<font face="Verdana"><table><TR><TD><FONT SIZE="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">
Wight
Posts: 182</TD><TD></TD></TR></TABLE>
**Edit note6/9/01 ---
Maybe we can convene on this thread [or start a new one] and come up w/ a current plan that is agreed upon by the current members as opposed to the rules largely agreed on by Saul,Mith and myself.
I am placing it here as this thread contains much info re: what has gone before and would in part be a good base to build on I think.
What say ye?
end edit**
**Edit note ---I have retitled the thread "DoV/Finwe and Miriel and the barrows rules of order"
w/out changing any content. 1/23/01 {end edit}**
this is a revised version from the literary devices thread updated and moved from that thread for your
consideration and convienence.
the missing #'s are due to some item's not being relevant -fret not.
************************************************
3} I propose we pick a text to use as our "base text " [the criteria being which text has the most of what we think
we will keep] and # the chapters sequentially for easy reference .
4}
I don't yet know wether we want to use the base text idea see below
I am also anticipating that we will run into CRRT's editorializing quite
quickly and this I hope will provide us w/ a model of how to adapt the
style of older texts,esp. IV and V .
5}
we will also hit the question , I am guessing of wether or not to keep
and use links or more than cosmetic changes that CRRT made . I will
tentatively put forth [ & I expect to hear some feedback on this! ] the
idea that we seriously consider using any links he gives us that do not
create new story, but are stylistic. What do you think on that? Wether
or not to use CRRT's bigger changes deserves a thread of it's own and
happily I don't think we need to cross that bridge yet ,but we will see
what the tale will bring!
I am eagerly looking forward to our first group discussion [after we have all read the relevant texts] .
What say ye ? [to the sectional theory]
I now return you to your regularly scheduled programing...
================
6-b***** We could use a system of bracketing that would tell
us which phrase or sentence or word came from what source , e.g.
<Finwe said no>* would indicate-77
{ Finwe said no} would indicate- IV
[Finwe said no] would indicate- V etc.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (Finwe said no) would idicate - I
Finwe said no would indicate base text- X
these would run throughout our edited copies of the chapters/sections and would tell us [or anyone ] at aglance just where a given line came from.
7- I think this is the main thing missing from your versions Saulotus, a quick * * * * *
and easy way of seeing what and from whence are your changes. I propose putting the corresponding paragraph #'s of the source of each word, phrase , sentence par graph , etc. in the margin this way we would be spared choopping the text up w/ clumsy words and
abbrev. or detailed notes at the end {and instead we can have clumsy
brackets throughout the text <img src=smile.gif ALT="
"> ] . I am open to other suggestions here,
this just popped into my head and seemed simple and convienent
[compared to the alternatives I could imagine that is].
What say ye?
8
As to debating changes and having a system whereby we hash out our
disaggrements, I suggest that we:
A>>> read the necesarry books in all versions making notes for group discussion
and queries esp making note of where we think the natural divisions fall and which
book should be used as a base text for each section.
B>>> work together on a general outline while establishing our repective sections
and talking over the big bumps we know will be in the road and trying to ensure that
our independent sections will have cohesion and not really be independent at all.
C>>>then submit our drafts of the sections to the group , automatically
soliciting feedback- which we then [ if there is any] hope is unanimously agreed on , if not the ...
D>>> we make suggestons and debate a bit and if this does not resolve it
vote,majority rules -if we have a deadlock due to having an even # of editors we can either:
1>>> give 2 votes to the editor of the particular paragraph [or any size section], or
2>>> choose an 'independent' arbitrator,
*************************************I think it is very important to have
some system of this type in place so that our method of resolution is
communicative and clear and not prolonged or subject to individual whims.*******************
**********
In closing:
I will reiterate to hopefully avoid any ill-will or confusion , these are
suggestions, open to debate -I hope they are only seen as one
members attempt to offer what he can .
</p>
Edited by: <A HREF=http://www.barrowdowns.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_profile&u=00000076>lindil</A> at: 6/9/01 8:23:40 am