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

This rule is abhorrent and I cannot be party to any community that supports it. All over the world people are fighting for the right to be involved in their country's politics - and we are banned from doing so?
I am deeply dissapointed in the PTB for allowing this to happen, and more dissappointed that the BBC think for one second that this is acceptable.
I shall be going back to the "temporary" EZ boards and the like, and will be on the look out for soemthing like thew old H2G2...but for now - see you all later.

<>====uuu====<
!

We are part of the BBC. The election can be discussed within the appropriate part of the BBC. You're not banned from discussing the subject, you're being asked to do it in the right place. I've been here at the BBC for what two months now? How am I supposed to have gained the political expertise to moderate discussions to the standard required by the BBC? Maybe they should bring someone else in? How are they going to find someone with political expertise to moderate, who understands the dynamics of online communities? Please try and work out what you want here. This is/was an entertaining Community website. We can't, overnight, be all things to all men. Great in principal. Love them. But here, in the office, we have do agree to things that we can practically implement. And this one, we can't.

This site is/was a bold attempt to realise Douglas Adams' dream of having a handy guide to life, the universe and everything.

I realise most people (my SO included) think this is a lot of fuss about nothing - but if I phone up Radio 2 it is accepted that the opinions I express on air are my own...I'm not allowed to swear and that's is fair. If I write in to Ariel (the BBC's internal magazine) or the world service magazine the same applies - but not here.

I certainly don't think that you or the others working for you are at fault over this - I believe that someone has misread the rules. At the same time I do want you to understand my position on this...I feel upset that this rule has come into being and I feel that Douglas Adams has been let down by this.

Nobody is asking you to moderate the political content of this site. We all accept that we are responsable for our own postings and actions - but having a political opinion is important. I do have such an opinion and have, in the past, enjoyed exploring my politics with other people on this site. Whilst the discussions have been intense (in particluar the debate on fox hunting) they haven't been libeluous nor even for the most part objectionable.

Do you honestly see nothing wrong with this rule?

I've posted a big explanation of the policy in this forum, Duncan. Probably worth reading it...

I've read it, Mark. And everyone else's postings to this forum.
With Nexus I find it very ironic that we're allowed to trash the US elections, but I've spent too much of my life in countries where free expression was/is denied the majority to adopt his/her solution and sit back and wait.
I too am quitting - for Duncan's reasons (and I don't have the option of other chatsites)
This is in no way a personal criticism of you, Peta or Abi. I have greatly enjoyed being part of your circle.But I've been a political animal since I was at uni with Jack Straw and had really looked forward to debates on the issues, especially the Euro things, with intelligent friends from all over the world.

Hi Wandrin' Star

I've had an email conversation with Duncan about this, so I do understand where you're coming from. I'd like to see political debate on h2g2, but because we still have the orginal *tiny* team from pre-BBC days on staff, we just don't have the manpower to moderate these forums. This is an entirely practical solution; move political comment to the BBC servers, where they have the expert staff to deal with the issues that arise. We have no wish to censor political debate on h2g2, but we have neither the staff, nor the experience to moderate political debate here. And yes, it does need to be moderated, we spoke to the electorial advice people before making the decision, apparently we potentially could be targetted/spammed - we're not talking about a few Researcher conversations - we're talking about being hit seriously by external political pressure groups. This isn't the place for that, is it? Do we want that on h2g2?

Why can't we help moderate this ourselves?

Yes I can discuss it outside on BBC, but with people I don't really know and trust - who are signed up to different rules than me.
And its a great deal more likely that the "official" BBC site will be subject to bulk attack...and it is highly likley that you will be subject to bulk attack outside of election times. What about if there were bulk postings supporting one or other side in the Isreali/Palestinian crisis, or in support of native American claims in Canada, or if the movement for a free Albania where to set up stall here?

I really think that you are better than this and that H2G2 is better than this....do you think DNA would support this stance? Perhaps the BBC news tag line should be changed too - "Nation shall speak peace unto nation, so long as they don't discuss the election".

What can we discuss - please vet this list list:
Foot and mouth disease?
Education?
The troubles in Northen Ireland?
The price of petrol?
Ramblers rights?
Devolution?
The Euro?
Should martin Bell stand for reelection?
What is the future of the monarchy?
Should the UK have the worlds 3 biggest arms industry?
How should the London Underground be funded?
Should canabis be decriminalised?
Should the cities green belts be protected?
Can Peter Mandelson claim the dole?
Is there still a North/South divide?
How do we fund pensions?
Can human genes be patented?
Should the over 70s be allowed to drive?
Should we still be bombing Iraq?
Should we start bombing America?
etc....

*How* are you going to help moderate this Duncan? I *know* that you, and the Community have the goodwill to do this. I just don't think that it's physically possible for you to help.

If things get out of hand on h2g2 during an election, then it'll make it so much harder for us to achieve other h2g2 goals. I have no idea what would happen on an h2g2 conversation within the BBC during an election, and neither does anyone else. Optimistically hoping that it'd go okay just isn't enough.

Will it just be this during these elections we can't have any discussion, or every time there's a local election, a by-election,...?

I can understand if your team is anxious not to get into impartiality problems. But this blanket ban just doesn't seem right - especially for a community like h2g2. When researchers - friends - like Duncan feel like walking, we should pause for thought, even if a lot of thought has already gone into your decisions.

Peta, Mark - now that you've explained the situation you find yourselves in, perhaps you could consult your many friends on h2g2, to see if some other solution can be found.

Please read Mark's journal and mine. We always consider the views of valued community members like Duncan. Be sometimes decisions have to be made by the internal team, we've heard your views, we've taken them on board, but the decision has been made for very sound reasons, and we've explained them very publically. We have to move on from this now. Thanks for your input Kaeori.

The decision was taken without any consultation wiath any of the users. The decision was released through the back door - or is posting "unfinished" dictums the way things are done now?
I have explained why I don't think the "Great Debate" is a workable alternative (synopsis: it's easy to impersonate someone else :. you can't be sure that if something looks like it was said by X that it was actually said by X) but this has not been answered.
I have explained why banning debate angers me, but I feel that this has been brushed off.
I'm sorry that your defensive reflexes have been triggered but this issue is important...more important than the moderators or shriek buttons IMHO. I promise you, this is an issue thing for me, not a people thing...it's not personal. (Well, not intentionally - I apologise in advance if it comes out all wrong).
I realise that it is your ball and you can take it away and that's probably what will happen - I just don't think that this is a good thing.
I wanted to ask lots of quite interesting stuff bouncing off this election. I want to know whether people think that an agreement not to play the race card is undemocratic. I want to know what people think of the current system with the house of Lords vetoing and philibustering all sorts of things. I want to know whether people think that political donations should be capped, or declared, or both. I want to discuss these things because I am a sentient adult registered to vote in a democrarcy, not because I want to make trouble or something.
<>====uuu====<

And you will be able to! The idea is to have a section over on the BBC election pages specially ear-marked for h2g2. We're not saying that you can't have your voice. You can talk to the same people, using the same name over there. The only difference will be the skin. Why not wait and see if it works?

I think it can potentially work well for those who want to discuss politics, they'll be better served in the election area, there will be guest speakers, live chat and so on. We can't provide these things in h2g2, and we don't want to, it's not what the Guide is about.

..and I have your assurance that no-one can just log on to that site pretending to be me? Think about it - what if someone logs as me and writes something which offends other people from H2G2 and as a result of that they lose respect for me? How will that work - and why didn't you say that in the first place?

Also - in the "What are the headlines in your country" thread, would I be allowed to talk about the story in the Irish times about the possible threat to the peace process from the UK elections?

Hi Duncan

I didn't say because, in between posts one and four I went and had a meeting with the relevant people in the BBC about it. This is exactly the kind of thing that I'm trying to get on with in between conversations, and why I'm trying to concentrate on 'doing stuff' rather than 'talking about doing stuff'.

It'd be great if everyone could come to an agreement to leave the election and moderation issues with the in-house team, for a while. We'll sort out the best possible solutions we can for our Community, and come back and tell you all about them when we have full details. Then you can choose whether to participate or not and to what extent. Okay? As soon as I have precise details, I'll share, promise.

Peta, I'm confused over the registration for the other pages linked to. It say

"If however, you are already registered for other BBC services (like my BBC), please enter the username and password you use on that service, below. "

But by only doing this I get told I haven't filled all the boses in, It is very unclear, I thought the BBC had a single site login

CH

...and now after entering my e-mail address I get

"Don't forget have been automatically registered for the BBC personalisation services, like my BBC, which you can activate at your leisure by visiting that site, and entering your username and password"

So are there now two of me?

CH

and

CH

oh and By the way Duncan, whilst I share many of you views, just think, I can so easilly change my H2G2 name to yours, mirror your home page, who would know after a few posts?


CH

Because H2g2 have my email address this kind of copycat stuff can be checked.
I may sleep on this and see if I cool down...and probably I'll be back in the long run (what can I say, I'm a bit of an addict) but I do feel this has been very badly handled altogether and I do feel that as a contributor and licence fee payer I deserve to be given better service than this.

Sorry Duncan, I really cannot see how else the old H2G2 team could have handled it differently.

The Great Debate also requires a unique e-mail address - have you even checked? And it is only known via the team. I don't know that you are the same Duncan who started this post, there is no way at all to tell.

The H2G2 team have done amazing things to keep this site alive, remember it's life expectancy was days if not hours when it went off-line, they simply cannot moderate fora to the high standards the BBC demand for pre-elections.

The Great Debate site can.

And yes, being targetted by parties is a real threat. Remember even the Today programme has had to stop politianc being nominated for man or woman of the year because ot the legions of party stooges who write in.

I don't like it, and wish it was otherwise and will almost certainly take part on any H2G2 section in the Great Debate forum, but to claim it is a violation of free speach, lighten up, I can't talk about lots of stuff here without already being moderated, and that was true before the BBC took over. These restrictions have always been part of the UK media prior to elections, now we are part of one of the most respected news broadcasters in the world we have to be so much more careful what we say, for a short period, in certian areas.

Don't go, please

CHawke