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

Yes - but a queued message system is not a discussion.
Imagine if you had to wait until tomorrow to see the response to this, and then I had to wait until the day after to read your response. You'd soon tire of it, I imagine. The only people who would persist in such a situation are the fanatically obsessed people we seem to be so worried about in the first place.

I totally agree. Just wanted to clarify so no one got the impression that the Great Debate was impossible to submit messages to while "closed."

It's a feeble message board. I don't think they really want "discussion" or interaction there. They want people to write 50 or 100 words (see samples on any of the bbc online boards), then flit away to another site. It's clearly not the kind of system designed for literate people writing at maximum verbosity like h2g2 researchers. (Is that a real word, "verbosity," or something that Infocom invented?)

Anyhow, BBC doesn't care. As long as they can corral people into a tiny outhouse for a townhall meeting, then they feel we've been given adequately free speech.

It's like I tried to say elsewhere. These "free speech zones" that we've seen in the U.S. at major protest sites, in cities with national conventions of political parties, and on university campuses, they're designed to minimize comments, shove it out of the way where the tv cameras won't see it. No one seems to notice that the idea of having "free speech zones" means that everywhere outside that area becomes a CENSORSHIP ZONE.

Ah (or should that be Aaaarrgh!) Takes me back to the days of Snail Mail, when we had to wait several days for things like this. Perhaps the BBC would prefer it if we all sent them our entries as letters which the mods could then type (or not) into H2G2?

Oh well, the great debate may actually be closed as the General Election has not been announced yet(or has it?), or that its been switched to Pre-Moderation (what a Horrible thought - it could happen to us!).

Perhaps the Beeb should make "h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated. Please note that the BBC is not responsible for the content of any external sites listed." more prominent? I mean, we obviously can't be trusted to read the bottom of the page, as well as the top!'s advocaat (mmm sounds nice??)

h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated.

Yes, I was thinking the same thing. Great minds think alike.

Perhaps we could just replay the disclaimer at the top and bottom of every post we make and even

h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated.

even in the middle of our posts. How many times would we need to display the disclaimer before they will trust readers to believe it?

h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated. h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated. h2g2 contains content that is generated by visitors to the site, and the contents of this page may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC, unless specifically stated.


I hereby swear before God that my views do not represent those of BBC or anyone but myself, and I'll deny these views myself if you ask ten minutes from now. I will even try to believe in God so that this statement will carry more weight. Better yet, I swear before Our Savior Jimi Hendrix, because at least I know with some certainty that he existed, and if he didn't, he ought to have. Please believe that I am not, nor ever will, represent BBC with anything approaching the authority of Jeremy Paxman (whoever that is).

If you follow the link to Mark's Editors repsonse you will see that he has unsubscribed from this and every other of the "H2G2 and the general election" because he is tired of hearing from us.

Absolutely right - I can't think of any reason why he should deign to read of our concerns much less answer them. The man has spoken people, you do not have the right of appeal so just shut up.

Honestly, you liberal minded free speechers just get me down. Who ever heard of peaceful protest changing anything anyway?
Why aren't you instead singing hymns to the great gift of "the hitch hikers guide to some things we have selected for you" (aka Readers Digest on the net)? The guide does not exist to cater for you so push off!

Yes, why can't we just get over it?

Virtual elections are more fun anyway (wink wink bump nudge this is all you will be allowed so play nice).

ALL YOUR SPEECH ARE BELONG TO US.

My speech they can't censor - its my typing that's the problem!

Shall we have a virtual election where the parties are called the anti-servatives; la rebills; and blown earu. which exactly doesn't follow the RL election....

We could have leaders such as Bill Vague (the Cat), Canthony Blurred, and forgot...

Thanks Duncan. After I sent you what three emails yesterday, and responded to how many forum posts? Can you name any other website that answers and responds to your questions and concerns more fully than h2g2? Let me know when you find one.

Cheers.

Peta, you have offended me just as much as you have taken offence from my last post.
Read my post about why I react badly to being told that I am banned from discussing my country's election again. You don't need emoticons to see that I am furious about this.