2018-05-04 Various things are connected, and finally the Agile Writing Process is being born:
- 1: One person brainstorms on Facebook, etc. (others may add comments)
- 2: 1 to 2 hours of pair Mach New Book (itemization stipulates the final product as âMach New Bookâ with two people dividing the time joint editing)
- 3: You start the sale by stating that it is a bullet point and the number of words (MVPâs release).
- 4: Create a private Facebook group that only buyers can join (gated community)
- 5: Place the new Mach book in Scrapbox and allow collaborative editing within the community.
The first step needs to be as small as possible so that it can be done anywhere and in any spare time, which in my case is currently the Writing Method on Facebook. You can do it publicly, or you can make it visible only to your friends, or only to yourself. If you are concerned about selling it later, you can do it privately.
Since what is produced at this stage is âfrom my point of view,â it is possible that the words may not make sense or be self-indulgent. In writing a paper book, the process of improvement revolves around editorial comments on the manuscript.
In this case, instead of âthe editor suggests changing the manuscript A to B, which is accepted and the manuscript is improved,â it is âby observing that the editor suggested changing A to B, the author realizes that the original expression A has the elements (A1+A2+A3) and the reader may misunderstand A2 as B2, so he/she changes the expression to B2, The author realized that the original expression âAâ had the elements (A1+A2+A3) and replaced it with another expression,â etc. This is what happens. This means that an error occurred when the source code of the program was put into the compiler. This means that when the source code of the program was put into the compiler, an error occurred.
And this process is currently very long.
Well, perhaps the advantage of taking time is that the feedback comes back months after writing, which allows us to improve the original text by bashing it up from a third-party perspective.
Usually, the bullet points are called âdraft headingsâ or âdraft structure,â and then there is the work of filling in the content, but the recent concept of the âMach New Bookâ is that âit is okay to release the book at the bullet point stage in the first place,â âit is okay if the readers are properly informed that it is bullet points before they buy it,â and âit is okay if they buy it on the basis of agreement. If the reader understands and agrees to buy the book, there is no problem.â âUnder the business model based on physical paper distribution, this quality and quantity cannot be distributed, but now there are other distribution channelsâ disruptive innovation (innovation by releasing something of lower quality than what currently holds the market share) innovation by releasing a product that is of lower quality than the one that currently has market share)
From an MVP perspective, it is futile to spend time writing a book that no readers will want to read, so you should spend less money to verify the existence of customers.
There is some concern that the â1-2 hour pair Mach new bookâ is time-synchronous and time-bound, and that it is not unnecessarily increasing costs slightly, while the task of âorganizing scattered manuscriptsâ is clearly âunclear in the definition of done,â so the labor cost expenditure on the part of the editor role is not at The risk is that the labor cost expenditure on the part of the editorial role is a âblue ceiling. In normal publishing, this is solved by concluding a revenue sharing contract in which âthe author pays 10% and the publisher (editor) pays 90%. (Many publishers do not sign a revenue sharing contract by convention, so if there is a dispute, it will be a big one.)
A contract that says, âWe will receive ~„10,000 for two hours of paired Mach new book activitiesâ would limit the cost.
Usually pair programming is, oops, like this. Until now, there was no explanation in this text that âpair ~â is spoken in analogy with âpair programmingâ at all. The âthird personâs eyeâ has the effect of making me aware of this kind of thing (I noticed it myself this time).
Usually pair programming uses a rule where one person uses the keyboard and the other person is not allowed to touch the keyboard. Whether the same rule should be done in this case is debatable. In the case of pair programming, it is important to gain experience in understanding and acting on your own for the entire range by doing 100% of the work yourself. For example, advanced users unconsciously press the up arrow on the console, and if they donât know how to do that, they try to type it themselves.
Once you try to type it in yourself, it encourages the verbalization of the unverbalized âOh, donât type that part, just press the up arrow and press Enter.
So this is an important rule for âeducationâ, while what about for writing (e.g. as a profession)?
The authorâs thoughts must be organized and the author must be able to explain in his or her own words what he or she has written. This is the same as in programming. This state of affairs cannot be maintained if the text on the ground is edited directly and collaboratively by multiple people. On the other hand, communicating information only orally is also inefficient. It may be better to have a person who writes the main text and a person who can only insert footnotes.
If you are using Google Docs, it would be a division of roles between those who use the comment function and those who edit the text.
- Yoshifumi Yamaguchi: Is it the same with the Suggestion function, for example?
- I have a feeling that more than half of the time when an editor points out something, the solution is not âdo as the editor saysâ but ârewrite the whole sentence (paragraph)â, so you can Suggestion it, but it will be deleted immediately⊠In Scrapbox, Iâd have to Ctrl-i and hang it in the tree.
Can we do something about the annoying problem of making appointments for the new Pair Mach book?
- This is a problem that is a hassle to make appointments and should be solved separately, so this time it is out of scope.
4 and 5 are not essential, as they are one way to create added value. On the other hand, if you consider a bulleted release to be an MVP, then of course there is a very important value in âobserving the buyerâs response.
The current paper book doesnât have much of that idea. This is because they are not developed in an agile manner to begin with. They donât have the image of frequently revising the book after it is released in paper form.
It is unknown what will happen with the 5 âplace the manuscript in Scrapbox and allow co-editingâ. It is only unknown because few people have tried it. As long as the original manuscript is backed up properly, nothing is lost by allowing co-editing.
Q: Is there a proactive meaning to the use of Facebook group? A: No. You can use other tools. I choose Facebook Groups because âmost people already have an account,â âitâs easy to create a private community,â and âIâve actually created and used a number of them.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/20180504ăąăžăŁă€ă«ăȘć·çăăă»ăč using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. Iâm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.