A Conversation for Intelligence

A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 1

Barton

You may find this article at

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A574724

Since this seems to have been the consensus opinion of the discussion of Playboy Writer's attempt to write on this subject and since I was challenged to do as well if not better.

Here is my contribution in the spirit of H2G2 and Douglas Adams

Your suggestions and critiques are encouraged.

Beware. If you contradict my basic assumption I may pass the torch on to you. smiley - smiley

Barton


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 2

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

Thank you for the clarification. Too bad nobody else (except Lucinda, of course) will necessarily 'get' it.

I wrote something, which is not submitted here, which is my attempt at clarifying some of the grosser misunderstandings:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A574643 To set the record straight regarding writing *anything* in this subject area, which I was challenged to do, too.

So, you answered 'sh*t or get off the pot' with... well, you answered. I answered by refusing to answer.

Arpeggio, who has not had an agreeable day... though some of the papers in PR right now are quite good.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 3

Barton

Do not make the mistake of thinking that I do not want this article considered for the edited guide. I'm quite serious about it.

Barton


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 4

Barton

I need to correct myself. The gentleman who wrote the first article by this name was called Playboy Reporter, not Playboy Writer as I said previously.

Barton


Typo! A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 5

Jimi X

"The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy regrets that is(sic) has not been able to find anyone with any intelligence who is willing to write about it."

- It's a shame that in an entry with only two sentences, one of them would contain a typographical error. One would assume that the sentence should read:

"The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy regrets that *it* has not been able to find anyone with any intelligence who is willing to write about it. (emphasis added)"

Of course by incorporating my suggested change I will expect a full researcher credit for this masterpiece if it ever becomes included into the Edited Guide.

==========================================

I appologize for this rude posting. I'm just really sick and tired of this whole issue.

Mistakes were made. And we don't seem able to get beyond this fact. OK, some people felt the original Intelligence entry was not up to snuff or that it was offensive or whatever. Others disagreed.

Some people felt the critics went over board. Others disagreed.

Can we please stop this now.

I posted this somewhat rude critique of this new 'entry' on Intelligence out of disgust at what it represents. The 'spirit of h2g2 and Douglas Adams' does not include efforts to demean others.

Here's a little tidbit that might interest you - though he cancelled his account, Playboy Reporter can still access the site as an unregistered visitor.

While it was a shame that he felt he had to leave the site, the postings after he left where he was ridiculed and his writing was held up to derision surely guarantee that he'll NEVER come back.

It's time to move on...

This 'entry' has no place in the Edited Guide, but of course Barton knows that. Thumbing your nose has no place in a civil community.

Again, I appologize for rising to the bait.

- Jimi X


Typo! A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 6

TowelMaster

Don't. I agree.

TM.


Typo! A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 7

Barton

Jimi X,

You may, of course, have full and equal mention and credit for this entry. Mainly because you took the trouble to come look at it. Your contribution has single-handedly pushed this back up to the top of the stack and given me this chance to thank you.

I have corrected the typo. And, I do appreciate your honest reaction.

Actually, now that you bring up the question of providing proper credit fot this entry, were it to be accepted (Which, of course, it will not -- It seems that some of the people around here are a little mad at me and are boycotting this entry) I would expect that if credit were to go to anyone, it should go to those who contributed to the original thread. But, particularly, it should go to Crescent, without whom, this article would never have happened. Thanks for the inspiration.

Jimi,

I'm so glad that after I complimented everyone on not flaming me, that you could prove me wrong on that as well.

And, Towelmaster(ACE), thanks for helping out.

Barton


Typo! A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 8

TowelMaster

Your welcome.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 9

Martin Harper

Since Crescent has now apologised fully for his comments, accepted that they were far too rude, and in general gone a lot further than even I would be willing to flame him, though I might be tempted, I think the best option would be if this thread were to be moved to the sin bin.

When everything has died down - perhaps in a couple weeks time - Barton may post it again to Peer Review, and people may look at it with eyes unblurred by prior judgement and suspicion and all the other emotions that do not lead to a useful productive Peer Review session.

Jimi - I am glad that you realised that you were out of order, but I sympathise with your reasons for being so. This incident has frayed everyone's nerves.

Barton - commendations on answering the challenge succinctly and well - and I hope to see this entry back in Peer Review in two weeks time - should you decide to do so - and from there into the Edited Guide.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 10

Martin Harper

I should say this, since misinterpretations have been far too common...

> "though I might be tempted"

Isn't because Crescent in anyway deserved flaming - he most certainly didn't. It's because my temper is straining at its leash and I have this huge urge to chop people into very small bitesized fragments and use them to fertilise my lawn.

And I don't even have a lawn.

MyRedDice


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 11

Barton

Please move this thread with my blessing. Or delete it. There seems little point in preserving anything here.

Barton


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 12

TowelMaster

Due to information received : "This Ends Right Now" for me. I have never flamed a soul in my life and I would rather not see any more of it happening either.

Thank you for your cooperation and we will undoubtedly be seeing each other again on h2g2. Let one false start not ruin the beginnings of beautiful relationships.

Peace.

TM.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 13

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

In the above post, one h2g2 ACE asserts he has 'never flamed a soul in [his] life'.

Towel Master: the texts below prove you are also a liar.


Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 2

Right.

I have not been actively involved in this discussion but I read most of the threads. As I am also an Ace it may not surprise you that some of the Aces have been talking about this "intelligence"-thread/article, and mainly about the way that this conversation was held.

You say you are new here. Good, great, fantastic, welcome, enjoy yourself. You are also commenting on other peoples work. No problem with that either, it needs to be done. And if they can't take a bit of constructive criticism then they shouldn't send articles to the Peer Review.

However, so far you have broken almost every unofficial houserule there is. Mind you : I am not talking about the official rules.
And I am not going to go on again about the sh*t in said thread(s). I am simply stating that saying(or implying) that someone is stupid is tactless and counterproductive. You are responding to an article that has taken work to complete, even if it is only a little bit of work. You have criticized the article(fine), and when the researcher in question did not do "as he was told" you(and others) have called him/her everything short of D*ickhead. And this still goes on after the researcher in question has left the building.

Every researcher Has To Go Through The Peer Review Page. They have no choice, you do. So if you find an article like this and the researcher does not comply with your advice, why not just leave him/her alone ? After all, in your opinion the article will never make it to the guide anyway. If you think it will then you clearly do not believe in the capabilities of the sub-eds...or the towers.

You are now on your way(with some colleagues I might add) to alienate Mark Moxon and *his* colleagues. Apart from the fact that this may not be the wisest move : If you are new here you don't even know the man, so why do you think you can judge him?

I am not sure it was you, but I think you were the one who talked about "tact". "Tact" in quotes means so-called tact. You use this "tact"-thing in your more sarcastic and caustic posts. It therefor implies that you think tact is useless. Not here my dear colleague, especially when you go about discussing other researchers articles. There are people here who have done their utmost best to write a valid article, even people with dyslexia, writing-problems, reading-problems, etcetera, etcetera.

Maybe you have misunderstood what the Guide started out as : A place where ordinary people could write about things they like and at the same time improve their writing-style. It is NOT a forum for geniuses who can't do anything wrong.

I am definitely NOT saying that you were wrong to criticize the article. I am saying that there is no valid reason to get personal. It is not the thing h2g2 was meant for, Usenet comes to mind.

Oh, one more thingy : You criticise that Playboy Reporter for not accepting criticism. You, and some other people are now doing exactly the same with regard to M. Moxon's word of advice(or whatever is is). Don't you agree that Mark Moxon knows a little bit more about h2g2 than you(or me)? Or is he not intelligent enough?

Yours truly,

Towelmaster.

p.s. Sorry, I don't like to mince words. Although I did try to be as tactful as I could...


Read the first reply to this message


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 3





BTW : Who are you, or anyone else, to say that an article "simply can't be written" ? Would it hurt to say "In My Opinion" ?

TM.


Read the first reply to this message


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 4





Just read your "Letter to Mark Moxon".

Quote : "I have always been respected, and of the two, I much prefer 'respect'".

Are you saying that people on h2g2 respect you now? Respect has to be earned. Forget whatever "respect" you are getting in the outside world, this is h2g2. You start all over again. And don't take "fear" for "respect".

Nyeh, nuff said.

TM.



A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 14

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

In the above post, one h2g2 ACE asserts he has 'never flamed a soul in [his] life'.

Towel Master: the texts below prove you are also a liar.


Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 2

Right.

I have not been actively involved in this discussion but I read most of the threads. As I am also an Ace it may not surprise you that some of the Aces have been talking about this "intelligence"-thread/article, and mainly about the way that this conversation was held.

You say you are new here. Good, great, fantastic, welcome, enjoy yourself. You are also commenting on other peoples work. No problem with that either, it needs to be done. And if they can't take a bit of constructive criticism then they shouldn't send articles to the Peer Review.

However, so far you have broken almost every unofficial houserule there is. Mind you : I am not talking about the official rules.
And I am not going to go on again about the sh*t in said thread(s). I am simply stating that saying(or implying) that someone is stupid is tactless and counterproductive. You are responding to an article that has taken work to complete, even if it is only a little bit of work. You have criticized the article(fine), and when the researcher in question did not do "as he was told" you(and others) have called him/her everything short of D*ickhead. And this still goes on after the researcher in question has left the building.

Every researcher Has To Go Through The Peer Review Page. They have no choice, you do. So if you find an article like this and the researcher does not comply with your advice, why not just leave him/her alone ? After all, in your opinion the article will never make it to the guide anyway. If you think it will then you clearly do not believe in the capabilities of the sub-eds...or the towers.

You are now on your way(with some colleagues I might add) to alienate Mark Moxon and *his* colleagues. Apart from the fact that this may not be the wisest move : If you are new here you don't even know the man, so why do you think you can judge him?

I am not sure it was you, but I think you were the one who talked about "tact". "Tact" in quotes means so-called tact. You use this "tact"-thing in your more sarcastic and caustic posts. It therefor implies that you think tact is useless. Not here my dear colleague, especially when you go about discussing other researchers articles. There are people here who have done their utmost best to write a valid article, even people with dyslexia, writing-problems, reading-problems, etcetera, etcetera.

Maybe you have misunderstood what the Guide started out as : A place where ordinary people could write about things they like and at the same time improve their writing-style. It is NOT a forum for geniuses who can't do anything wrong.

I am definitely NOT saying that you were wrong to criticize the article. I am saying that there is no valid reason to get personal. It is not the thing h2g2 was meant for, Usenet comes to mind.

Oh, one more thingy : You criticise that Playboy Reporter for not accepting criticism. You, and some other people are now doing exactly the same with regard to M. Moxon's word of advice(or whatever is is). Don't you agree that Mark Moxon knows a little bit more about h2g2 than you(or me)? Or is he not intelligent enough?

Yours truly,

Towelmaster.

p.s. Sorry, I don't like to mince words. Although I did try to be as tactful as I could...


Read the first reply to this message


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 3





BTW : Who are you, or anyone else, to say that an article "simply can't be written" ? Would it hurt to say "In My Opinion" ?

TM.


Read the first reply to this message


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Subject: As there is "No Intelligence around Here" let me try to add some...
Posted 7 Hours Ago by TowelMaster(ACE)
This is a reply to this Posting.
Post: 4





Just read your "Letter to Mark Moxon".

Quote : "I have always been respected, and of the two, I much prefer 'respect'".

Are you saying that people on h2g2 respect you now? Respect has to be earned. Forget whatever "respect" you are getting in the outside world, this is h2g2. You start all over again. And don't take "fear" for "respect".

Nyeh, nuff said.

TM.



A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 15

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

I apologise for double-posting. My hands are shaking rather badly.

I *would* have preferred not to add fuel when people are trying to put the fire OUT. If TM had not outright LIED in public, I'd have let it go.

I am a product of an extremely unhappy childhood. There are many things I have got over. I cannot and will not tolerate liars. The lie was gratuitous. There was no need to say that. TM could simply have gone away, or said he was dropping out.

SINCE he had to lie, I'm afraid my buttons got pushed, and I had to *prove* it was a lie. I woke up to that post this morning. Coming from an ACE, under colour of authority, as representing the h2g2 community as a whole, that was NOT AT ALL OK.

Moderators, please remove above double-posting and this note.

Leïlah el Khalil Zendavesta, MAR


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 16

TowelMaster

Arpeggio,

I am sorry but that is not a flame. A flame is repeated use of swearing, threatening abuse, repeat repeat and repeat again, lots of those sort of posts on all your forum-entries(you will see that I did not do that).

It is stalking in cyberspace.

I honestly asked you those questions as the basis for a discussion. I saw so many flames on all the other threads that I thought h2g2 would burn down...

So please take it for what it is : a critical post to an intelligent critical person. It is nothing more, nothing less.

TM.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 17

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

Towel Meister:

I have requested the double-post and the note below it be removed. They may or may not be.

Why did you have to lie? Anyone can come to my page and read the thread 'No Intelligence Around Here', and know you to be both capable of flaming, and now also of lying about it.

A fine ACE you make. You are a magnificent reflexion of the worst part of a small minority of people. Under colour of authority, you did indeed flame me.

Now, you have lied about it.

Thanks ACE! smiley - smiley You are really terrific at your job!

Leïlah el Khalil Zendavesta, MAR


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 18

TowelMaster

I have explained enough I think.

TM.


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 19

Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular

Herr Meister,

The text of the Yikes button defines unacceptable posts as:
'unlawful, harassing, defamatory, abusive, threatening, harmful, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, racially offensive, or otherwise objectionable material.'

Your posts to me were: legal, harassing, defamatory, abusive, nonthreatening, intentionally emotionally violent, not obscene, not profane, not sexually oriented, not racially offensive, and otherwise completely objectionable material.

Keep denying it, and all you're doing is digging yourself in deeper.

Why am I trying to stop you?

Leïlah el Khalil Zendavesta, MAR
Who will not, ever, allow anyone to get away with LYING, if there is anything s/he/they can do about it!


A574724 -- Intelligence

Post 20

Martin Harper

For the benefit of any bystanders who may have wandered in here, and wondered what the heck is going on, Towel Master and LeKZ have settled their differences elsewhere. Please do not feel the need to intervene.

Dang, but I'm tired.


Key: Complain about this post

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more