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

Re post 1845 about 1817...

What a bout a reference to me not posting a link to the actual thread I was talking about, the link I sent to Jimster via iCan message and also I havd made an e-mail request prior to that for contact with Jimster to show him the thread I was taking actual quotes from.

What did I get "I know you have issues with people posting to you"

Again Jimster making false claims about other reserchers. As to say "have issues" is to imply a defect.

If its defective to want others to follow the house rules, then why not put them in the bin?

La la la la la lol ol # jingle bells jingle bells # CME ON PPL JOIN IN # Jingle all the way #

localised girl .was asking the question regarding awol .since you havent the foggiest of awol problems .wasnt worth me typing to you .

Martin.. is that your fave phase ase or something? ""Wasnt worth trying to you"????????

can we just kept to subject matter please

sorry gone

Rho
re: post 1844

ok my mistake, a recommendation then
and as for aces ignoring stuff, thats another issue in this thread that is often overlooked

Hi all

Sorry to butt in on an old conversation and add my pithy . I've sat here all evening reading the backlog, trying to ignore the personal issues and address only the ones regarding the ACEs' Code of Conduct.

I've not been on the site all that long compared to some- three years in all, two since I registered. I volunteered as an ACE after about nine months on site (perhaps not all that long per se, but enough for me to have a good knowledge of the site, the "rules", and the responsibilities involved), because my situation allowed me a considerable amount of time online, most of which I spent here. Even when my work situation changed, I did my best to fulfill what I understood was the obligation I'd taken on, which was to welcome new researchers and offer help in navigating a vast community and a plethora of information. I did not feel that having an ACE badge on my space gave me license to act however I pleased, and I only yikesed one thread, in which a researcher made plainly undesirable sexual requests of a researcher whom I had previous contact with.

Now I'm by no means a technical whiz kid, but I did spend enough time onsite and have enough previous internet experience to feel that I could offer some guidance here when it was needed. I'm a fairly shy person in "Real Life", but enjoy making new acquaintances online, especially in a community such as this, which consists (or at least did at the time) of a vast majority of extremely intelligent and articulate individuals with whom I could engage in interesting, and often very informative, conversation. Over a decade working in customer relations and marketing has also given me, I think, the ability to be helpful and diplomatic towards nearly everyone, and I thought these qualities would be an asset to the ACE team. I know that, for a while anyway, being an ACE was rewarding and enjoyable.

But I'm rambling, as I often tend to do...

Several months ago, I felt I had no choice but to "resign" my ACEhood here. I love this site, and this community, and will continue to do so indefinitely. I've met not only the man I'm going to marry, but also several of my best and most cherished friends through h2. And it still serves as a valuable resource for information, as it was originally intended (or so I understand) to do.

I have to admit, I'm afraid to mention by name or post any links to the forum and threads that led to my "resignation" from the ACE team. This is for the same reason I felt it necessary to step back and disassociate myself from the responsibility. I'd be happy to discuss it, seriously, with any researcher who genuinely seemed to care and demonstrated some level of trustworthiness. Suffice it to say, for this purpose, that I am an active member of a "group" formed here on h2 for people much like myself. During the course of discussion, we touched upon some sensitive issues. Said issues were discussed maturely, as discreetly as possible, and with the purest of intentions.

Said discussion was then taken issue with by another researcher, who was not an "active" participant, so to speak, in the relevant discussion. Those of us involved in this discussion are well aware that this is a very public venue, and by no means anticipated any kind of exclusivity in it. But on the other hand, I feel that if someone doesn't like what's being said, provided it doesn't contravene the house rules, that person has the right to see their way out of the conversation.

Apparently, however, the researcher in question saw fit to raise enough of a stink that the house rules were effectively "modified", rendering the conversation- which was conducted in a mature, responsible fashion and intended to be of benefit to everyone who might be interested in obtaining benefit thereof- in violation of said rules.

Given the fact that as an ACE, I was expected to set an "example" for other researchers, and that I was - and still am, as much as I can be- involved in discussions which other researchers find "questionable" and "offensive", regardless of the nature in and reason for which they are conducted, I felt that I had to choose between having "official" ACE status and being loyal to myself and my dearest friends here on h2. So, I stepped down.

All of that said, I guess what I'm trying to say is that I feel that it is true that some ACEs are held to certain standards and others are not. And some of them certainly take advantage of that. That, and the fact that several researchers who make no constructive contribution to the site and seem to be here only to be argumentative and troublesome, in addition to the feeling that conversations which need not be censored are while some seem to have license to act however they please, led to my feeling I neither could, nor wanted to, serve in an "official" capacity. In a way, it's no big deal. But in a way, I think it's a bit of a shame. I agree with those here who feel that an ACE's responsibilities go beyond greeting newbies, and oughtn't make one feel they can do as they please, yikes anything they disagree with, and act like one is "above the law". It's a privilege, yes, but when the day is done, it's just a bit of code on one's user space. If one feels that being an ACE makes one all that important in the grand tapestry of life, perhaps one needs a reality check?

PS- Neither my participation in previous conversations, including the aforementioned, nor my resignation as an ACE has resulted in my being moderated, harassed, or barred from the site. I hope that venting my frustrations here will not result in any of those, either. I've been flamed only once by another researcher (who didn't have the guts to do it publicly but resorted to an email attack) and don't expect I'll be now, either. But then, I have quite a lot of faith in the lot of you.

Thank you for your time. End of whinge/rant.

PC

Hiya PC...Well i can say one thing to that ... god you can type lol ... Anyway hope you will chat soon, but ive got to go off now as i want to watch a film on the Sci-fi channel so t/c and hope you are well.
Goodnight and Godbless.
Scott x

Thanks, and hi, Scott. Yes, I can go on a bit when the mood strikes. Sorry for going off so much. It's a bad habit of mine.

Look forward to talking to you as well, pop by my space and say hey if you so desire. Take care as well and blessed be.

PC

psychocandy: If only where are more like you, thoughtful of others, and clued-up enough to not assume.

Rho: Going back to what you said, AWOL did have the full 'T.G.P.' treatment. But the people that had been hounding him just happened to have an ACE badge and had using it to hide behind. Which is very much the subject of ACEs' code of conduct?

However regarding AWOL, I am of the opinion a ban is a ban. Any future appeal, or complaint of the <./>TGP</.> to happen elsewhere?

Thanks, Jab. I'm also interested in the fact that some people are hounded by others who have a badge behind. Part of the reason I gave it up....

There is one significant difference though, psychocandy. By your own admission you resigned. You didn't stand up to them. You effectively ran away and hid from any moral responsibility to improve things for others. That's what they want of course and that's why you wouldn't have continued to be abused/flamed. Anyone who does persistently speak out against the injustices they remove by whatever means they can - including making up rules/interpretations/excuses on the fly (as you noticed yourself).

Jab, it wasn't the full transgressions procedure since the staff failed to announce it publicly on site. Thus rendering it largely pointless as a measure of community feeling since only those specially notified or looking for trouble would have found out.

That said, I also pointed out to AWOL/all (when I did come across the banning page/threads) that he really wasn't helping by continuing to post and that in itself would be grounds for a ban. Perhaps that wasn't a big enough warning. It is debatable whether he would have received fair treatment even if he had shut up though. The noticeable absence of any evidence presented against him (contrary to previous staff statements that they like the evidence to be visible and speak for itself) indicates it is unlikely.

Hi, SEF. I think you make a valid point. I understand I didn't discuss the full nature of the issues involved in my resignation, but I also recognise that I did not in fact stand up to them. Perhaps I should have. I don't know if it's too late to do so. It's my nature to back down and run away, so to speak. I guess my question now, and reason for posting to this thread, is how can I help now?

Also, SEF... to what extent does one's moral obligation to improve things for others supercede one's moral obligation to protect one's self? The flaming I mentioned involved someone telling me go and kill myself. Luckily, though I was vulnerable at the time, I'm also strong and ornery as hell.

Damn I was about to ask if SEF means moral commitment, not "moral responsibilty" in post 1893.



To answer IVs post 1860 "what not even an appology??"

In e-mail I did request, well demand one, but no to having any appology. But its more important the staff know their assumptions are wrong.

Re: Post: 1894

SEF. Well how did the manage to fool Rho then? Hell, everybody else?

It was by lurking you that I found the 'vote threads'.

Could it be the staff wanted rid of AWOL, or was it the staff showing support for volunteers, not fully understanding they had rouge ACEs about?

manually bookmarking as the automatic convo list isn't always updating it

baboon

what do u actually know ere?
i dont have foggiest on awols problems?? lol thats the 1 thing oon this site i am aware of more than anything dear