See Bam from here (and the linked meta posts):

@msh210 That's a good point. If you haven't already, could you make a note about that one in the list? We'll need to check these, but fortunately we have an abundance of options so if any one funny-on-the-site-but-not-on-paper question doesn't make it, no harm done.

@msh210 Indeed. Related point about jargon

@msh210 In that case, I think it wouldn't be hard to make the question intelligible with a footnote that doesn't kill the joke. (e.g. simply "1. http://yeshivatmaharat.org/faculty-and-staff/") A more artful footnote could be funnier than a less artful one, but isn't necessary to keep it funny. Fred's answer wouldn't be killed by a footnote pointing to the RbN article in WP. DoubleAA's answer is probably not ideal for paper without a particularly artful footnote.

@MonicaCellio I've added rows for writing an intro and for compiling back matter to meta.judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/1906/… . The acknowledgements page will probably end up getting done as part of the typesetting step, but if we're to have a glossary and/or bibliography, that's going to take some actual content work in Meta.

@IsaacMoses good catch. And writing the intro is a significant chunk, so it's good to call that out.

@IsaacMoses I added a new call-for-submissions question for the additional parts. Someone should probably "stake out" the intro since that's a bigger effort and no sense having competing drafts, but the others can be collaboratively edited (glossary and biblio are lists, after all).

An intro can be collaboratively edited too, but I meant that it can't as easily be collaboratively created.

@MonicaCellio In parallel, I added a call for an intro. Since it's a different kind of effort anyway, can we rescope your call to be just back matter?

@IsaacMoses just saw your post and have an edit on mine open already, yes. What should we do about the chapter intro(s)? Leave with mine?

@MonicaCellio I think whether we need any really depends on how the document intro is written. Probably, at most, we need a short disclaimer at the top of Chapter 3, which won't be a big deal to write. How about we just leave that off as a product for now?

@IsaacMoses sounds good, and done. I've added CW answers for the glossary and bibliography and removed chapter intros.

@MonicaCellio Thanks

@IsaacMoses thank you for your good work on the intro post. (Linking the haggadah intro is a good touch that I hadn't thought of.)

@jake, hi! Good to see you again.