Weekly Poetry Template

Lucy_k_p · Post by **Lucy_k_p** » April 14th, 2009, 8:50 am

I'm asking here because I've got no idea how to edit a wiki and I don't want to do anything that might mean the templates go wrong.

I've noticed that the Weekly Poetry template says only 'a few' seconds in the main body of instructions and doesn't specifically ask for 5 seconds anywhere. I think the template needs changing, both so that it is correct and because a too short silence is a common error in the Weekly Poetry but doesn't seem to be elsewhere.

I've edited the post for the current Weekly Poetry to say 5, but I'd prefer to simply copy and paste the template in future, rather than trying to remember to change it manually each time.

smijen · Post by **smijen** » April 14th, 2009, 11:12 am

I think Kristin said "a few seconds" on purpose. For such short recordings, 5 seconds is not strictly necessary... even 3 seconds is OK.

Lucy_k_p · Post by **Lucy_k_p** » April 14th, 2009, 12:47 pm

Hmm, OK. However I've been told I should have done 5 seconds of silence before now. I've also been correcting and reuploading recordings to change that when there's nothing else the matter with them.

I still think saying 5 seconds is a good idea - having every recording have the same rules means people are less likely to forget them. And since Weekly Poetry is often the first thing newbies try, it'd be a good idea if it was consistent with the rest of the recordings.

Plus I just like things to be symmetrical and even. *g*

(Also, hi, welcome back!)

Post by **aradlaw** » April 14th, 2009, 3:33 pm

Lucy_k_p wrote:Hmm, OK. However I've been told I should have done 5 seconds of silence before now......
....
Plus I just like things to be symmetrical and even. *g*

(Also, hi, welcome back!)

That could have been me what told her that, not sure though

And I agree with Lucy about her consistency comment.

Post by **annise** » April 14th, 2009, 4:21 pm

Its nice to have 5 secs between the poems don't you think - it gives time to inwardly digest one reading before embarking on the next - anyhow that's my thoughts

Anne

smijen · Post by **smijen** » April 14th, 2009, 6:43 pm

If everyone else agrees, it's fine with me. I was just giving the background. I will also pass the buck on editing the wiki, though...

ETA: Thanks, Lucy... I'm sort of back, but not reliably so... still just checking in here and there.

RuthieG · Post by **RuthieG** » April 15th, 2009, 2:18 am

I've edited the wiki.

Ruth

Lucy_k_p · Post by **Lucy_k_p** » April 15th, 2009, 1:04 pm

Thanks Ruth.

Post by **aradlaw** » April 15th, 2009, 1:07 pm

smijen wrote: ETA: Thanks, Lucy... I'm sort of back, but not reliably so... still just checking in here and there.

We're very glad to see you back Sarah, even if it's just from time to time