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

to be a lot of palava going on about this site lately. Edited Guide, Alternative Writing, Underguide, etc etc

One crowd is telling us if we don't all write an entry a month and get the Edited Guide a bit of fresh blood in the BBC will have to shut the site down, so like a good little H2-er I've shifted myself and written (together with another H2-er, who's a student doctor, and therefore has the "right" sort of knowledge I need) a subjective account of the medical procedure I had a couple of weeks ago.

Its not going to set the world alight, but I guess it shows willing.

But it also confirms to me just how complicated it all is. If I could just write a "Guide" in nice simple English, put it into Peer Review, listen to the feedback and alter it if necessary, well and good. But no. The "Edited Guides" have to be written to a formula of sorts, and also - and this is my biggest gripe in HMTL, which I know without my co-author I wouldn't have a clue as to how to go about.

The procedure is complicated, as well; so far, we're at the "Here's my version, see what you think and do any alterations you think we'll need" bit, and I've got test pages and duplicate entries coming out of my ears already.

I've been a member of this site for over 4 years - getting into the Guide (which isn't a big ambition of mine, I admit, but I've contributed poems and hopefully fairly entertaining journal entried, and taken part on conversations when I've felt I've had anything worthwhile to contribute) is like finding the Holy ruddy Grail

I've found the instructions, such as they are, complicated to say the least, the mysteries of HTML inponderable, and when I have looked at Peer Review, there's lots and lots of humourless comments, which invariably degenerates into splitting into factions as to where a comma should go. There is no guidence as to once an entry has been OK'd - or the author gives up in despair and their entry goes to the Flea Market - as to What to Do Next.

There seems to be a clique in every official bit of this Site - and obviously, the charactor of each clique permeates the style and type of entries - The Alternitive Writing Crowd go for abstract but possibly beautifully written prose, which I'm afraid bores the nadgers off've me (I can recognise "good" writing, but I don't have to enjoy it, after all), The Edited Guide Crowd tend to be terribly serious, earnest and devoid of fun. Anything remotely levitous or skewed in presentation gets so much tut-tut-tutting so doesn't surprise methere's loads in Flea Market and few people contribute generally.


- Someone cited SWL as a good example of how to write excellent entries on non mainstream subjects (Mellified Man and How to Skina Cat, are just two that come to mind) He writes incrediably good entries about amazing subjects - but then, he also was a jouralist, so he knows how to play the writing game; not many of us on this site *are professional writers, or have been, either. Most of us are wannabes with pretentions toward writing. Or in some cases, editing and non constructive critisism.

Then there's Subs, Miners, Scouts Aces, and probably a group representing little green pixies for all I know.

More committees, more little clubs...and inevitably more little cliques, as similar mindset meets and recognises similar mindsets.

I thought Douglas Adams description of his own HitchHikers Guide to the Galaxy says something to the effect that the guide may well be confused, inaccurate or at the least wildly apocryphical, it has the advantage over its nearest arrival in that it has the words "Don't Panic" in large friendly letters on its cover, and, two, it is cheaper.

My own intereptation of that is that it's a Fun Guide. It doesn't have to be boringly encyclopedic - there's plenty of "serious" entries, and very interesting some of them are, too. But there're loads of em that...well... probably beautifuly researched, but ..sorry lads... I reckon they're boring. I can feel myself propping my eyelids up, hoping against hope I can get to the end of the entry so I can -possibly -be educated, or even, make an intelligent comment. I don't expect to find *every subject interesting, but come on!

But they're written to the correct formula, the authors can write in HTML.


They also seem to know their way around the site - which is more than I do.



A site map might be a good idea - something nice and simple, that doesn't assume that we're all into committees, formulae and want to belong to clubs or societies.

Why arn't there more entries such as the excellent "Retread; the desparate cigarette A6671973? Its a scenario that all smokers and ex smokers can relate to, and even if you arn't a smoker, it certainly gives you an insight into a nicotine addicts' mind set.

Plus, it's fun.

This is becoming a Geeks site for Geeks. Its not much fun any more. I chat to a few friends mainly, and go to the Meets (and they're far less well attended now than they used to be, which is a shame, because actually they're quite good fun)




Now one I could possibly remedy - I *could learn HTML, but do I really want to? The answer is No - I've got better things to do.

I suppose I *could contribute more to the Conversation and Debate threads - but invariably we all go over the same tired old grounds, and the debate becomes predictable. Sorry, I can't be arsed.

Given the fact that most of this is a moan, with one constructive suggestion, perhaps its time I took a break from H2? It's an internet site, is all; it's not a large part of my life. I utilise the journal spaces, mainly for my own benefit - it's always a bonus if anyone replies. I'll dip into the conversations; it's nice to see how people live, how people think. Its pleasant to witness complete strangers triumphs and failiures, hopes, thoughts and occasionally shattered dreams. H2 is my own private little soap opera with charactors I'm interested in.

But if I were asked "is it so important to you that you'd learn HTML and submit an entry every month in order to keep it going" my answer would be a firm No.

I'd willingly pay a fiver a month subs to keep it going independently though.

If you want to learn Guide ML, it really isn't as difficult as the 'guides' to learning it make out it is; they're badly written and expect
you, the reader to have a lot of knowledge that I know I certainly didn't when I learnt it, I can explain if far easier if you'd like than the over-techy
way that the guide ML help pages use and don't go and we relaly need to do somethign to get the numbers for the meets back up it was
a pitiful turnout last time in London, and I felt sorry for those who'd travelled a long way to come down, at quite some expense, and I guess having to
pay out for accomidation too whilst other researchers, who live in, or very near to London just don't seem bothered to make the effort
any more

Hi Evadne, long time no see

As the instigator of the group you're talking about, I'd better have my twopennyworth.

The reasons for my setting up the Researchers' Group are explained in my Post article at A29048989, so I won't go through the whys again. However, you have misinterpreted my reasons for setting it up. I asked for thirty Researchers to contribute two Entries a month to keep a flow of new Entries running on the Front Page - nowhere did I ask everyone to write one a month. I also asked that everyone contribute to PR and the Edited Guide as much as they are able. That can be writing or commenting, or both. If you don't feel comfortable reviewing, I'd consider that you didn't feel 'able' to do so, and would have no beef with you at all

Another aspect of the group is that it is encouraging more people to get involved in the process. There have been accusations of a 'clique' since day one, but the more people that get involved in reviewing the less valid that becomes.

There is no need to write any GuideML at all. You say 'If I could just write a "Guide" in nice simple English, put it into Peer Review, listen to the feedback and alter it if necessary, well and good', but that's exactly how PR works. We have Sub-editors to add GuideML and all Scouts are - or should be - aware that some people can't add ML for whatever reason. If you find ML intimidating, don't even think about it. Just write.

You talk about the volunteer groups as 'committees', so maybe I should explain what I do as a Sub-editor. Basically, someone writes an Entry, a Scout decides they like it and the Editors send it to me. I then go through it and correct all the spelling mistakes and grammar, add or correct the GuideML, add some links, check the author likes it and send it back to be queued for the Front Page. I think this is a pretty good service, because if you were to write an Entry about a really interesting subject with your own style, but weren't particularly interested in GuideML or very good at spelling, your work would still get into the Edited Guide. Of course, other people might be involved; the Photographers might add a spiffing photo to it, the AViators might make a video clip to accompany it, the Curators might pick up the odd error that I'd missed and correct it. All the volunteer groups you mention are actually helping out around the site to make h2g2 better and more inclusive. If they look like cliques, I can assure you they're not - all you have to do is put your name down and explain briefly what experience you have, and you're in!

Finally, you'd be sorely missed if you took a break. I hope you don't

Hiya Rich

Nice to see ya

Firstly, no popping as such was intended. It didn't occur to me that you are part of the clique I'm referring to, so I don't think I'm misinterrupting anything as such. I'm just speaking as I find.

I know, thru wiggling thru and asking nicely, that it *is possible to write in nice simple english, an entry *can be got into PR - I contacted Alex because he did an artical about fistulae, and I've had all *sorts of examinations into the botty department, and knew that if I wrote something about the examination it'd be a good idea to know how to get it linked to his entry. He very kindly offered to Sub me, and we're now doing a joint entry; him doing the medical bits, and me doing a subjective running commentry. But had Alex not volunteered to do this (and there's *still test entries and duplicate entries all over the place - when I'm feeling calmer I'll have a go at putting my edits into the test page he's set up) it'd be one less entry even considered.

My point is, no; it's *not how Peer Review works atall. Not in my experience, and I'd like to bet, not in a lot of other's people's experience. "Just write" you say. And then contact who, exactly? There's no Guide Map or advise as to whom as far as I know; I could contact you, because I know what you do for the site, but frankly, you weren't the best person to ask, in this case. You know a hell of a lot about an awful lot of things mate, but backsides arn't one of them. Alex is(IMO) the right person, because backsides, amongst other bits of anatomy are what he does for a living, so therefore, he has more specialist knowledge than you in that particular are.

if you see what I mean.

I've no beef about that; my beef goes back years ago, when I first joined - many's the time I asked how I went about getting something into Peer Review, and I got the same few people spouting (rather patronising, IMO) advise which made no sense whatsoever to me. I asked again, and got the same replies, so in the end I simply thought "Bum to the lot of you. I won't bother"

I read your ccomments about the site possibly folding, and took em on board - what I'm saying is, that if I, as an "old" member of this site finds navigation difficult, then pity the poor newcomer.

Scouts, aces, miners, etc have always been a mystery to me; I haven't seen any scout say to any member "Hey! I liked what you wrote (about such and such" in the (Thingummy conversation" (for example) care to expand on that?"

Possibly because there arn't many scouts, and possibly because thats not the way it's done here? I don't know. Point me to somewhere where scouts are actively recruiting (and yes, I know you're volunteers and you've got lives to live) and I can learn from it

The cliquiness I refer to isn't directed at the scouts/editors etc in particular. But Peer Review reminds me very much of the Al Anon meetings I used to attend many many years ago. There were usually a group of around 20 participants, but - and here's the point - all seemed to defer to the 3 Marys - that is, the three who were the longest standing members of the group, who knew The Book inside out, and who frankly, had become habitual in their responses.


There were certain buzz words, or set phrases that littered their comments, which were not relevant to any point made by any other member. The fact is, they were probably so stressed with holding their own lives together, that instead of being able to be creative, or at least imaginitive in their responses, they probably utilised The Book almost automatically.

There is a distinct "personality" to PR, and also to that of Alternative writing. Neither of them are particually welcoming.


Generally speaking, one is very dry, and seems to have lost the"fun" element of the Guide, and the other seems very exclusive and chooses intellectual - albeit beautifully crafted - subjective imagary.

Please don't think I was referring to volunteer groups as committes - I wasn't. What I am saying is that the reviewers seem to form their own private committees and instead of offering constructive and relevant criticism do The 3 Marys Routine.

Finally, you mention that all I have to do is "put my name down"

I would.

But it'd be mighty handy to know *where* I put my name down.

To whom, and so on.

If its action you want, then fine - I've experience in creative writing, and can spot a decent poem at 60 paces as opposed to some of the stuff I've seen. I'm a lurker extrodinaire, and frequently see excellent prose. I'd love to ask the more silent members of this forum to expand on their experiences .

Oh. And for the record, I'm a qualified aromatherapist, with a very wide range of knowledge of the theraputic usages of essential oils and herbs generally. Do you actually get experts in to read over entries to ensure they're as accurate as they could be? I ask,simply because it seemed to me the best person to ask about my proposed entry would be someone like Alex, because of his medical background. If I were writing about birds, or "nature" generally, then there's be you, or Websailor or MMF to check with

Do you see where I'm coming from here?


There's The Guide...and the Edited Guide.

The whole thing confuses me. What exactly is the difference?



And believe you me, there are cliques - if it's a community like any other community, then there are *bound to be cliques. Frankly it doesn't concern me overly, as I wouldn't want to belong to any clique that'd have me as a member anyway (god bless Groucho Marx)

The only reasen I ever got into the Post is by the sheer fluke that Shazz had read some of my poems in some conversation she and I had in common, and asked me if I'd be willing to submit them to The Post.

I was more than willing to do that, as I felt it was a nice way to contribute to this particular site. I wasn't paying any subs towards it, so I allowed the BBC copyright to some of my work. I haven't seen them used anywhere, so if I ever do get them published elsewhere, then I imagine there'll be a copy right wrangle. Possibly.

Fortunately, I've kept a note of

(a) what I'd already had published elsewhere, and made a word or a punctuation alteration for the BBC version
(b) what I've merely allowed the BBC to use should they ever need to
(c) and kept the best of them back away from the site so I have sole copyright.

Well, when you write an Entry, a little button appears in the corner that says 'Submit for Review'. If you hit that, you get a choice of forums - the Writing Workshop, Peer Review, and so on - just choose it and click 'Submit'. There's no need to actually contact anyone; the Entry goes into review, and people can read it and comment on it from there. This, of course, presumes that you're writing the Entry alone; if you need a co-writer, I agree that it is more difficult if you don't know someone already, and you have to ask around or post at Ask. There used to be a list of Sub-editors' specialisms at A1035145, but it's sadly out of date.

Details of all the volunteer schemes are at <./>Volunteers</.>, and there are links to each group with more explanations about their activities. There are also links to pages where you can volunteer for any of the schemes. The Scouts look after Peer Review and don't really have any 'official' role outside of it - I'm not quite sure what you meant when you wrote the part starting 'I haven't seen any scout say to any member...', so if you can explain that I may be able to answer your question a little better

I'm sorry, I misunderstood your talk of committees and cliques; it sounded as if you were referring to each of the volunteer groups as a clique! Of course cliques exist on h2g2, there's no denying that, and there are plenty of long-term Researchers who I've never had much contact with because we hang around different parts of the site. Thing is, I don't see an unwelcoming atmosphere in PR these days; we can certainly be tough on experienced writers who we feel can do better, but occasional and new Researchers get more encouragement and patience than reviewers are normally given credit for. I think my latest thread F48874?thread=4817430 is about standard these days.

The difference between the Edited Guide and the Guide is that the EG consists solely of Entries that have been through review, have been edited and been on the Front Page. 'The Guide' consists of these plus all the other entries anyone onsite has ever written, including UnderGuide entries, Post articles, community pages, unedited entries and personal spaces

Incidentally, we still need good poetry for

A17191361 and andhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F74130?thread=4666673 Are in review at the minute Rich - if you want to snaffle em for the Post then by all means, feel free. I've got a couple of rather bitter, Christmassy ones as well if you like I can either put "here" and let you fooster with, or post em to your space if you're short of stuff for the Christmas edition, as well. I've had a look at the links you gave; the "specialisms" one hasn't been used for ages, has it? A Shame. >>I'm not quite sure what you meant when you wrote the part starting 'I haven't seen any scout say to any member...', so if you can explain that I may be able to answer your question a little better << What I *should have said is I haven't come across many cases of any one saying to another researcher "Hey! You're good, why not try doing a guide?" - I assumed the Scouts scouted around the site looking for little gems of talent (as in "Talent Scouts"?) I think you may have to bear in mind, not everyone's pushy or automatically assumes their written work is good enough - or even worthy, as such, to attempt the Edited Guide. Does that make any more sense? I hope so. Thanks for explaining the difference between EG and just Guide entries - as I've said before, I'm not overly ambitious in getting my name in lights and being Front Page Author, etc etc, ( I don't crave that sort of recognition, generally speaking) but I can certainly bung in plenty of unedited guides when the mood and the subject matter enthuses me if you think that's going to help the future of the site. Oh... and Leggsie - I'll take you up on your offer of a tutorial of HMTL at some point in the future, please. Thanks for offering - much appreciated In truth I still think a brief sabbatical from H2 might be a good thing for me; I've little to say generally, and what was once a pleasure is becoming a habit, and I'm not into habits as such (except smoking) A few weeks away might be beneficial to me generally, and I might feel a little less jaundiced and cynical about life generally. I'm afraid Christmas does that to me on a yearly basis.

As for a simple h2g2 site map - how's this: A21853325

That's not a Site Map Alex - that's a list of instructions!!!!

In honesty, I've read that page loads of times, and maybe it's just me, but the words "Clear as Mud" frequently cross my mind.

The sort of site map *I'd like to see is one like a flow chart, or a diagnostic table

ie

Have you written (this) - ie, anything that hasn't automatically gone on ones Personal Space - for Review? I'm sure eventually there could be some facility put on each researcher's personal space... couldn't there?

Yes: Then press "submit for review button"
No: Is there anything you'd like done with it further

Yes: Choose Options (ie, not for review, send to Alternitive writing, etc etc)
No: Return to your Personal Space.

Etc etc.


*Thtas the sort of thing I mean by a site map!


I'm probably not explaining it very well, but I'm waving my arms around like a mad thing, and I *know what I mean;

I haven't a clue as to how it could be designed, or who would have the time or ability to do it, frankly!

Or whether it'd be hinderence or a help, either

But if the option was staring Researchers in the face constantly, and the procedure really was very very simple, I'd bet there'd be a lot more people offering entries. Possibly too many, and possibly a lot of weird, soapbox type rants, but I'm sure there could be a tactful way of saying "Thanks but No thanks" for them.

Couldn't there?

A definition of 'site map': a single page of links that list all the pages in a website with simple HTML links.

What you're after is an overhaul of the site making it more like one of those networking sites where you constantly have to reject and remove content that you didn't spontaneously create/request. While that sort of thing would make life a lot more foolproof, I feel that simply letting people know where the pages are on the site should help them work out what they can do here. Then again, that's not everyone's cup of .

Alex

Oh!

I thought I was having an original idea - poot!

I didn't realise other sites *had this sort of system - humour me and tell me what a networking site is, please? I've never actually come accross one you see, which is why I thought I'd had a good, original idea Oh well!

If it involves an overhaul of the site, then it's obviously a no-goer

- but it *would make it more fool proof, in the cases of people like me. I've never been terribly good at following written instructions like that - whether its because its simply because I'm a "hands on/kinetic(?) learner, or because I'm a bit of a dufus in some areas, is a moot point.

I think I'll have to solve it by having some H2-ers come stay over for a weekend and ask them nicely to *show* me how it's done for my future reference. I meant to ask 2 Legs and Roy to, when they came for my birthday celebration a couple of weeks ago.... but by the time the rest of the party goers had left, we'd become sidetracked into researching alcohol

I will get the hang of it one day. Honest.

A networking site: a bit like h2g2 but without the guide entries. Imagine nothing but journals and friends lists and possibly a few societies, but with the added nightmare of people's drunken photos and choice of music being inflicted on you.

I quite like Facebook but MySpace irritates me immensely.

Jee-sus, that sounds awful

But... as I've said earlier, I wouldn't want to belong to anything that wanted me a a member

I knew there was a good reasen to keep away from Facebook, Myspace and Blogs incorporated

Didn't know what it was until now

...but by 'eck I was right in my suspicions.

How's the vomiting going, btw Roy?

The vomiting has eased off but I'm still feeling flakey. I've still got the same cold I had before our 'researching' weekend.

I suggest you blame 2 Legs

Or have another reseraching sort of weekend in a kill or cure attmpt. perhaps?

Well, that midwinter piss up thing's coming up!

True... so there is! Did you get the email I sent to you about Chas and Dave?

I did indeed. I'm undecided and as yet haven't sounded LL out about it: I'll get onto that forthwith.

As and when, no hurry in the big scheme of things. Better to get yourself sorted first - if we don't make this performance, then there's bound to be another one somewhere else.

I'm holding out for 'em to play the Margate Winter Gardens again!