Return to sender

[Zedability]

Oh hey, yeah, I tooooooooooooooooooooootally missed that. My bad. I read the question and then came back to it like two days later because no one else touched it, and I guess I forgot that detail by then.

In fairness, we answer a LOT of computer questions with "We can't replicate this problem with the information you gave us, so there's really no way to figure it out." And I think this falls into that category. I guess I'd also add a suggestion to try uninstalling and re-installing Firefox, but really, there's no way to figure out why a reader's web browser is being extra-weird.

[Digit]

For good computer end-user problem answers usually within two or three minutes, there's superuser.com, one of the many stackexchange Q&A sites. The biggest one is stackoverflow, which is mainly for programming questions.

[Zedability]

For good computer end-user problem answers usually within two or three minutes, there's superuser.com, one of the many stackexchange Q&A sites. The biggest one is stackoverflow, which is mainly for programming questions.

Yeah, I read through some stackoverflow stuff, but they were all like "change the character encoding settings!" and I think that's what made me forget the reader had already done that :/

[Zedability]

Okay seriously, my inner perfectionist just shriveled up and died.

[UffishThought]

Yeah- they're swamped, but not any more than usual, according to my inside source. In my opinion, the Board could hire more writers- then they wouldn't have so much pressure put on them to get so many questions done in a short amount of time. I may have my own motives here, but... Yeah, okay. It's just my own motives.

Yeah, but (and I'm not saying anything about you, Squirrel, but about applicants in general) most of applicants are excited by the fun of being in a secretive group, and having free reign to add their opinion to the dating questions and so on, but very few of them are really ready to spend hours each day doing research. Plus, many don't write that well, or have areas of expertise that the board already has a surplus of. Maybe I missed some good ones when I was hiring editor, but it's hard to see what kind of writer each applicant would be from his or her application, and the pickings always seemed a little slim.

Of course, my own application was 1) much less involved and 2) much less impressive than many of the current writers', but I'm also not convinced I was that great a writer. I hated to make a real phone call, too, and I quickly tired of the hard research questions and went for the opinion questions. I had a decent voice, and I tried to put real thought into my answers, but I rarely answered factual questions.

But here's a question, BoardBoard people: how would you design the application to find those that would make really good writers? Most applicants are willing to make a short, concerted burst of effort for the application, but that doesn't always have staying power.

[Tally M.]

But here's a question, BoardBoard people: how would you design the application to find those that would make really good writers? Most applicants are willing to make a short, concerted burst of effort for the application, but that doesn't always have staying power.

I'd make it a steady process. Not just a one week thing. My application came over Christmas break, so I had plenty of time to perfect it.

[Squirrel]

Can you give me a "no homework when you're filling out your application" card? That would be really nice. I've been out of commission for a week and a half, so I'm already very behind on homework....... oh well, that's life, I guess, and I'll have moments like that if I ever become a writer...... :-/

[Zedability]

See, I'd argue that applications should be sent out during notoriously busy weeks of the school year. When applications come out over holidays, you have all this spare time to sit around and make it nice. it doesn't give you an idea of the commitment, and it doesn't give the writers an idea of your ability to juggle school and writing.

[Tally M.]

I agree. Having it over Christmas Break didn't *really* give me a practice at being a writer...it just kept me busy when I was bored.

[Squirrel]

See, I'd argue that applications should be sent out during notoriously busy weeks of the school year. When applications come out over holidays, you have all this spare time to sit around and make it nice. it doesn't give you an idea of the commitment, and it doesn't give the writers an idea of your ability to juggle school and writing.

Done.

[thatonemom]

But here's a question, BoardBoard people: how would you design the application to find those that would make really good writers? Most applicants are willing to make a short, concerted burst of effort for the application, but that doesn't always have staying power.

I don't really know what the needs of the Board are right now, or what the application looks like. (I always wanted to apply as a student but was scared I wouldn't know enough. Also lazy enough not to bother. Two traits that would make for a bad writer, for sure) But I would have prospective writers tackle a wide variety of questions (from "CPM usually answers these" to "my unique dating situation") that would require a lot of different methods for getting answers. Even making phone calls. Maybe give them previous questions and ask how they would go about answering, or how they would improve on the answer that was given.
And I'd have them keep track of how long it took to answer, so they'd have a realistic idea of the time commitment.

If commitment is an issue, I'd ask people for examples of how they've budgeted their time, or specifically when in their schedule they have time to devote to researching answers.

[bobtheenchantedone]

But here's a question, BoardBoard people: how would you design the application to find those that would make really good writers? Most applicants are willing to make a short, concerted burst of effort for the application, but that doesn't always have staying power.

This would probably make the application process a little unwieldy, but a good way would be to have about a month-long application process and send them three or four questions at a time without warning, all of them due within 100 hours. Also if that can be done in the middle of the semester/various busy points the semester that would be good.

As for the rest of my opinion, be warned - I may be about to offend people here.

One problem you have is that the majority of your applicants a) are freshman or otherwise immature and b) think the Board is just the coolest thing and are really looking forward to the prestige (see a). I will admit that I'm glad now my applications were never chosen - any of the times I could have been hired, I wasn't really ready for it. However, the follow-up to that is that now that I'm mature, have a better writing voice, have more knowledge and opinions, and am much more interested in the writing and researching than the coolness factor, I have already been rejected enough times and am embarrassed enough about my past applications that I don't want to try again.

Also, I couldn't be hired now because I've been out of BYU for more than three years and due to my father losing his job there I'll be going to UVU instead when I do finally finish my degree. I know the Board is a BYU thing and all, but I think lots of people would agree that you're really limiting the field when you can only pull writers from that pool of current students. I think it's pretty obvious that Utah and especially BYU breed a follow-the-crowd, close-minded, R-rated-movies-are-dirty, and rather immature approach to life, and even if that isn't the case, having them all be people who are at BYU tends to mean they have a lot of other things in common, thus limiting the amount of differing opinions and expertise they have. On the other hand, Marduk and I would probably be great additions to the Board - we're both mature, decent writers, have learned to manage our time, think, do research frequently just for ourselves, are interesting people, aren't orthodox and could provide a different perspective yet are still good members and can be Honor Code compliant, etc. - but the mere fact that we aren't at BYU disqualifies us entirely. Even though, despite our other qualifications, we both have ties to BYU (both of our fathers worked there and still have contacts there, for example) and could easily drive over if for some reason all the writers who are at BYU can't handle the BYU-related question. Sure, allowing non-BYU students would destroy a little bit of the "but we're an exclusive club!" mentality, but that's part of why you're getting the immature applicants in the first place! And wouldn't it be better to have your exclusivity be defined as "fantastic writers who will do whatever they can to get the job done" rather than "students at BYU"? (Not to mention there have been and are currently writers who aren't BYU students, and there have been writers who no longer lived in the area, but those are arguments for another time.)

Obviously my bias is showing here, but when my usual motivation to read the Board is so I can provide another point of view on the bb and I stopped asking questions when I got an answer that proved the writer had at best skimmed my question, you can see why I'd like things to change.

[OptimusPrime]

Okay seriously, my inner perfectionist just shriveled up and died.

Don't worry about it, Zedability, I wasn't trying to single you out*, I was just continuing the topic of answers that didn't quite go far enough. These are the ones I would read before becoming a board writer that made me want to be a board writer. I remember several times as a writer having to add an actual answer to someone else's already "answered" question because the original answer obviously wasn't the full answer to the reader's question. Plus, I have a really hard time just saying, "I don't know". I'm still fighting the temptation to see if I can figure out the character encoding problem...

*In fact, I debated whether to mention it at all because your answers are generally very good. I'll allow this one mistake (especially since, in a fit of nostalgia, I read through most of my answers recently and came across no fewer than 4 typos, which are anathema to me), but no more!

[Zedability]

Okay seriously, my inner perfectionist just shriveled up and died.

Don't worry about it, Zedability, I wasn't trying to single you out*, I was just continuing the topic of answers that didn't quite go far enough. These are the ones I would read before becoming a board writer that made me want to be a board writer. I remember several times as a writer having to add an actual answer to someone else's already "answered" question because the original answer obviously wasn't the full answer to the reader's question. Plus, I have a really hard time just saying, "I don't know". I'm still fighting the temptation to see if I can figure out the character encoding problem...

*In fact, I debated whether to mention it at all because your answers are generally very good. I'll allow this one mistake (especially since, in a fit of nostalgia, I read through most of my answers recently and came across no fewer than 4 typos, which are anathema to me), but no more!

Haha, don't worry, I didn't feel attacked by you, just bothered by myself. And I'm glad you pointed it out at any rate.

[Zedability]

One problem you have is that the majority of your applicants a) are freshman or otherwise immature and b) think the Board is just the coolest thing and are really looking forward to the prestige (see a).

If you think we're bad, you should see some of the people we reject, haha.

Also, back in the BYUSA days, writers had to retire when they graduated, so the average age and corresponding maturity of the Board was quite a bit lower, judging by the archives.

I know the Board is a BYU thing and all, but I think lots of people would agree that you're really limiting the field when you can only pull writers from that pool of current students. I think it's pretty obvious that Utah and especially BYU breed a follow-the-crowd, close-minded, R-rated-movies-are-dirty, and rather immature approach to life, and even if that isn't the case, having them all be people who are at BYU tends to mean they have a lot of other things in common, thus limiting the amount of differing opinions and expertise they have. On the other hand, Marduk and I would probably be great additions to the Board - we're both mature, decent writers, have learned to manage our time, think, do research frequently just for ourselves, are interesting people, aren't orthodox and could provide a different perspective yet are still good members and can be Honor Code compliant, etc. - but the mere fact that we aren't at BYU disqualifies us entirely. Even though, despite our other qualifications, we both have ties to BYU (both of our fathers worked there and still have contacts there, for example) and could easily drive over if for some reason all the writers who are at BYU can't handle the BYU-related question. Sure, allowing non-BYU students would destroy a little bit of the "but we're an exclusive club!" mentality, but that's part of why you're getting the immature applicants in the first place! And wouldn't it be better to have your exclusivity be defined as "fantastic writers who will do whatever they can to get the job done" rather than "students at BYU"? (Not to mention there have been and are currently writers who aren't BYU students, and there have been writers who no longer lived in the area, but those are arguments for another time.)

First, obviously my bias is showing here too, but I don't see anything wrong with the BYU 100 Hour Board being kept a BYU thing. Right now, we're not officially sponsored by anyone, although we're still hosted on the server, so our only formal connections to BYU are the ones we choose to make. And on the Board, the writers have always felt like it's important to maintain our ties to BYU. It's one thing that distinguishes us from just a random Internet question-and-answer site. Plus, we do hope do be more officially sponsored again someday, and so it's important to have that clear BYU connection.

Next, I would say that following the crowd doesn't necessarily mean that you're immature. I know plenty of mature people who can think for themselves and understand different points of view, but who find their personalities work better when they follow the crowd than when they stick out from it. Furthermore, the Board already attracts are more open-minded, watching-R-rated-movies group than the general BYU population. At the same time, our main target audience is BYU students. I feel like we have had writers like Queen Alice and The Black Sheep, and also current writers, who are more liberal, but we also have balancing conservative voices. This helps us appeal to a broader demographic. And I think that being truly open-minded means having a good mixture. We have libertarians, democrats, republicans, and independents on the Board. We have some people who are all for gun rights, and some people who strongly oppose them. We have had writers who were straight-laced, only-a-temple-wedding-for-me people, and we've had writers who wrote while being inactive members of the Church. I don't see that mixture changing anytime soon. I feel like if the Board were entirely liberal, we would simply have a different type of narrow-mindedness.

Finally, you make the point that it would be better to have "fantastic writer" as the criteria rather than "student at BYU." Well, we try to require both. Really. I can think of tons of fantastic writers - Concealocanth, Gimgimno, Art Vandelay, Watts, Anne Certainly - who are definitely both. We focus a lot on quality when we review the applications.

You and Marduk would definitely make objectively fantastic writers, and it is unfortunate that you're disqualified. However, I also feel like you maybe want the Board to be something it doesn't want to be. There are definitely really good things about not going to BYU, or being way more liberal than the average Church member, or being older than the freshmen and sophomores. However, that makes you very different than most people who use the Board. If you don't find the Board enjoyable to read, it may just be because you're simply not its target audience. For instance, I don't like watching children's TV shows. That doesn't mean that there aren't genuinely good kid's shows on the air right now; it just means I'm not the one who's suppposed to watch them. And it would be unfair for me to accuse the writers of those TV shows of not being good writers just because they're not writing to me.

[OptimusPrime]

Zedability responded before I could, and made several of the points I wanted to. I agree almost word for word with what she said. But since I typed this up, I'll shorten it and go ahead and post it anyway.

Now that I'm mature...

I think it's pretty obvious that Utah and especially BYU breed a follow-the-crowd, close-minded, R-rated-movies-are-dirty, and rather immature approach to life, and even if that isn't the case, having them all be people who are at BYU tends to mean they have a lot of other things in common, thus limiting the amount of differing opinions and expertise they have.

Let me start by saying that I am not at all offended, rather amused that someone who is obviously still in the formative stages of finding her own meaning and direction in life, and at a rather late age for it, in my opinion, is calling others immature. (But you're very mature, so I'm sure this won't offend you.)

It is my experience that truly mature people do not derisively call others immature, like a parent doesn't call a child stupid for not yet knowing how to read. They know it comes with time. I have no doubt you will figure out what works best for you in life, but in the meantime be aware that someone's "close-minded" approach to life may be just as thought-out and deliberate to them as your open-minded approach is to you. Everyone has to strike a unique balance between individuality and dogma, spirit of the law versus letter of the law and, as we all do when we are college-aged, we think we have it all figured out, only to find out as we get older that we didn't know as much as we thought we did.

As for the Board, I think it would be a huge mistake to hire writers that are disassociated from BYU. The connection to the current, living BYU (including its current zeitgeist, be it conservative or liberal) is what makes the Board interesting and why I still read it as an old fart. In fact, I think writers tend to write for the Board for too long (it's a hard thing to quit, I know) and mature so much that they lose their youthful vigor and become almost melancholy. If I was in charge, I would say writers can write for the longer of two years or until graduation. There are thousands of extremely bright people from all over the country with "differing opinions and expertise" at BYU that could be great writers. The question, as Uffish said, is how does the Board find the ones who will make the necessary commitment?

[yayfulness]

I'd also just like to point out that the decision to only accept new writers who are current BYU students is not something we've undertaken lightly or thoughtlessly. It's been recognized that this decision disqualifies many otherwise excellent writers. However, the feeling I get is that we agree that our official ties to BYU are so important that that is an acceptable sacrifice.

[Marduk]

I'd also just like to point out that the decision to only accept new writers who are current BYU students is not something we've undertaken lightly or thoughtlessly. It's been recognized that this decision disqualifies many otherwise excellent writers. However, the feeling I get is that we agree that our official ties to BYU are so important that that is an acceptable sacrifice.

And yet, this decision has been overlooked in several cases. It seems silly to me to ardently defend a policy that has had several exemptions made before, and almost certainly will in the future.

[bobtheenchantedone]

You have lots of good points, Zed (and I suppose by extension Optimus) and you're right that I kinda want the Board to be something it's currently not. I'll also admit that there are a lot of level-headed people at BYU, and that the Board tends to attract them. However, I cannot agree with you that the Board is always or even usually balanced, and the idea that you might need more conservative writers to balance out the more liberal ones is almost laughable.

You do have and have had a lot of fantastic writers, I'm not casting doubt on that. But since Uffish specifically was wondering how to attract better writers, I thought it valid to point out what kind of pool you're drawing from. Be determined to get them from BYU by all means, but understand what that means you'll have to work with - a group of people that is largely young, just barely getting started on their own, and haven't so much as stopped to think about why a shoulder is immodest, much less start questioning why Republicans are the One True Party. (Not to bash anyone who does believe shoulders should be covered or vote Republican; I'm pointing out the immaturity or close-mindedness in blindly accepting these as fact.) Depending on where they went to school and what their home life was like, they are unprepared for hours of research, seeing different points of view, managing their time, thinking deeply, and writing well. (Some of the stories in Marduk's creative writing class just make me sad...)

The Board is what it is, and what it is is an exclusive club made up of students in a school sponsored and run by a religion that still has some growing up to do. That was how it started and how it is likely to continue, and if nothing else it is interesting in its continued depictions of the lives and thoughts of Mormons at BYU. However, with that said, I'll let you know that many of my decisions as admin here are largely influenced by the desire to separate this board from the Board, and it seems telling to me that we have a lot of active members who almost never read the Board any more.

P.S. So Optimus, who is allowed to call others immature? I mean aside from you, obviously. : ) Really though, while I know I still have more to figure out, I'm significantly further along than, say, my parents, so you can see why I'd be a little confident.

[yayfulness]

I'd also just like to point out that the decision to only accept new writers who are current BYU students is not something we've undertaken lightly or thoughtlessly. It's been recognized that this decision disqualifies many otherwise excellent writers. However, the feeling I get is that we agree that our official ties to BYU are so important that that is an acceptable sacrifice.

And yet, this decision has been overlooked in several cases. It seems silly to me to ardently defend a policy that has had several exemptions made before, and almost certainly will in the future.

I've only known about the Board for about a year and a half, and I've only been a writer for half a year. I can't speak for anything that has happened in the past, and I obviously can't speak for the future either. This is merely my observation on the current attitude of the Board.