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

I think I'm pretty sure I've just posted my last post on H2G2. I understand the moderators have a difficult job and all but I was expecting them to get a little more relaxed and acclimated to the flow of things as time went on... obviously not the case. Some thought-nazi deleted a post of mine on the grounds it was 'offensive'. I had posted to the FFFF forum thread and made a comment to the effect that I thought Christianity was stupid. The FFFF is, of course, a discussion forum for atheists. I suppose I should have praised the merits of a religion that invokes the presence of a giant invisible gaseous vertebrate as the supreme manifestation of the universe... my apologies for my insensitivity.

Anyways, just to let you know that you zealots are overdoing it a bit.

As I recall the only posting that *I* failed this morning about Christianity was one that made a remark along the lines of Christians are all stupid. Not Christianity. Christians. It wasn't swathed in a logical argument, it was just a basic 'Christians are all thick' comment. Mmm, very thoughtful. It's totally okay to discuss belief or non-belief of religion, but insulting people is *not* okay.

Can I also say that I personally object *strongly* to being called a thought-nazi? If you're going to be *generally* offensive round here then it's probably a very good thing if you *have* decided to leave.

Goodbye.

Peta, I don't think you're any kind of Nazi, but I disagree with your call in this situation, and I'll briefly say why.

I hang around the FFFF, and if I had actually seen a post containing the sentiment that "Christians are stupid," I would have jumped all over it. A spirited discussion would have ensued, and someone might have learned something. It would have been fun, thought-provoking, and a good example of the ennobling nature of dialogue.

As it is, we missed an opportunity to show the BBC how self-policing works, and instead provided more evidence that pro-active moderation is "necessary"...

BTW, Twophlag, if you're reading this, I'd like you to know that I know many intelligent Christians (sometimes, I'm one of them!) who consider God neither "gaseous" nor a "vertebrate"

GTB

Ah, Dear Peta, I AM sorry that I mistook your handiwork for that of one of the overzealous yahoos that are going around correcting everyone's attitudes for them.

I see the Guide's new House Rules as being in place to enforce certain standards that are necessary and required by our new hosts, the BBC. I think they are being used, though, to enforce the personal opionions of the moderators enforcing them. Tell me, have you combed the H2G2 Christian forums for comments alluding to the fact that atheists are doomed to be tormented eternally in hell for their belief systems? I would find any such statements much more offensive than simply being called "stupid".

I mean, I respect your disapproval of the statement in question, and I respect that you have a job to do, but I donno... It seems to me your efforts as moderator would be better directed towards going after the people who are actually being intentionally and repeatedly, vile, abusive, and spiteful.

Whether I'm right or you are here, the point is that I'm left with the impression that I'm not longer allowed to use H2G2 as a forum for my own thoughts and ideas if they contradict yours or if anyone might in any way take offense to them. I always say, those who are offended easily, should be. Please check the "Quotes and Rants" page linked from mine for a who's who of other people who would not be allowed to contribute to the Guide in these circumstances.

Not to keep invoking DNA, which I'm sure you're bored with people doing, but what drew me to H2G2 was the legacy of thoughtful, cynical, humanistic prose that saw the universe as a collosal, ghastly joke with our lives and our suffering as the punchline. To me, the chance to carry on this tradition was what set H2G2 apart from other sites offering similar hosting services. It seems to me that this vision is directly at odds with the H2G2 guidelines though... I'm left wondering if even DNA himself would find a home here if he was to show up out of the blue under a pseudonym.

Twophlag Gargleblap, There is no reason why anyone should get into such an argument over religious beliefs. My opinion is that debate will always suffice. I am not a Christian (just to indicate lack of bias). The matter of what is generally considered acceptable in the guide is put rather eloquently by Woodpigeon in post 38 of this conversation: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/brunel/F1804890?thread=434257&skip=20&show=20#p5464387 In this way, it is acceptable to a certain degree for a conversation on religion to state the beliefs of the followers of that religion, provided that it is clear that this is a *religious fact*, and does not try to 'convert' people to the idea. However, it is just your opinion, not a fact of any kind, that you consider Christians to be "stupid" - this has no real weight in any argument (argument in the sense of a chain of logical statements, each leading to the next), so posting it is more or less pointless. I would certainly not call you "stupid"... (we're all friends on hootoo remember ) >>>intentionally and repeatedly, vile, abusive, and spiteful.<<< I don't think it's really fair to say "repeatedly" - if every researcher were allowed one 'bad' post, then there could be 232337 'bad' posts out there. >>>the legacy of thoughtful, cynical, humanistic prose that saw the universe as a collosal, ghastly joke with our lives and our suffering as the punchline<<< Yes, but I think the idea of HHGttG (or whatever the official abbreviation is at the moment) was that you've just go to laugh at it all. The characters often didn't see the funny side, but the books do have a moral of a kind. I'm not sure that it's your job to decide who's allowed to post what - you may click on the yikes button if you believe a post's inappropriate. One last thing - everyone may post their ideas on h2g2, but not in way that could make h2g2 an inhospitable place. Thanks for your time, Alex

Before we go further here, I have to admit I'm sort of curious what prompted the resumption of this thread after so long? I mean, the moderation help desk isn't even open now... not that it was ever useful. Seems sort of pointless now.

I must ask pardon if some of this comes out a little awkward, Im using a busted computer with several defunct 'keez' (guess which ones).

To whit:

I am of the opinion that an attempt to stifle the ideas and words of other human beings, whether to preserve one's own comfort or to achieve some form of power or gain, is a perverse and destructive pursuit. I care not a whit who I offend or for what reasons I offend them. Those who can be offended, should be. That the BBC does not see the matter in the same light is unsurprising, and given that this is their website I am writing on, some censorship is expected. The case in point is that the H2G2 site used to be a haven for intellectual rebels with a sharp sense of humour and a knack for sharp phrasing, and under the influence of the 'moderators' it has become something rather less.

The evaluation of the weight of the argument that was originall censored is interesting, but since the text of the original post is not available, it is uninformed at best. More to the point, I don't feel a need to reconstruct the logic behind each assertion I make when posting just because someone might disagree with it; those who disagree should feel free to do so, in writing. It is a shame that the chance to read the original argument and comment on it in retrospect is not available to us on account of the thought-nazis having their little post-BBC move book burning bash. I am much less involved in this H2G2 project now than I once was, on account of that atmosphere of moderateness.

"I'm not sure that it's your job to decide who's allowed to post what - you may click on the yikes button if you believe a post's inappropriate."

I have no idea what this means, but thanks for the update.

"One last thing - everyone may post their ideas on h2g2, but not in way that could make h2g2 an inhospitable place."

That's a somewhat nebulous statement, and is prone to subjective interpretation. Again, interesting civics lesson, but I don't see the point of this, although it was sort of fun to pick at an old sore point for a few minutes.

I saw this thread by chance, and felt it may be helpful of me to contribute my .

However, it seems you are not here for a sensible debate. I assume you know where "Speaker's Corner" is...
(I refer to the one in London in real life)

*unsubscribes*