Phil Gyford

Articles

Phil Gyford has written four articles:

Annotations and comments

Phil Gyford has posted 773 annotations/comments since 27 December 2002.

Comments

First Reading

About Monday 12 March 1659/60

Phil  •  Link

Re: Fuller. My mistake. I've changed the link to point to William Fuller, rather than Thomas.

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

Nix: I think 20-30 is too many annotations myself (although not always), but maybe that's just me! *Some* guidelines will be valuable, if only so anyone new can't complain too much when they get told off for posting a 1000 word rant about their pet topic! But it'll be a guide, not rules.

I think a 60-day purge (or whatever) would help a PhD student an awful lot if any obviously useless annotations are removed (I know, "useless" is subjective).

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

Yup, Movable Type isn't ideal for this site, given the number of annotations - it's never been intended for use with lengthy discussions. If I could have forseen so many annotations I'd have used another solution, but hindsight is perfect! While MT isn't perfect for us, it's OK.

BTW Hhomeboy, http://www.phpbb.com/ is a free solution that would require a minimum in the way of branding and cost (or being beholden to a commercial company).

The trouble with most potential solutions is the large amount of work involved. While I'd love to do the work, it would take a lot of time and so there would need to be a larger demand for a change than there appears to be at the moment.

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

Hhomeboy: As Pauline said - these are guidelines, not rules, so there will always be welcome exceptions (such as David's People postings). The guidelines are more for people who aren't familiar with the customs of the site's old hands.

Unfortunately it is a laborious process for me to copy/move annotations to Background pages so I won't be doing it often; it's down to annotators to put things in appropriate places I'm afraid.

I think you're saying there are plenty of people who want a separate discussion forum. I have a completely open mind and am happy to be convinced of the need for one. But so far more people have said they'd prefer to keep things as they are.

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

Esme: I completely understand, but I'm afraid Movable Type requires an email address. However, some people do disguise their address. For example I could enter something like phil@NOSPAMgyford.com. Humans should be able to work out the real address OK.

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

I think that's the case LH, yes (correct me if I'm wrong Pauline!). Not an essential guideline, but something that would encourage future annotators to consider their postings and not dash them off on the spur of the moment might be handy?

About Creating a guide to annotating

Phil  •  Link

Oh, and I'll add something saying that annotations may be edited or deleted by the moderator (me) where appropriate. Talking of which, I'll probably go back to January's annotations soonish and prune them for the sake of brevity and clarity.

About What do you want from a discussion forum?

Phil  •  Link

Hhomeboy:

1. I'm past being reasonable with you. I've tried it to no effect.

2. Well, you're wrong. I *do* have the last word, although I've never come close to wanting to exercise my power against anyone but yourself.

3. Many Yahoo Groups style groups do fade, but not all. It wouldn't be a perfect solution, but I'm not convinced there is such a thing.

4. You're taking a simplistic view of things. This site is popular because it was mentioned on a couple of popular weblogs and in turn got picked up by the BBC. If that hadn't happened few of you would have heard of the site, unfortunately. I got lucky with publicity.

5. You're more than welcome to set up a companion site at any time. Honestly.

6. I certainly am sensitive about some things and insensitive about others. It beats being insensitive about everything.

7. Some people do want a forum - I'm still undecided. Many of those who want a forum (but certainly not all) want a forum so they can enjoy the diary without your lengthy opinions getting in the way.

8. Private Eye really have more important things to worry about.

9. Entirely wrong. I'd *love* to play and work with some forum software as it's all new to me. But it would be wrong of me to implement it just because I want to play.

10. I am content to leave things here. If you continue to behave in the annotations we can continue. If you don't behave, or you post anything further here other than some suggestion of apology, you're banned. It's your last chance.

About What do you want from a discussion forum?

Phil  •  Link

David:

Good ideas about how to physically improve the annotations. I'm not sure about splitting them into two streams, but it's food for thought.

Putting names at the start of annotations is a good one that I'd been pondering but if someone else has thought the same it's worth further investigation on my part!

I'd like to limit the length of annotations but Movable Type doesn't have such a feature as yet. I may look into hacking something in if it continues to be a problem in the future.

About What do you want from a discussion forum?

Phil  •  Link

I hope most people will understand I've done my best to be patient thus far, but there are limits.

Hhomeboy, I realise you're trying to help and can be surprisingly reasonable, but any benefit is vastly outweighed by your arrogance and insensitivity. You have succeeded in making it a miserable few days for me. To do you the honour of responding to your points...

I was saying that I would prefer it if the need for a forum hadn't arisen. In fact, it has only become a prolonged issue (it had also been discussed briefly earlier in the year) when you began posting overly long and less-than-relevant annotations and resisted calls to cease. So in this situation a forum would improve the site's mission by returning the annotations to a previous state.

You seem forgetful... *you* said this was just Pepys' site. *I* reminded you that the readers had as much stake in this as I do. So far, despite your claims to have fans, I have heard nothing but people wishing you would shut up. I would genuinely love to hear from people who feel I've been unfair to you.

I have been looking at forum software and there's some great, and free, stuff out there. But I'm not quite convinced there's enough need for it here. It's a close call, particularly when looking at the needs of most users (those that never or rarely post annotations) who may just find it complicates matters. A simple Yahoo! Group style mailing list/forum may suffice for off-topic chat for the dedicated.

As for me relying on free and willing labour to fill out this "skeletal site"... Originally I was hoping I'd have maybe 2-3 annotations per day. I would have been extremely pleased with that. Instead I've been blessed with large numbers of eager annotators who have surpassed all my expectations in terms of knowledge, curiosity, generosity and friendliness. Don't you dare suggest I wish to "dampen" this or that I take it for granted.

Despite all this I still don't want to physically ban you yet, although believe me, I've come close. I suspect you will, as ever, continue to be patronising and oblivious when I warn you you'd better keep a damned low profile on this site from now on.

About What do you want from a discussion forum?

Phil  •  Link

I'm going to resist replying to most of Hhomeboy's comments, some of which I agree with, some of which not. But I must say that peppering one's argument with terms like "tight-assed," adpoting a overly superior tone and dismissing those who hold an alternate (and perfectly valid) point of view does little to support his case.

The one point I do wish to correct is his mention of the "raisons d'etre of this site" as support. The purpose of this site was and is for reading the diary and making its obscurities clearer for readers without the knowledge or time to understand it fully themselves. Whether or not "exploration and experimentation" covers this or not, any discussion forum will be an effort to maintain the site's tight focus for those who have no interest in lengthy discussions. I do not, to be honest, see a forum furthering the tight focus of this site further.

I'd prefer it if the need for a forum hadn't arisen, but some solution seems necessary to keep the goal of this site achievable, and not have it diluted.

About Temple Gate

Phil  •  Link

There were (are?) two Temple Gates on the south side of Fleet Street, one leading to Middle Temple, the other to Inner Temple.

About Navy Office (Seething Lane)

Phil  •  Link

This was the location of the Navy Board http://www.pepysdiary.com/encyclo… from 1654 to 1673. Latham's Companion describes its location as "the northern section of a large house on the e. side of Seething Lane, a few doors south of its junction with Crutched Friars, with a courtyard opening onto the Lane and garden stretching from the Lane to the n.-w. corner of Tower Hill."

From the map one can see there is now a Pepys Street at this location!

About Guidelines for annotations

Phil  •  Link

Thanks for all your comments. I think we can draw this topic to a close now, move on and concentrate on enjoying and investigating the diary. Thanks to all those who are making it a more enlightening experience for everyone.

About Claire Tomalin answers questions

Phil  •  Link

Yes, I think you're right Todd, although I don't think the changes a while back would have affected this. From the tests and the feedback I've had it seems that definining font sizes in ems (which I do here) makes them too small when IE's font size is "Smaller". But if done with percentages it looks fine - compare the Default and 'Font Test 2' with both Medium and Smaller settings in your browser. Strange, but it looks like percentages will be an improvement.