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
    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 1 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 2 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 3 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 4 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 5 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 6 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 7 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 8 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 9 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 10 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 11 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 12 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 13 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 14 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 15 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.