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

Yes, you're quite right, I have taken it comepletly out of context. I can't have been reading properly. My apologies.

"The researchers who were at fault followed you into your message centre deliberately to pick a fight. "

Well, if they really want a fight they they chose the wrong person to pick on. What pisses me off about this kind of person is that they do sod all except sit around and bloody talk all day. they don't do ANY Scouting or ANY writing or ANY subbing or ANY aceing yet they expect to be taken seriously. Perhaps if they did do something that actually contributed to the community then they'd have less time to annoy others.

I feel guilty if I don't do what I came here to do. I know how much it annoys some researchers when all others do is chat. I've made a real effort since coming back to participate in the Guide.

I think that's a good point, FM.

I've heard people talk about divides between EG and non-EG people, between serious and fluffy people, etc. But to me, the most concrete divide I see here on h2g2 are those who see the site as a collaborative development project, and those who see the site as something here to give them a good time.

Those are two such drastically different perspectives, that I guess it's not too surprising that such strong clashes spring up.

I'm not entirely sure what the solution to that greater problem is, but I do think that this idea of an "ignore" function could be potentially useful to both of those groups.


Mikey

"Do you think a user should have the ability to remove a thread from their message centre?"

Yes, but only if the message doesn't get removed unless it breaks the rules. I'd suggest it gets moved back to the originators message centre instead, with the option for them to remove it gone.

Traveller in Time no ignoring not informed backlog
"I do disagree with a site wide button to set an account on a personal 'Ignore'. I think we should be mature enough to unsubscribe in cases but should have to deal with the odd itch as someone says something you can in the 'wrong' state of mind see as offensive.
And it would be likely to be abused by those offending others.

A function to set certain accounts (excluding italics and ACEs) in a personal or public premoderation on your Journals and Message Center could be an option. Mind you this should only be temporary as the emotions should time out after say a Danda (the time it takes to get the date on postings, 42 days).

This should reduce the load for italics but not have real impact on the site at all. One of the things I find great about this site is people evolve, not really change minds as well as can come to mutual agreements, a way of overcoming pointless ongoing discussions.

Actually I think people who think they need the sitewide 'Ignore' function should concider what they say with that: 'I will not change and I refuse to listen to you.', sorry 'Mina' nothing against you but on that point I would say 'Grow up' . "

It's nothing to do with needing to growing up. It's to do with being able to block those trolls who make h2g2 a tedious place to be. The amount of aggravation one person has been causing lately is immense - people have been creating journal entries about how annoying he is - so giving him the attention he's seeking and encouraging him to continue. He's wasting the time of people who come here to socialise, debate and write, and taking up valuable Eds time.

If people had the chance to ignore him, he would wind down, just like they always do.

It's not a case of blocking people who's opinion we don't agree with - although I don't see why that's not a valid reason either, considering all the creation/evolution rucks that go on around the site - but a case of being able to block people who are deliberately trying to wind us up, making it a nicer place to be. It's a valuable tool, and a way of the site *evolving* to suit its users, and will have a huge impact on the site, as it suddenly stops being a place full of bickering, and becomes a place where people disagree sometimes, and the odd row goes on, but generally is a much nicer place to be.

It's more about not giving attention to time-wasters and idiots, than blocking people you sometimes clash with.

Mikey speaks wise words, as always. Just to expand upon her point:

There was, in my village of birth, a cricket club. About 20 years ago it had no clubhouse, then some bright spark had the idea about building one, just a slightly bigger Portakabin. It was a big hit, and loads of people who hitherto had not the slightest interest in the club would turn up of an evening for a drink.
A few months later, some of the diehard cricketers decided to hold a secret meeting, to discuss how the club's social success could be thwarted as it wasn't really anything to do with the game of cricket. They just didn't like the idea of other people having a good time when they weren't playing cricket .
Now this dog-in-the-manger attitude is inexcusable. The non-playing-members were paying a lot of cash over the bar and supporting the club's activities. However, of one of them turned around and said to one of the cricketers : 'you can't chuck this guy off the team despite the fact he's been abusive and aggressive, he's always good for a laugh over a pint or two' then they would have been told to go forth and multiply, and quite rightly so.
I think it's instructive to see how this relates to hootoo: the people who are here primarily for the project should tolerate and encourage the social aspect to this site, but only insasmuch as it (a) doesn't have an adverse effect upon the project and (b) encourages people to get involved in hootoo for its own sake. At the same time, the 'non-playing' members ought to remember that this is a *project* site, and while they are welcomed purely for the vibrancy they bring, they have no overarching right to behave or act with total impunity.

I find the social aspect of this site indispensable. As I mentioned several hundred posts ago, I don't always do too well in RL in terms of friends and the members of this site have helped my confidence immensly. This makes me want to contribute to the project to 'give somethng back'.

I would imagine that the people who are on here purely to chat would eventually leave, they wouldn't really have an incentive to stay.

Traveller in Time searching for 'The Guide'
"Are conversations not also an important part of The Guide ?

Even the slightly offensive or totally silly conversations are mirroring the social structure of life and community as we have off line. I think there are no non-players from this point of view . "

Looking at user numbers - and at the ammount of people in Peer Review - I would say that there are far more social members than people contributing to the Guide. However its the number of contributers that justifies the BBC spending public money on the site in the first place.

Whilst it would seem a nice idea to seperate the two sides of the site, in reality a lot of us contribute to both sides, and people do move from one to the other - if I've ignored them as trivial, how will I know ?

I know why people want it, and I see why it appears attractive, but I think it should be limited to ones PS.

The idea of limiting convos to a person's PS seems a bit daft. We are after all currently participating in a convo, which has at times strayed from the main debate into silliness. (Which I thought was a good thing...but then I brought up Harry Potter, sorry)

ignorance is bliss

I think if there is one kind of conversation I would most like to ignore then it would be lectures from people who do nothing for the actual project itself, about how unfairly we've been treating other people who seem to do little more. This is insufferable at the best of times, but to have to endure it on one's PS really brings how just how priggish these people are. Hence, an Ignore button on one's PS plus the ability to shut down conversation threads would do no harm whatsoever.

i agree on principle .however i think Douglas would see it as censorship and therefore be opposed

I really wouldn't start speculating 'what would Douglas do' around here.

fair point but flamewars accomplsh nothing i stand admonished

Don't worry crazyhorse, I'm sure that was a fairly natural comment to make.

h2g2 has a reputation for being a lovely place to meet people, it would be a shame if this was spoiled by a few. I'm rapidly coming round to the idea of an ignore button, at least on the PS.

Nice to see the conversation has progressed in the week i've been gone.

I think that this debate is going to be running for some time...