h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

I didn't get to see what SEF.
Could someone please tell me? I would prefer to know.

I've never heard of SEF, or indeed any of the other people. I was just commenting on the general principle involved.

If someone does know the background, if they could put it in a nutshell here, it might be useful.

zdt

SEF and I have had a run in, in the past.

Apparently she posted a nasty post aimed at me - to the point of a person defending me in the thread and someone coming to my PS to post and be supportive.

The post is pending moderation. I never got the chance to see it.
That is all.

What a pain! Thanks, Mort, helps to know a bit more about things; the last thing i want to do is put my big in it!

zdt

I can't remember it very well, but it replied to your post when you asked whether people could guess you had suffered from depression. She said yes, because of your attitude, and complained about how the italics defend you. Same old thing, saying that italics and their friends all live to different rules to the rest of us.

SEF's post was pretty rude and mean towards Mort - I found it quite shocking. I'm surprised it was yikesed though because there are a few researchers who seem to post like that quite alot and the community tolerates it. Maybe I'm out of the loop in terms of what the mods are doing these days.


I'm starting to get pissed off about that thread. I've just posted again, but it's hard to tell what is really going on there. It'd be good to hear other's opinions. I think people from here have posted really well on that thread, and I'm not sure how well those posts have been heard.

Am I reading it right that some are still wanting guidelines on how to deal with people with a mental illness? And is Peta italics supporting this? I am quite tired, so I might be misreading what is going on.

Thanks Kea and Kazz, pretty much what I expected her to have said, however didn't want to comment until I had read it.

I haven't read the backlog from today, but what I read yesterday was Peta saying you can't judge a persons state from online, so if they suffer a mental illness that causes them to behave badly on site they get treated the same as everybody else. Brealing the house rules is still breaking the rules even if it is caused by a mental illness. She also said it would be a good excuse for everyone to behave badly and blame it on being ill.

Peta has made a correct decision IMO.

I guess the time to ask for it to be taken into consideration would be during the transgression procedure. A mental illness could cause a problem for a couple of posts but when a person is 'well' then they could explain and apologise. It actually takes alot of modding complaints, pre mod, temporary bans before a permanent ban is considered. If someone has got that far down the line then there would have been alot of opportunities to explain the behaviour.

Being ill doesn't make us crazy - but I also won't use it as an excuse. Think that is how we all feel.

SEF will argue a cause against the italics and 'underlines' even if she doesn't necessarily agree with the origin of the cause. She just turns into another one of her blah blah blah blah threads.

SEF is great for that, isn't she? I know the Slanted Ones (new name for the Italics, you like? ) have been a bit selective at times, but that's got nothing to do with the discussion.

Personally I think it's going okay - two issues and their incongruity have been established, and Peta has given her support and the promise of some development. The rest I think is down to hearts and minds, and you cant legislate for that.

I want to say aswell that I'm exceptionally proud of PC for her contribution.

I hope I'm not out of line for chiming in.

I suspect (and hope) that the suggestion was not entirely serious. I'd like to think that the defining characteristic would be an inability to keep civil while on the site (perhaps incessant, entirely nonsensical babbling would also be sufficient).

If that is the case, I would be for guidelines that determine 'extremely unjustified or intolerable' on-line activities.

I cannot imagine trying to stay involved in this, or any other, site if I could not find a preponderance of sanity and good will.

If suggested guideline was seriously meant to be determined, that someone was actually to be labelled 'mentally ill', I shouldn't even want to think about the miasma of descriptions and conditions that would have to be concocted to make such a determination from just text on a computer screen.

Well yes! if "The Slanted Ones" (nice one Krispy!) could actually determine the mental health status of people from their postings, wow, the NHS is saved, no more need for shrinks!



Yes, PC's posting was brill!

zdt

I second Terris posting
and all other good sense posted above.