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

aids? now now calm down these folk are here to help and you throw the kindness back in thier faces what do do you have to say for yourself?

/

hello pal

Insomic vamp...

yes i admited the fact i went into your page i never said that i followed you about tho which made it a little bit more seedy than it actualy was in actuall fact
The reason i did it you know i know and the Aces/Italics know the reason behind all that
But i cant see how it broke the house
rules in any way i didnt post any messages i didn`t interfear with any post`s you reseved appart from the one`s you reseved from the (reason)
and the odd one that did break the house rule`s......

The italics should explain the house rules to the Aces that are weeker etc etc....

But isnt that like saying becouse you
brake the house rules so much that you obviously dont understand them and therefor must have the house rules explaind to you becouse you seem to be finding them hard to follow
well isn`t that one rule for you and one for the Aces
1)Aces--there doing something wrong within the context of the <./>Aces code of conduct</.> there for they canot seem to understand them and need a tutorial to explain the rules to them
2)Vamp--you are doing something wrong
within the context of the<./>houserules</.>so you dont understand the them and need a tutorial to explain about not useing foul language flaming etc etc

"some aces ignore the code of conduct
or use it a means to a end"

so with you breaking the house rules this means you pick the ones you like
and obide by them and the ones you dont you brake

Welcome back Insomniac.Vampire..

A bit of cut and paste to start with...


Ref: Posting 951


>Natalie
Re: post 750

"as a member of h2g2 staff i would like to just state that we're sorry if it seems unflattering but we simply do not have time to conduct any campaigns against specific individuals. we endeavour to be impartial"

is that right Natalie? well perhaps you should back up a little in this thread because not only has Loup admitted it has gone on, in my conversations..<



If it has to do with the suggestion made in a certain forum [by ACEs _not_ Italics] relayed to us by yourself regarding checking your space to spot a certain _banned_ researcher who posted regularly on it, i merely formulated a theory on why it was suggested... and pointed out later on that as no-one has contradicted/denied what i said i assumed that i was right...


If it has to do with something else which could be interpreted as a campaign against specific individual[s], please let me know...



loup.dargent

Ref: Posting 939


>n there are obvioulsy 2 halves here....those who see the points vamps r makin n those who r defending themselves against her allegations....<

LocalisedGirl....

Nope... Try _three_ thirds, that would be closer to the facts... Unless you want to back up the statement you've made with proveable facts of course... which you are very welcome to do...

loup.dargent

erm...i think u just need to read ppl's posts to see who theyre backin (insert frownin stupid face here)

I think it is slightly more complicated than that, LG. There are lots of possibilities:

1a - people who unreservedly agree with IV (because). There are probably not many in this group at all.

1b - people who already know there are grounds for IV having a point (subtly different from 1a) but can't verify specifics.

2 - people who are more or less attempting to remain neutral but may acknowledge individual points (Loup seems to be in this territory).

3a - people who are defending themselves because they already know which group they are in from IV's point of view.

3b - people who are defending their friends out of misguided loyalty or even cowardice rather than honesty.

3c - people who are clueless but toss in insults anyway (mostly being on the official side and against the dissenters because that's where the power is).

I may have missed a few potential categories too!

SEF

u know what....i totally agree with u...but im bettin that will bring up a new debate now of ppl sayin theyre not in them categories lol

OH BTW

i dont wanna use this thread for it but how do i report a user for posting stuff etc....u know so he gets a warning to bog off n leave me alone?

Natalie
Re: post 804

"as i stated earlier h2g2 is reactively moderated - if a post was removed it is because at least 1 researcher found it offensive and so it proceeded to the moderation queue
where the decision was upheld by the moderators. we cant discuss the details behind moderation decisions onsite"

no Natalie you cant cos its not policy is it to explain your/staff actions publicly but i can suggest a reason for someone trying to remove post 963 amongst others!, some people on this site, (probably loyal pals aswell), want to cover up the truth! t.g someone up theres got half a brain because as i never mentioned names it wasnt libellous therefore despite 'someones' best efforts my post remained as i havent broken house rules, just told the truth which is something whether your prepared to face/admit facts is something thats not welcomed by some in this thread!

If you can't use the complaints button on individual postings there is an email version of the service which is explained on A1108018. That doesn't of course deal with an overall problem. Do you want official addresses within or outside the BBC for reporting harrassment?

SEF

i dunno....if ya want to have a look its sum bloke who has a big grudge against sum1 on ere n he involves every1 that he talks to me included...so ive had a pop but i think he should be removed as its not just me hes doin it to

Jab
Re: post 835


"also i think enough people have said yes there is a problem with ace conduct, it does not matter if she does not come back. there is a problem to be addressed"

really? and yet the staff still believe their aces do an exemplary job - without question..how many aces have to 'misbehave' before the problems taken seriously then? what does it take for a member of 'staff' to look at the way 'some' aces are behaving on site, i mean my words not good enough here, thats obvious but if its not just me questioning the actions of some, whose word is good enough? why is there not some impartial body that looks into these matters anyway? i think its been said earlier (NOT BY ME), some staff are corrupt so how come this site doesnt have an impartial body? makes sense doesnt it

"if you think her absence is to do
with lack of evidence, well infact it could be she is busy with real life moving issues"

perhaps i didnt explain myself very well when i re-entered the thread..for those who believe i ran away from this thread/site lol cos i had no evidence, well im afraid believe it or not i had some personal stuff to take care of, pressing matters way more important than this place, yes its true i have a life lmao however, once those matters were taken care of i had some problems with telewest, (my cable provider who for those who dont know have given me a pants service of late and i could not access h2g2 or my email but after about 3 or 4 weeks give or take of them messing up my account they finally rectified the situation and everything has been restored to some sort of normality..hope that explains my absence

but as for the point about lack of evidence, its fair for anyone to bring this up, if i was sat on the aces side of the fence id be bringing it up too..i have pointed some things out early on in this thread that were explained away and backed up so it looked like im complaining and its all a little 1 sided, not much to go on admittedly and for anyone that missed it Mort and Loup did (oops nearly said didnt, they definately did), offer to help compile some examples for me but as 'Kow' (i think), pointed out no offence you too but yeah i declined for my own reasons which dont really need explaining though i did thank you for the offer at the time..the fact that sneaky aces go around unsubscribing to theirs and researcher pals conversations certainly hasnt helped either and ive already said had i anticipated this course of action, (with PERFECT timing, credit where credits due)!, i would of compiled my examples before this thread begun, should of foreseen that action coming considering my dealings with individuals both on h2g2 and before! (note to myself, never underestimate the actions of people who portray themselves to be 1 thing but in actual fact they are something else entirely! no need for starred out words here, i might not be able to post complete truths but i am at least allowed to think it)
there is 2 more avenues i can try in respect to this matter, (thanks SEF for your helpful advice i havent forgotten), i have a backlog of emails which i am trying to get through in various accounts so HOPEFULLY ive saved some of the more pathetic attempts of 'hounding'/'goading'/'pettyness'/whatever and ive also when i get time, (and i can remember), to select key words into the 'search bar' if it works on digibox? i will get to this soon as

Whoami?
Re: post 843

lol another example of an ace jumpimg to conclusions without knowing/bothering to find out/read the facts! part of the overall problem on this site! however, before you get upset, i noted later on you at least here anyway on this point had the good grace to hold your hands up..you afterall being an ace are only human and occassionally make mistakes!

Whoami?
Re: post 845

discussing matters from the aces forum gets yikesed? what do you mean? if a researcher posts it? and what about the people who give the information up? the aces i mean, thats perfectly ok i guess cos theyre only human? sorry to overuse a phrase already well overused on this thread but it seems to be an aces excuse for any 'slip-up' they make and it would seem thats alright..or maybe im wrong? dont seem like it though...

Boriyani
Re: post 881

yeah i thought so but no doubt the aces can either overlook another 1 of my/someones elses posts or back each other up and explain it away, as has been said before..they do a fine job!

SEF
Re: post 892

was his page created on the 6th october? (same as this thread for anyone that missed/overlooked that the 1st time), it only showed from the 11th on my digibox

its ok SEF anyway though, i know who Time Traveller is but as this would only get yikesed and really 'blow this thread out of the water' (that phrase btw is for the benefit of the researcher), obviously as i cant name names ill just overlook it, since they have now 'gone' (according to themselves, yeah ok whatever) lol they can always use another 'spare' name to re-enter the thread again under the guise of a 'new researcher' cant they

what will make you happy ?? is it for "some" aces to have their badges removed ?? i agree if they have broken the rules then yes but as yet this has not been proved either way (only an opinion) say for example they have them removed would that not open up a whole new can of worms i think you can guess what i mean

Star Fleet