Sodbusters Earning Their Keep

A few weeks ago I mentioned to Peta that some Zaphodistas had discussed the possibility of a boycott, but I felt that we should try "diplomatic methods" like a petition first.

Peta joked, "What, do you think you're in a James Bond movie or something? *strokes cat*"

I replied that a more appropriate movie to represent this situation would be Shane. 1953 Western directed by George Stevens, starring Alan Ladd, Jean Arthur, Jack Palance. Gunslinger rides into a quiet farming community, joins forces with settlers who are being harassed and attacked by a cattle baron.

Let me clarify that I don't fancy myself the heroic gunslinger riding in to save the day. Although my scraggly reddish beard approaches the thin and patchy natural beauty of Che Guevara's beard, I'm really not as pretty as Alan Ladd.

What I'm talking about is the relationship between the cattle baron and the settlers, and how it compares with our situation. Riker, the mean, old, nasty cattle baron says the peaceful farmers are all squatters on his claim, that he has every right to push them "sodbusters" off his land and hire Jack Palance¹ to gun them down if necessary.

Again, not all parts of the comparison hold up. I don't mean to say that Auntie Beeb is going to hire a villain in a black vest to shoot down rebellious researchers. I just like the idea of squatters having rights. They cleared the land, put up cabins, cultivated the land. They earned the land by the way they used it.

So what gives you any right to tell BBC how to run the website they bought?

You have squatters' rights. If you were here on the old h2g2.com, then you were here before the BBC. You cultivated your guide entries and it entitles you to some say in how they are used.

BBC owns the infrastructure that supports this web publication and community.

We are the community.

The list of analogies is piling up. In order to describe the relationship h2g2 researchers have with BBC, some people have said we are like houseguests, so we have no right to question rules set by our host. Garius Lupus compared h2g2 with a community center, originally decorated by members of the community. Now the center has been bought by a corporation that forbids our decorations and stations people in every room to monitor conversations. Some people have compared the situation to a store or a place of business. Customers don't get to come in and decorate the walls. When a pub changes management, you either continue patronizing the place, or else you go somewhere else. Protest by customers would be unreasonable. Some might even agree with the romantic and substantially silly comparison between squatters and evil ranchers.

Finally, Editor Mark Moxon listed several political comparisons² that may be helpful to understand how we should behave.

Is h2g2 a "completely restriction-free, open-source hippy commune?"

"A community-run democracy?"

"A benign dictatorship?"

"A malicious dictatorship?"

Let's throw another analogy on the pile.

The Zaphodista Army as Virtual Union

If you work for a company, then they probably own the building where you work. They own the equipment. They lay down capital to buy all the materials for manufacturing your product, or all the paper and staples and post-it notes that support services you provide.

What right do you have to say how that company should run? Who do you think you are to request a higher salary? You work for the company as part of a mutual agreement. You're no slave. Either take the job on the terms they give you, or you should find another job.

Millions of hard-working people in capitalist societies reject those options. They react by confronting the employers, demanding changes, and they are taken very seriously. People who appreciate their jobs, who don't want to quit but want policies changed by their employer, often take action by forming a trade union.

Are the Zaphodistas anything like a trade union? BBC provides the facilities where we can publish articles on the web. We do this as unpaid volunteers. The relationship is complicated because we are also spectators or customers who read the Guide and participate in the community, similar to but not the same as TV viewers.

I don't know if there have been a lot of unions or strikes organized by members of volunteer groups in the past. I imagine it would just lead to the volunteered service dissolving, if enough of its volunteers reacted this way.

But maybe we should think of possible future actions in terms of a "strike," not a "boycott."

"You're crazy!" the loyalists will say. "They don't even pay you anything, so how can you be on strike?!"

Easy. Real union members don't always get paid when they're out on strike. We have even less to lose.

The reactions must be similar when workers first begin to organize in industries that have not traditionally seen trade unions. Workers are told they have no rights, that bosses own the equipment and therefore call the shots. Management soon learns what kind of power can be wielded by organized workers.

As spectators, participants, customers, squatters, cultivators, volunteer workers, we bring value to this community. We share a right to influence this community. We hold power in this community when we band together and show that our services can be withdrawn as easily as we give them.

I'm not saying we should rip the doors off the hinges and burn the place down, or that the "injustice" we're dealing with is on the same scale as people who were massacred in Haymarket Square fighting for the eight-hour day. I'm just telling you another idea that you can hold up to anyone who says that h2g2 researchers have no right to protest, or that we should choose between the only two options they view as acceptable, "get over it" or "leave."

plug for the Petition

Got Moderation?

Show how you feel about it. Sign the
Petition for Greater Freedom on h2g2.