to add photos - let's face it, we do it anyway but just have to send people off-site to flickr, fotki etc.

But I wouldn't like it to be *too* photo-reliant. I certainly wouldn't like media clips popping up all over the place.

I post pictures to other sites sometimes, but I don't use the feature anywhere near as much as some other people do. I don't miss it here.

I liked the line 'a sign of either ambition or traffic' and wish I'd written it.

I'm with you on wanting the site to remain text-based. It loads quicker than an image-laden site, it looks respectable (which matters at the office) and it makes people put some thought and effort into what they write. If we do start to incorporate images, I'd hope that the text would always dominate. I'm a word nerd; I'm here for the words.

I'm certainly old-school. I view h2g2 much like reading a book; thought-provoking, making up in my own minds-eye how something should look or feel, letting the words (and their meaning) sink in.

Sometimes 'ready-media' can destroy that. Instant gratification or a message that stops you thinking. You've been given the answer, now you don't have to imagine, formulate your thoughts, opinions or ideas.

Comics, picture books, even OK! magazine are fine at what they do. h2g2 picks up the slack.

Times will change though. The advent of advertisements will make this a more image-based site, I'm sure. Shame really, I don't see adverts on every-other page when I'm reading a fantasy novel.

It's what they call progress folks.

Thanks kea - an interesting, thought-provoking journal. Picture not needed.

"Comics, picture books, even OK! magazine are fine at what they do. h2g2 picks up the slack."

Now I know you're just making a point, Ivan, but I can't accept that comics are inherently inferior to the written word. For one thing, the written word's usually (not always, but usually) as important as the picture - if not moreso.

But mostly because I find "Maus", say, or "Safe Area Gorazde", a lot more intelligent and thought-provoking than today's all-text opinion column in the Daily Bigot.

Besides - the words you're reading - the letters - are nothing more than pictures. They are symbols we draw, to represent things and ideas from real life.

Isn't that just what a picture is?

That wasn't me...

Yeah, it was!

No, it wasn't - sorry!

"especially ones who are learning or need to extend their writing skills" speaking personally that hits a nail right bang centre, and I've wondered about the effect of having images back too.

When I joined h2g2 you could post images. I missed that very much when the BBC stopped them, but it forced me into creating images by using words. Trying to make up for the lack of pictures was the motivating drive and had a definite effect on my writing skills.

At the same time, I really, really would like to be able to post images - not being able to does have an effect on my h2g2 user page being 'my' home on the internet.

I've no answers, I was just interested someone else had thought the same thing about the effect of other media.

Waz (dropping in from NaJoPoMo)

I can see the points that are being made but...

The way I had been seeing that by allowing images and the creation of the Arts Team was a very positive dynamic to the site.

Firstly because of the Artists themselves and their enthusiasm and dynamism. Secondly h2g2 researchers often me with their writing and I have expectation that they will also with their art in whatever form that comes in

So whatever new freedoms this new home can offer the arty researchers amongst us to share their stuff is a very good thing for me



Peanut

I have no problem with the Arts Team having more input into the site. It's the rest of us I worry about Remember what noesis looked like?

One thing I want to have happen is that whatever we decide, we do so with the full* knowledge of what we are doing, including the things we are losing.


*relatively speaking. There will always be things we don't see or understand.

Do you mean the ads in threads, those god-awful signitures and the minging moving pictures that people have, that sort of thing?

In which case a firm no from me, or if we have too, a big off buttons so we get a choice

Yes, that sort of thing. An off button would be nice for those of us who can't stand the visual assault, but it doesn't solve the issue of if graphics lessen writing.

I hadn't thought about those awful signatures and animated gifs on other sites. I don't want those. Definitely not. I love our collection of smileys and that's more than enough for me.

Post 13. I endorse the sentiments in Post 13.

I'd like to make it easier to get images into entries, but I have no desire to see them in conversations.

TRiG.