Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [BackpackGearTest] Re: EDIT ADDENDUM: Owner Review - GoLite Hex 3 - by tim todd

Expand Messages
  • Steven H. Miller
    Are these house styles and standards delineated in writing somewhere that s accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor s work considerably.
    Message 1 of 24 , Feb 2, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing somewhere
      that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor's work
      considerably.

      SteveM


      On Feb 2, 2006, at 3:41 PM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

      > Hi Tim,
      >
      > As I wrote recently on this list, the role of the editor on BGT (as
      > with any form of editorial work) is not adversarial, although I
      > realize it's not that comfortable to have one's writing dissected. You
      > should realize that all BGT reviews and test reports are carefully
      > peer-edited. It's a crucial part of the process.
      >
      > Why? BGT is, in effect, a publication, and we have certain house
      > styles and standards. These aren't always obvious or intuitive. Even
      > the best report writers among us make mistakes, me no less than
      > others.
      >
      > It doesn't give me any pleasure to take an hour or two out of my day
      > carefully correcting a submission. Your review has a number of
      > substantial defects in form and substance that I addressed. If you
      > work to correct them, you will have created something worthwhile, as
      > well as showing the sense of responsibility we require for gear
      > testing.
      >
      > Best,
      >
      > Ted.
      >
      >
      > --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, "nivaun" <tim@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > So, why am I writing the review when someone else can do it better?
      > It's a waste of time. I
      > > don't see where my review needs any improvement.
      > >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
      >
      >
      >
      > SPONSORED LINKS
      > Hiking sock
      > Hiking tour
      > Hiking vacation
      > Hiking clothes
      > Hiking the inca trail
      > Hiking backpack
      >
      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
      >
      > ▪  Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
      >  
      > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      >  BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >  
      > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      > Service.
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Jason Boyle
      ... somewhere ... Steve and others, They best advice that I can give you as a veteran tester would be to watch the list read what others edits are, and take a
      Message 2 of 24 , Feb 2, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Steven H. Miller
        <metaphorce@...> wrote:
        >
        > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
        somewhere
        > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor's work
        > considerably.
        >
        > SteveM

        Steve and others,

        They best advice that I can give you as a veteran tester would be to
        watch the list read what others edits are, and take a look at some of
        the reports on the web site. Also when you joined you should have
        received a link to the survival guide which while not perfect outlines
        what is expected in a report.

        If you are looking for reports to get an idea of the content that is
        required I would start with the editors of this group. Roger Caffin,
        Pam Wyant, Colleen Porter and others.

        We don't want to change peoples style of writing, but do want to make
        sure the content of the report meets the requirements. Additionally
        there is a mentoring program where your mentor can help you with your
        report so that it will go through the editing process on this list
        much easier.

        Jason B
        Veteran Tester
      • edwardripleyduggan
        ... Not to mention the writer s... Jason s post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide, though a little out of date for a few minor details (a
        Message 3 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing somewhere
          > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor's work
          > considerably.
          >
          > SteveM

          Not to mention the writer's...

          Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
          though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
          in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
          as both a tester and an editor I agree.

          One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
          The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has pretty
          comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
          presented, and I consider this text indispensable.

          The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
          documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
          seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
          easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
          would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
          carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.

          Ted.
        • Steven H. Miller
          Ted and Jason: Actually, looking back through my emails, I can t find the Survival Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and I
          Message 4 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            Ted and Jason:

            Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
            Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and
            I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see when
            the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)

            But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over the
            past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
            which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles" involved
            here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in the
            online lessons.

            Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so often, a
            new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
            twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense of
            outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
            arbitrary.

            It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers if a
            couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
            since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
            editing.

            Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
            couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
            advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:

            a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as the
            author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
            involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you wrote
            it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
            somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
            needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
            writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel that
            it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
            part with it at some point anyway.

            b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. Criticism
            of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your work
            is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human being
            when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first time I
            sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
            thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
            what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
            rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
            don't know you. They've never even met you.")

            c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry, it's
            not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. If
            it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
            taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your first
            day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and pointed
            to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's not
            square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. You'd
            get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped you
            out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof wouldn't
            sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
            squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
            worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about it.
            You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
            imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.

            All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
            It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing you,
            just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
            what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I suspect
            that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so far.

            Best,
            SteveM

            On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

            > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
            > somewhere
            > > that's accessible to new reporters?  It might ease the editor's work
            > > considerably.
            > >
            > > SteveM
            >
            > Not to mention the writer's...
            >
            > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
            > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
            > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
            > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
            >
            > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
            > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has pretty
            > comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
            > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
            >
            > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
            > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
            > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
            > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
            > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
            > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
            >
            > Ted.
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
            >
            >
            > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
            >
            > ▪  Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
            >  
            > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >  BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >  
            > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service.
            >
            >


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • TheMiddleSister
            Bravo, Steve! Truly well-written and thoughtful advice to us all! Thanks, Kathy ... From: Steven H. Miller To: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com Sent: Friday,
            Message 5 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              Bravo, Steve! Truly well-written and thoughtful advice to us all!

              Thanks,
              Kathy
              ----- Original Message -----
              From: Steven H. Miller
              To: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com
              Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 12:42 PM
              Subject: Re: [BackpackGearTest] Re: EDIT ADDENDUM: Owner Review - GoLite Hex 3 - by tim todd


              Ted and Jason:

              Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
              Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and
              I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see when
              the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)

              But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over the
              past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
              which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles" involved
              here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in the
              online lessons.

              Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so often, a
              new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
              twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense of
              outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
              arbitrary.

              It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers if a
              couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
              since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
              editing.

              Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
              couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
              advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:

              a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as the
              author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
              involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you wrote
              it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
              somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
              needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
              writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel that
              it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
              part with it at some point anyway.

              b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. Criticism
              of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your work
              is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human being
              when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first time I
              sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
              thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
              what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
              rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
              don't know you. They've never even met you.")

              c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry, it's
              not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. If
              it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
              taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your first
              day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and pointed
              to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's not
              square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. You'd
              get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped you
              out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof wouldn't
              sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
              squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
              worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about it.
              You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
              imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.

              All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
              It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing you,
              just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
              what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I suspect
              that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so far.

              Best,
              SteveM

              On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

              > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
              > somewhere
              > > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor's work
              > > considerably.
              > >
              > > SteveM
              >
              > Not to mention the writer's...
              >
              > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
              > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
              > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
              > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
              >
              > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
              > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has pretty
              > comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
              > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
              >
              > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
              > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
              > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
              > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
              > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
              > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
              >
              > Ted.
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
              >
              >
              > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
              >
              > ▪ Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
              >
              > ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              > BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
              >
              > ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
              > Service.
              >
              >


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



              To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/



              SPONSORED LINKS Hiking sock Hiking tour Hiking vacation
              Hiking clothes Hiking the inca trail Hiking backpack


              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS

              a.. Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.

              b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
              BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

              c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------



              __________ NOD32 1.1392 (20060202) Information __________

              This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
              http://www.eset.com


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • edwardripleyduggan
              Steve, Looking over your articulate, insightful, and incisive response, I m really looking forward to your OR! I feel the latter part of your note goes to the
              Message 6 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                Steve,

                Looking over your articulate, insightful, and incisive response, I'm
                really looking forward to your OR! I feel the latter part of your note
                goes to the heart of the matter. I do have a few comments.

                1. Public expressions of dismay at edits have been rather uncommon on
                BGT. In general, those who submit ORs for the first time are either
                grateful for the assistance in getting their review into shape, or
                they simply don't respond. They drop out of the program. Though that's
                often disappointing to me as an editor, the cruel truth is that they
                were (likely enough) not a good fit for the program.

                2. The issue of "styles" is a tough one. In point of fact, we try to
                avoid editing style wherever possible. As an example, we often let
                punctuation issues pass, provided that they don't interfere with ease
                of reading. This is just as well, as I'm terrible about punctuation
                myself. We value the variety of the voices which our contributors
                bring to the table. However, I'm often faced with new contributors who
                know their gear, but not how to express their opinions about it. This
                is rather tough on all concerned.

                3. The single biggest source of confusion lies with metric
                conversions, and with the expression of units. The best guide to this
                by far is to be found at the foot of the conversion page, at

                http://www.backpackgeartest.org/convert.html

                I would be the first to admit that this is a little buried (not
                something over which I have control). In the next revision of the
                Survival Guide, I hope this will be hyperlinked.

                4. On BGT, see

                http://www.backpackgeartest.org/lesson.php?lesson=BecomeTester&page=1

                (linked from the homepage).

                The Survival Guide, which is linked from several places, is at

                http://www.backpackgeartest.org/requirements.php

                Chapter 3 is the critical section.

                ******


                We are all volunteers here, and we wouldn't be editing if we didn't
                care about both BGT and those who contribute to it. Without
                contributors, BGT does not exist. No edit I make, or that any of the
                editors make, is addressed to the writer as an individual. We're
                editing the text, not the person!

                I'm sure that there's more that I could write on this subject, but you
                have addressed the issues admirably. Thanks.

                Very best,

                Ted.









                --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Steven H. Miller
                <metaphorce@...> wrote:
                >
                > Ted and Jason:
                >
                > Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
                > Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and
                > I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see when
                > the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)
                >
                > But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over the
                > past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
                > which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles" involved
                > here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in the
                > online lessons.
                >
                > Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so often, a
                > new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
                > twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense of
                > outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
                > arbitrary.
                >
                > It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers if a
                > couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
                > since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
                > editing.
                >
                > Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
                > couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
                > advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:
                >
                > a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as the
                > author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
                > involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you wrote
                > it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
                > somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
                > needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
                > writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel that
                > it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
                > part with it at some point anyway.
                >
                > b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. Criticism
                > of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your work
                > is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human being
                > when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first time I
                > sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
                > thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
                > what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
                > rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
                > don't know you. They've never even met you.")
                >
                > c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry, it's
                > not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. If
                > it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
                > taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your first
                > day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and pointed
                > to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's not
                > square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. You'd
                > get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped you
                > out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof wouldn't
                > sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
                > squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
                > worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about it.
                > You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
                > imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.
                >
                > All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
                > It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing you,
                > just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
                > what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I suspect
                > that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so far.
                >
                > Best,
                > SteveM
                >
                > On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:
                >
                > > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
                > > somewhere
                > > > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the
                editor's work
                > > > considerably.
                > > >
                > > > SteveM
                > >
                > > Not to mention the writer's...
                > >
                > > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
                > > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
                > > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
                > > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
                > >
                > > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
                > > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has
                pretty
                > > comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
                > > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
                > >
                > > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
                > > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
                > > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
                > > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
                > > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
                > > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
                > >
                > > Ted.
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                > >
                > >
                > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                > >
                > > ▪  Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                > > Â
                > > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                > > Â BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                > > Â
                > > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                Terms of
                > > Service.
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                >
              • Steven H. Miller
                Ted: Well, I kinda doubt my OR is anything earthshaking. I think it s reasonably to the point, but that s all. Thanks for the Survival Guide link. It s not
                Message 7 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ted:

                  Well, I kinda doubt my OR is anything earthshaking. I think it's
                  reasonably to the point, but that's all.

                  Thanks for the Survival Guide link. It's not linked from the main nav
                  bar, nor is it linked from the How To Become A Tester page, although it
                  IS linked from the Quickstart page.

                  I hope it's OK to talk about process onlist like this. I really felt
                  for those two reviewers who seemed to be bleeding so badly from being
                  edited. I figured that if these two people were hurting badly enough
                  to go public, there are probably others who are bleeding in private.
                  It felt like a little public airing of the issues - without so much of
                  the anguish - might do everyone a bit of good. (Pretty presumptuous
                  for a newbie, I admit, but have been known to pop blythly in where
                  angels fear to tread... with mixed results.)

                  I think this list and the associated website are a very cool web
                  phenomenon, and I'd like to be part of it. Obviously there's quite a
                  few others who would, too, so I thought maybe reducing some of the
                  emotional wear and tear of joining might be helpful.

                  Best,
                  SteveM


                  On Feb 3, 2006, at 1:47 PM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

                  > Steve,
                  >
                  > Looking over your articulate, insightful, and incisive response, I'm
                  > really looking forward to your OR! I feel the latter part of your note
                  > goes to the heart of the matter. I do have a few comments.
                  >
                  > 1. Public expressions of dismay at edits have been rather uncommon on
                  > BGT. In general, those who submit ORs for the first time are either
                  > grateful for the assistance in getting their review into shape, or
                  > they simply don't respond. They drop out of the program. Though that's
                  > often disappointing to me as an editor, the cruel truth is that they
                  > were (likely enough) not a good fit for the program.
                  >
                  > 2. The issue of "styles" is a tough one. In point of fact, we try to
                  > avoid editing style wherever possible. As an example, we often let
                  > punctuation issues pass, provided that they don't interfere with ease
                  > of reading. This is just as well, as I'm terrible about punctuation
                  > myself. We value the variety of the voices which our contributors
                  > bring to the table. However, I'm often faced with new contributors who
                  > know their gear, but not how to express their opinions about it. This
                  > is rather tough on all concerned.
                  >
                  > 3. The single biggest source of confusion lies with metric
                  > conversions, and with the expression of units. The best guide to this
                  > by far is to be found at the foot of the conversion page, at
                  >
                  > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/convert.html
                  >
                  > I would be the first to admit that this is a little buried (not
                  > something over which I have control). In the next revision of the
                  > Survival Guide, I hope this will be hyperlinked.
                  >
                  > 4. On BGT, see
                  >
                  > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/lesson.php?lesson=BecomeTester&page=1
                  >
                  > (linked from the homepage).
                  >
                  > The Survival Guide, which is linked from several places, is at
                  >
                  > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/requirements.php
                  >
                  > Chapter 3 is the critical section.
                  >
                  > ******
                  >
                  >
                  > We are all volunteers here, and we wouldn't be editing if we didn't
                  > care about both BGT and those who contribute to it. Without
                  > contributors, BGT does not exist. No edit I make, or that any of the
                  > editors make, is addressed to the writer as an individual. We're
                  > editing the text, not the person!
                  >
                  > I'm sure that there's more that I could write on this subject, but you
                  > have addressed the issues admirably. Thanks.
                  >
                  > Very best,
                  >
                  > Ted.
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Steven H. Miller
                  > <metaphorce@...> wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Ted and Jason:
                  > >
                  > > Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
                  > > Guide.  I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website,
                  > and
                  > > I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see
                  > when
                  > > the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)
                  > >
                  > > But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over
                  > the
                  > > past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
                  > > which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles"
                  > involved
                  > > here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in
                  > the
                  > > online lessons.
                  > >
                  > > Style is a very subjective call.  I have noticed that every so
                  > often, a
                  > > new report writer just freaks out about being edited.  I've seen it
                  > > twice in the past three weeks.  It has seemed to center on a sense
                  > of
                  > > outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
                  > > arbitrary.
                  > >
                  > > It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers
                  > if a
                  > > couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
                  > > since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
                  > > editing.
                  > >
                  > > Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
                  > > couple of decades ago.  I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
                  > > advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:
                  > >
                  > > a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as
                  > the
                  > > author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
                  > > involved.  Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you
                  > wrote
                  > > it that way.  But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
                  > > somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
                  > > needs fixing... you'll find something every time.  Most really good
                  > > writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel
                  > that
                  > > it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
                  > > part with it at some point anyway.
                  > >
                  > > b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. 
                  > Criticism
                  > > of your work is not criticism of you.  Outright rejection of your
                  > work
                  > > is not rejection of you.  Nobody's talking about you as a human
                  > being
                  > > when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag.   (The first
                  > time I
                  > > sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
                  > > thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
                  > > what had happened.  "I got rejected" I said.  "You did not get
                  > > rejected!" she said very briskly.  "Your script got rejected.  They
                  > > don't know you.  They've never even met you.")
                  > >
                  > > c)  This kind of writing is a job, it's not art.  It's not poetry,
                  > it's
                  > > not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. 
                  > If
                  > > it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
                  > > taking personally.  But this is a job.  If you were working your
                  > first
                  > > day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and
                  > pointed
                  > > to two boards you'd nailed together and said,  "Hey, that joint's
                  > not
                  > > square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. 
                  > You'd
                  > > get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped
                  > you
                  > > out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof
                  > wouldn't
                  > > sit on it correctly.  Writing-style is more subjective than the
                  > > squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
                  > > worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about
                  > it. 
                  > > You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
                  > > imperfect as an editor.  All we can do is try.
                  > >
                  > > All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here. 
                  > > It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing
                  > you,
                  > > just because they can.  I don't know how the editors decide between
                  > > what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I
                  > suspect
                  > > that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so
                  > far.
                  > >
                  > > Best,
                  > > SteveM
                  > >
                  > > On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:
                  > >
                  > > > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
                  > > > somewhere
                  > > >  > that's accessible to new reporters?  It might ease the
                  > editor's work
                  > > >  > considerably.
                  > > >  >
                  > > >  > SteveM
                  > > >
                  > > >  Not to mention the writer's...
                  > > >
                  > > >  Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival
                  > Guide,
                  > > >  though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new
                  > version is
                  > > >  in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed
                  > that, and
                  > > >  as both a tester and an editor I agree.
                  > > >
                  > > >  One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and
                  > units.
                  > > >  The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has
                  > pretty
                  > > >  comprehensive information regarding how this information should
                  > be
                  > > >  presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
                  > > >
                  > > >  The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
                  > > >  documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront.
                  > It
                  > > >  seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't
                  > internalized
                  > > >  easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
                  > > >  would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting
                  > them
                  > > >  carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
                  > > >
                  > > >  Ted.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                  > > >
                  > > >     â–ª     Â Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                  > > > Â
                  > > >     â–ª     Â To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  > > > Â BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  > > > Â
                  > > >     â–ª     Â Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                  > Terms of
                  > > > Service.
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                  >
                  >
                  > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                  >
                  > ▪  Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                  >  
                  > ▪  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  >  BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >  
                  > ▪  Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                  > Service.
                  >
                  >


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Jerry Goller
                  Excellent post, Steve! These are just general comments on the subject and not directed at anyone in particular. I ve tried to, as much as possible, avoid
                  Message 8 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Excellent post, Steve!

                    These are just general comments on the subject and not directed at anyone in particular.

                    I've tried to, as much as possible, avoid having styles edited. I *want* different styles in reports. I can't imagine anything more boring than a few thousand cookie cutter reports. I want our readers to believe that a report they are reading could be from the person they shared a shelter with last week or the person they were talking to at the trailhead last month...or themselves, for that matter.

                    But we also have to have standards to make our reports readable and worthwhile. Certain information *must* be in there for reports to have value.

                    Editor make style *suggestions* only when they truly feel it would substantially add to the report. When they say it isn't a suggestion, but a requirement that means it is something we've discussed and decided was necessary for reports in general.

                    I'd also like to say I don't believe in micromanaging. The Editors have a tough job. I don't want to do their job. So I set down guidelines, general, to be sure, as to what I want and I let them decide how to get that.

                    I absolutely support *all* Mods and their people in their decisions. Unless I want to take over their jobs, which I don't, I don't see how it can work any other way.

                    I do, from time to time, comment on editing that seems to be more toward style than substance when I see it. It is a gentle reminder to Editors as to what I consider style and what I consider content. The content, the information, is the important part, not the report. The information is the only reason BGT exists.

                    If you feel quite strongly that it is a style issue then don't make the change. If the Editors feel quite strongly that it is a content issue and needs to be changed then they can leave it up to me and I will arbitrate it. But I am the court of last resort and am not going to second guess Editors on a daily, or weekly, or monthly basis. Don't bring it to me unless it is a deal breaker between you and BGT.

                    And when I make a decision the only discussion is if you want to follow it or leave BGT.

                    Jerry Goller
                    Publisher/Owner
                    Backpackgeartest.org

                    <http://www.backpackgeartest.org/> http://www.BackpackGearTest.org : the most comprehensive interactive gear reviews and tests on the planet.



                    _____

                    From: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven H.Miller
                    Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 10:42 AM
                    To: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: Re: [BackpackGearTest] Re: EDIT ADDENDUM: Owner Review - GoLite Hex 3 - by tim todd


                    Ted and Jason:

                    Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
                    Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website, and
                    I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see when
                    the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)

                    But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over the
                    past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
                    which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles" involved
                    here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in the
                    online lessons.

                    Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so often, a
                    new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
                    twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense of
                    outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
                    arbitrary.

                    It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers if a
                    couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
                    since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
                    editing.

                    Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
                    couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
                    advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:

                    a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as the
                    author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
                    involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you wrote
                    it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
                    somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
                    needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
                    writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel that
                    it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
                    part with it at some point anyway.

                    b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work. Criticism
                    of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your work
                    is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human being
                    when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first time I
                    sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
                    thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
                    what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
                    rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
                    don't know you. They've never even met you.")

                    c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry, it's
                    not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter. If
                    it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
                    taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your first
                    day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and pointed
                    to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's not
                    square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you. You'd
                    get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped you
                    out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof wouldn't
                    sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
                    squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
                    worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about it.
                    You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
                    imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.

                    All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
                    It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing you,
                    just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
                    what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I suspect
                    that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so far.

                    Best,
                    SteveM

                    On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

                    > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
                    > somewhere
                    > > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the editor's work
                    > > considerably.
                    > >
                    > > SteveM
                    >
                    > Not to mention the writer's...
                    >
                    > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival Guide,
                    > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new version is
                    > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed that, and
                    > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
                    >
                    > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and units.
                    > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has pretty
                    > comprehensive information regarding how this information should be
                    > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
                    >
                    > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
                    > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront. It
                    > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't internalized
                    > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
                    > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting them
                    > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
                    >
                    > Ted.
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                    >
                    >
                    > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                    >
                    > ▪ Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                    >
                    > ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    > BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                    >
                    > ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                    > Service.
                    >
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                    To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/




                    SPONSORED LINKS
                    Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+sock&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=U7vNs1GAXQsMdkmMejGcvg> sock Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+tour&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=FTu67uRNdfXzYYRGjh3i0g> tour Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+vacation&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=8M9bAzGv1jv1caX5nQWHOg> vacation
                    Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+clothes&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=WrmBQDpNvAms02hrqEWL9w> clothes Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=bz8AqFG05H-XH09jUZRJNA> the inca trail Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+backpack&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=tAm1RFs4a8iRVKkXahBWZQ> backpack

                    _____

                    YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



                    * Visit your group "BackpackGearTest <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BackpackGearTest> " on the web.


                    * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                    BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


                    * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


                    _____




                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Jerry Goller
                    I d also like to say the BGT is a work in progress. We re always interested in ideas. May not take them, of course, but always interested...... ;o) Jerry
                    Message 9 of 24 , Feb 3, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I'd also like to say the BGT is a work in progress. We're always interested in ideas. May not take them, of course, but always interested...... ;o)

                      Jerry

                      <http://www.backpackgeartest.org/> http://www.BackpackGearTest.org : the most comprehensive interactive gear reviews and tests on the planet.



                      _____

                      From: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com [mailto:BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Steven H.Miller
                      Sent: Friday, February 03, 2006 3:44 PM
                      To: BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com
                      Subject: Re: [BackpackGearTest] Editing protocols WAS: EDIT ADDENDUM: Owner Review...


                      Ted:

                      Well, I kinda doubt my OR is anything earthshaking. I think it's
                      reasonably to the point, but that's all.

                      Thanks for the Survival Guide link. It's not linked from the main nav
                      bar, nor is it linked from the How To Become A Tester page, although it
                      IS linked from the Quickstart page.

                      I hope it's OK to talk about process onlist like this. I really felt
                      for those two reviewers who seemed to be bleeding so badly from being
                      edited. I figured that if these two people were hurting badly enough
                      to go public, there are probably others who are bleeding in private.
                      It felt like a little public airing of the issues - without so much of
                      the anguish - might do everyone a bit of good. (Pretty presumptuous
                      for a newbie, I admit, but have been known to pop blythly in where
                      angels fear to tread... with mixed results.)

                      I think this list and the associated website are a very cool web
                      phenomenon, and I'd like to be part of it. Obviously there's quite a
                      few others who would, too, so I thought maybe reducing some of the
                      emotional wear and tear of joining might be helpful.

                      Best,
                      SteveM


                      On Feb 3, 2006, at 1:47 PM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:

                      > Steve,
                      >
                      > Looking over your articulate, insightful, and incisive response, I'm
                      > really looking forward to your OR! I feel the latter part of your note
                      > goes to the heart of the matter. I do have a few comments.
                      >
                      > 1. Public expressions of dismay at edits have been rather uncommon on
                      > BGT. In general, those who submit ORs for the first time are either
                      > grateful for the assistance in getting their review into shape, or
                      > they simply don't respond. They drop out of the program. Though that's
                      > often disappointing to me as an editor, the cruel truth is that they
                      > were (likely enough) not a good fit for the program.
                      >
                      > 2. The issue of "styles" is a tough one. In point of fact, we try to
                      > avoid editing style wherever possible. As an example, we often let
                      > punctuation issues pass, provided that they don't interfere with ease
                      > of reading. This is just as well, as I'm terrible about punctuation
                      > myself. We value the variety of the voices which our contributors
                      > bring to the table. However, I'm often faced with new contributors who
                      > know their gear, but not how to express their opinions about it. This
                      > is rather tough on all concerned.
                      >
                      > 3. The single biggest source of confusion lies with metric
                      > conversions, and with the expression of units. The best guide to this
                      > by far is to be found at the foot of the conversion page, at
                      >
                      > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/convert.html
                      >
                      > I would be the first to admit that this is a little buried (not
                      > something over which I have control). In the next revision of the
                      > Survival Guide, I hope this will be hyperlinked.
                      >
                      > 4. On BGT, see
                      >
                      > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/lesson.php?lesson=BecomeTester <http://www.backpackgeartest.org/lesson.php?lesson=BecomeTester&page=1> &page=1
                      >
                      > (linked from the homepage).
                      >
                      > The Survival Guide, which is linked from several places, is at
                      >
                      > http://www.backpackgeartest.org/requirements.php
                      >
                      > Chapter 3 is the critical section.
                      >
                      > ******
                      >
                      >
                      > We are all volunteers here, and we wouldn't be editing if we didn't
                      > care about both BGT and those who contribute to it. Without
                      > contributors, BGT does not exist. No edit I make, or that any of the
                      > editors make, is addressed to the writer as an individual. We're
                      > editing the text, not the person!
                      >
                      > I'm sure that there's more that I could write on this subject, but you
                      > have addressed the issues admirably. Thanks.
                      >
                      > Very best,
                      >
                      > Ted.
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > --- In BackpackGearTest@yahoogroups.com, Steven H. Miller
                      > <metaphorce@...> wrote:
                      > >
                      > > Ted and Jason:
                      > >
                      > > Actually, looking back through my emails, I can't find the Survival
                      > > Guide. I certainly read the review-writing lessons on the website,
                      > and
                      > > I think I followed the suggestions pretty closely (but we'll see
                      > when
                      > > the editor "has at" my first review, won't we!)
                      > >
                      > > But having read a bunch of fresh reviews and the edits of them over
                      > the
                      > > past few weeks, it seems to me that there are not only standards -
                      > > which are addressed well in your post, Ted - but also "styles"
                      > involved
                      > > here, and style requirements are not really clearly documented in
                      > the
                      > > online lessons.
                      > >
                      > > Style is a very subjective call. I have noticed that every so
                      > often, a
                      > > new report writer just freaks out about being edited. I've seen it
                      > > twice in the past three weeks. It has seemed to center on a sense
                      > of
                      > > outrage that the editor is being too demanding, too subjective, too
                      > > arbitrary.
                      > >
                      > > It would certainly make it easier for a lot of new report-writers
                      > if a
                      > > couple of you veterans could try to document some thoughts on style,
                      > > since you are certainly operating out of your style-opinions in your
                      > > editing.
                      > >
                      > > Now, I write for a living, and my skin got toughened up to editing a
                      > > couple of decades ago. I feel it incumbent on me to pass along some
                      > > advice that helped me over this emotional hurdle:
                      > >
                      > > a) If your editor does not seem objective to you, remember that as
                      > the
                      > > author, you are probably the least objective of all the parties
                      > > involved. Of course you think your piece is good: that's why you
                      > wrote
                      > > it that way. But if you can step back from it honestly and pretend
                      > > somebody else wrote it and see if you can spot anything in it that
                      > > needs fixing... you'll find something every time. Most really good
                      > > writers are never completely satisfied with their work, and feel
                      > that
                      > > it was never really "finished" and perfected, only that they had to
                      > > part with it at some point anyway.
                      > >
                      > > b) It's important to distinguish between you and your work.
                      > Criticism
                      > > of your work is not criticism of you. Outright rejection of your
                      > work
                      > > is not rejection of you. Nobody's talking about you as a human
                      > being
                      > > when they're editing your report on a sleeping bag. (The first
                      > time I
                      > > sent off a screenplay and got it back with a short 'Thanks, but no
                      > > thanks' note, I called an older and wiser friend and glumly told her
                      > > what had happened. "I got rejected" I said. "You did not get
                      > > rejected!" she said very briskly. "Your script got rejected. They
                      > > don't know you. They've never even met you.")
                      > >
                      > > c) This kind of writing is a job, it's not art. It's not poetry,
                      > it's
                      > > not a confession of your inmost feelings, it's not a love letter.
                      > If
                      > > it was one of those things, criticism of your style might be worth
                      > > taking personally. But this is a job. If you were working your
                      > first
                      > > day on a construction job, and a veteran carpenter came by and
                      > pointed
                      > > to two boards you'd nailed together and said, "Hey, that joint's
                      > not
                      > > square," you wouldn't start yelling at him for criticizing you.
                      > You'd
                      > > get your square and fix the joint, and be thankful the guy helped
                      > you
                      > > out before you put up the wall-frame and found that the roof
                      > wouldn't
                      > > sit on it correctly. Writing-style is more subjective than the
                      > > squareness of two studs, but it's still a job, not art, and it's not
                      > > worth expending a lot of emotional energy getting defensive about
                      > it.
                      > > You are probably imperfect as a writer, and your editor is probably
                      > > imperfect as an editor. All we can do is try.
                      > >
                      > > All that said, I sympathize with the two freak-outs I've seen here.
                      > > It's terrible to feel that a strangers are capriciously torturing
                      > you,
                      > > just because they can. I don't know how the editors decide between
                      > > what things are mandatory edits and what are suggestions, but I
                      > suspect
                      > > that therein lies the key to the emotional problems I've seen so
                      > far.
                      > >
                      > > Best,
                      > > SteveM
                      > >
                      > > On Feb 3, 2006, at 7:02 AM, edwardripleyduggan wrote:
                      > >
                      > > > > Are these "house styles and standards" delineated in writing
                      > > > somewhere
                      > > > > that's accessible to new reporters? It might ease the
                      > editor's work
                      > > > > considerably.
                      > > > >
                      > > > > SteveM
                      > > >
                      > > > Not to mention the writer's...
                      > > >
                      > > > Jason's post addressed this issue pretty well. The Survival
                      > Guide,
                      > > > though a little out of date for a few minor details (a new
                      > version is
                      > > > in the works) remains an essential document. Jason stressed
                      > that, and
                      > > > as both a tester and an editor I agree.
                      > > >
                      > > > One major source of edits is in the matter of conversions and
                      > units.
                      > > > The BGT site has a converter utility. The foot of this page has
                      > pretty
                      > > > comprehensive information regarding how this information should
                      > be
                      > > > presented, and I consider this text indispensable.
                      > > >
                      > > > The BGT standards are not hidden away or arbitrary; they are all
                      > > > documented, and most of the documentation is indicated upfront.
                      > It
                      > > > seems not everyone reads it, though (or perhaps it isn't
                      > internalized
                      > > > easily). I really don't expect perfect ORs to come rolling in--it
                      > > > would be boring if they did--but I do ask that those submitting
                      > them
                      > > > carefully attend to my edits and advice. Most do.
                      > > >
                      > > > Ted.
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                      > > >
                      > > > â–ª Â Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                      > > > Â
                      > > > â–ª Â To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > > > Â BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      > > > Â
                      > > > â–ª Â Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo!
                      > Terms of
                      > > > Service.
                      > > >
                      > > >
                      > >
                      > >
                      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      > >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                      >
                      >
                      > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                      >
                      > ▪ Visit your group "BackpackGearTest" on the web.
                      >
                      > ▪ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      > BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                      >
                      > ▪ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                      > Service.
                      >
                      >


                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



                      To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/




                      SPONSORED LINKS
                      Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+sock&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=U7vNs1GAXQsMdkmMejGcvg> sock Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+tour&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=FTu67uRNdfXzYYRGjh3i0g> tour Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+vacation&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=8M9bAzGv1jv1caX5nQWHOg> vacation
                      Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+clothes&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=WrmBQDpNvAms02hrqEWL9w> clothes Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=bz8AqFG05H-XH09jUZRJNA> the inca trail Hiking <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+backpack&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=tAm1RFs4a8iRVKkXahBWZQ> backpack

                      _____

                      YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



                      * Visit your group "BackpackGearTest <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BackpackGearTest> " on the web.


                      * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                      BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com <mailto:BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>


                      * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> .


                      _____




                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Andrew Priest
                      ... Hi Steve Ahh, it is linked from the How to Become a Tester page. You will find it in the first paragraph of the Quick Start Guide and it is linked at
                      Message 10 of 24 , Feb 8, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        At 06:43 AM 4/02/2006, you wrote:

                        >Thanks for the Survival Guide link. It's not linked from the main nav
                        >bar, nor is it linked from the How To Become A Tester page, although it
                        >IS linked from the Quickstart page.

                        Hi Steve

                        Ahh, it is linked from the How to Become a Tester page. You will find
                        it in the first paragraph of the Quick Start Guide and it is linked
                        at
                        <http://www.backpackgeartest.org/lesson.php?lesson=BecomeTester&page=9>
                        the appropriate page of the How to Become a Tester documents.

                        Also if you log into the BackpackGearTest.org site you will find
                        under Documents. It is called "Test Requirements" which it primarily is.

                        As an aside, can you please ensure you edit (read delete the surplus
                        parts of the email you are replying to) your posts before sending to
                        the list. We ask you do this as a consideration of other users,
                        particularly digest readers.

                        Thanks
                        Andrew Priest
                        List Moderator





                        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      • Steven H. Miller
                        Andrew: In the future, I will delete the previous (the opposite is the protocol on other lists I belong to). As to the Survival Guide/Test Requirements
                        Message 11 of 24 , Feb 8, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Andrew:

                          In the future, I will delete the previous (the opposite is the protocol
                          on other lists I belong to).

                          As to the "Survival Guide/Test Requirements" pages... May I suggest
                          (based on my own strugles as a pioneer website content creator in the
                          mid 1990's) that settling on one name for it and always using that name
                          -both on the website and in posts/emails - would make it easier on us
                          newbies.

                          Thanks,
                          SteveM
                        • Andrew Priest
                          ... Protocol on other lists? That is interesting. If you do a search on email etiquette you might find that your approach of (a) top posting versus bottom
                          Message 12 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            At 03:46 AM 9/02/2006, you wrote:
                            >Andrew:
                            >
                            >In the future, I will delete the previous (the opposite is the protocol
                            >on other lists I belong to).

                            Protocol on other lists? That is interesting. If you do a search on
                            email etiquette you might find that your approach of (a) top posting
                            versus bottom posting (considering people with disabilities) and (b)
                            quoting in full all the advert details and in full all the previous
                            posts in the thread as opposed to editing the material you are
                            quoting to the relevant material is not consider good etiquette.

                            I suggest you also try going on to digest and get a feel for the
                            digest users experience. You might even be surprised. Or
                            alternatively I am sure Roger and some of the other digest users here
                            will be more than happy to let you know what they think of you
                            earlier approach :-).

                            >As to the "Survival Guide/Test Requirements" pages... May I suggest
                            >(based on my own strugles as a pioneer website content creator in the
                            >mid 1990's) that settling on one name for it and always using that name
                            >-both on the website and in posts/emails - would make it easier on us
                            >newbies.

                            Sure, I understand your point, but it is referred to as the Survival
                            Guide in all "newbie" related documentation and the testers who have
                            signed up to the website seem to have had no problem finding the
                            document. This is the first time that I am aware of since we have had
                            the website that it has been raised as an issue. Given the website
                            usage etc I am not going to get hung up on this one.

                            That said I will pass your comment on to the Webmaster.

                            Regard

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          • edwardripleyduggan
                            Historically (can one write historically in connection with such a recent phenomenon as the Internet?) the norm with replies to e-mail--and, by extension, to
                            Message 13 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Historically (can one write "historically" in connection with such a
                              recent phenomenon as the Internet?) the norm with replies to
                              e-mail--and, by extension, to lists--has been to remove all
                              superfluous material. I was online as soon as public access to the
                              Internet (i.e. to those without government or academic affiliation)
                              was permitted, and all the books on the subject of Internet procedures
                              of that time mentioned trimming excess from e-mail.

                              Though this sounds like one of those "Back when I was a lad..."
                              stories, almost everything was command line driven, but that was OK
                              because we were all used to DOS, if not even more "primitive"
                              operating systems. I still like command line, in fact. The issue with
                              e-mail is both practical (bandwidth) and procedural (it's annoying to
                              readers who receive the digest form).

                              My first machine had 1 MG of RAM--which marks me very much as a
                              Johnny-come-lately, given that the really early home computers had 64
                              k or less. I now have 50 times more RAM than I had hard-disk capacity
                              back then. This statistic is somehow both obscurely pleasing and
                              disturbing...

                              Ted.

                              Andrew wrote:

                              > Protocol on other lists? That is interesting. If you do a search on
                              > email etiquette you might find that your approach of (a) top posting
                              > versus bottom posting
                            • Andrew Priest
                              ... Hate to tell you this Ted but I suspect I was online even before you ... academic institution. I can still remember or the stories of doom and gloom if
                              Message 14 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                At 10:20 PM 9/02/2006, you wrote:
                                >Historically (can one write "historically" in connection with such a
                                >recent phenomenon as the Internet?) the norm with replies to
                                >e-mail--and, by extension, to lists--has been to remove all
                                >superfluous material. I was online as soon as public access to the
                                >Internet (i.e. to those without government or academic affiliation)
                                >was permitted, and all the books on the subject of Internet procedures
                                >of that time mentioned trimming excess from e-mail.

                                Hate to tell you this Ted but I suspect I was online even before you
                                :-). I can remember vaguely pre-WWW days, but then I work for a
                                academic institution. I can still remember or the stories of doom and
                                gloom if business got hold of the Internet. How things have changed.
                                Mind you I see AOL is looking to charge to have emails sent to AOL members.

                                Andrew


                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • Leesa J
                                I remember a demonstration of spednet it was an academic online board for special education teachers. We could go to the university to access information
                                Message 15 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  I remember a demonstration of 'spednet' it was an academic 'online' board
                                  for special education teachers. We could go to the university to access
                                  information using their computers. I'm pretty sure it was 87-88. Most of
                                  the teachers couldn't understand why this was worth using - they thought it
                                  would never amount to anything. I guess I was a geek even then. Leesa

                                  On 2/9/06, Andrew Priest <apriest@...> wrote:
                                  >
                                  > At 10:20 PM 9/02/2006, you wrote:
                                  > >Historically (can one write "historically" in connection with such a
                                  > >recent phenomenon as the Internet?) the norm with replies to
                                  > >e-mail--and, by extension, to lists--has been to remove all
                                  > >superfluous material. I was online as soon as public access to the
                                  > >Internet (i.e. to those without government or academic affiliation)
                                  > >was permitted, and all the books on the subject of Internet procedures
                                  > >of that time mentioned trimming excess from e-mail.
                                  >
                                  > Hate to tell you this Ted but I suspect I was online even before you
                                  > :-). I can remember vaguely pre-WWW days, but then I work for a
                                  > academic institution. I can still remember or the stories of doom and
                                  > gloom if business got hold of the Internet. How things have changed.
                                  > Mind you I see AOL is looking to charge to have emails sent to AOL
                                  > members.
                                  >
                                  > Andrew
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > To read our reviews, please visit http://www.backpackgeartest.org/
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > SPONSORED LINKS
                                  > Hiking sock<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+sock&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=U7vNs1GAXQsMdkmMejGcvg> Hiking
                                  > tour<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+tour&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=FTu67uRNdfXzYYRGjh3i0g> Hiking
                                  > vacation<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+vacation&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=8M9bAzGv1jv1caX5nQWHOg> Hiking
                                  > clothes<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+clothes&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=WrmBQDpNvAms02hrqEWL9w> Hiking
                                  > the inca trail<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=bz8AqFG05H-XH09jUZRJNA> Hiking
                                  > backpack<http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Hiking+backpack&w1=Hiking+sock&w2=Hiking+tour&w3=Hiking+vacation&w4=Hiking+clothes&w5=Hiking+the+inca+trail&w6=Hiking+backpack&c=6&s=123&.sig=tAm1RFs4a8iRVKkXahBWZQ>
                                  > ------------------------------
                                  > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > - Visit your group "BackpackGearTest<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BackpackGearTest>"
                                  > on the web.
                                  >
                                  > - To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                                  > BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com<BackpackGearTest-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe>
                                  >
                                  > - Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
                                  > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>.
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > ------------------------------
                                  >



                                  --
                                  This land is your land, this land is my land...
                                  Woody Guthrie


                                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                • Brad Larson
                                  At the risk of perpetuating this thread indefinitely.... -- I remember sending my first emails in 1975 via U of Minnesota -- In 1983 had my own ATT 3b2 Unix
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    At the risk of perpetuating this thread indefinitely....

                                    -- I remember sending my first emails in 1975 via U of Minnesota
                                    -- In 1983 had my own ATT 3b2 Unix SysV computer in my home running
                                    UUCP (unix to unix copy) that allowed me to send emails


                                    Leesa J wrote:
                                    > I remember a demonstration of 'spednet' ... I'm pretty sure it was 87-88.
                                    > On 2/9/06, Andrew Priest <apriest@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    >> At 10:20 PM 9/02/2006, you wrote:
                                    >>
                                    >>> Historically (can one write "historically" in connection with such a
                                    >>> recent phenomenon as the Internet?)
                                    >>>
                                    >> Hate to tell you this Ted but I suspect I was online even before you
                                    >> :-). I can remember vaguely pre-WWW days...
                                    >>
                                    >> Andrew
                                    >>
                                    >>
                                  • Steven H. Miller
                                    I can t top that (1975, that is), but I was known to frequent a notoriously raucous chat room on Peoplelink somewhere between 1983 1987. (I think... those
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      I can't top that (1975, that is), but I was known to frequent a
                                      notoriously raucous chat room on Peoplelink somewhere between 1983
                                      1987. (I think... those years are a bit hazy). It was there that the
                                      term SPAM first arose. Certain individuals had a tactic for silencing
                                      people who they found boring or intrusive in our little group. They
                                      would start quoting the Monty Python SPAM routine back and forth...
                                      they had it pre-typed so they could post far more qucikly than anyone
                                      else - until they drowned out all other conversation. (Hence, SPAM is
                                      unwanted communication that chokes the system). Those of us who were
                                      regulars would just wait this out. The interlopers would figure this
                                      was no place to pick up cybersex, and leave. Then normal conversation
                                      would resume.

                                      But seriously, folks, I had no intention of stirring up a storm. I
                                      belong to a couple of Photography oriented lists where people normally
                                      leave in the preceeding thread messages. They don't even <snip>. If
                                      it's different here, I don't mind at all. I'm perfectly flexible to
                                      local custom.

                                      As to Top-posting VS bottom posting, this is endlessly the topic of
                                      debate. I have seen nasty flame-wars erupt over the question of which
                                      practice is actually the "norm," what constitutes courtesy, and what
                                      makes something intelligible.

                                      And then there's interstitial-posting...

                                      Anyway, I hope to repost my (edited) OR soon. Back to work.

                                      SteveM


                                      On Feb 9, 2006, at 8:26 AM, Brad Larson wrote:

                                      > At the risk of perpetuating this thread indefinitely....
                                      >
                                      > -- I remember sending my first emails in 1975 via U of Minnesota
                                      > -- In 1983 had my own ATT 3b2 Unix SysV computer in my home running
                                      > UUCP (unix to unix copy) that allowed me to send emails
                                      >
                                      >


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • edwardripleyduggan
                                      This thread should probably end here, but I suspect that machine is now quite collectible!
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Feb 9, 2006
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        This thread should probably end here, but I suspect that machine is
                                        now quite collectible!


                                        > At the risk of perpetuating this thread indefinitely....
                                        >
                                        > -- I remember sending my first emails in 1975 via U of Minnesota
                                        > -- In 1983 had my own ATT 3b2 Unix SysV computer in my home running
                                        > UUCP (unix to unix copy) that allowed me to send emails
                                        >
                                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.