A Conversation for Old Announcements: January - September 2011

This thread has been closed

This is not hidden, so i'll change the subject

Post 301

Spelugx the Beige, Wizard, Perl, Thaumatologically Challenged

I also think this is all terribly unfair on the poor italics (although Jim seems to be coping quite well...). What would be nice, would be if one of the people higher up in the BBC frayed rope of command, posted themselves on h2g2 explaining the policy, probably a bit much to ask, but every single other person concerned with the direct operation of the site posts directly, from Natalie through Peta, and our editorial and community teams.

I'm also glad someone agrees with me, especially after reading the last paragraph, because Rho disagrees with myself, on the extremeness of Machivellian (?, sp!) view that any way to rid us of this policy, even if it means absolutely _destroying_ the site, by forcing Mina to press the big red pre-moderation button thoughtfully provided by Jim. I also don't particulary like the way the policy was enacted in the evening outside of office hours, but *shrub*.

I've also started a protest thread elsewhere, with a connection to pi (only correct to 2dp though).

spelugx


This is not hidden, so i'll change the subject

Post 302

a girl called Ben

"What would be nice, would be if one of the people higher up in the BBC frayed rope of command, posted themselves on h2g2 explaining the policy"

smiley - laugh
smiley - wah

B


This is not hidden, so i'll change the subject

Post 303

Tango

I don't see what certain types of plants has to do with it all though... smiley - erm

Tango smiley - winkeye


This is not hidden, so i'll change the subject

Post 304

Hoovooloo

"I also think this is all terribly unfair on the poor italics "

Oh yeah, my heart's bleeding.

H.


Hidden

Post 305

Linus...42, i guess that makes me the answer...

i already know more than enough about moderation smiley - grr


Hidden

Post 306

Hoovooloo

You're not the only one....

H.


Hidden

Post 307

daraline, keeper of unusual rats and deranged hamsters

smiley - mod's must be on overtime.
xxsmiley - peacedove


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 308

Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista)

It's not about suppressing certain viewpoints. It's not even about "maintaining balance". From what I've picked up, any discussion of the war is being moderated to remove any postings which could endanger life or property, either through inappropriate revellation of war-related facts such as troop movements, or through inflammatory posts which might draw the attention of terrorists trying to decide on a suitable target. *Really* inflammatory posts might even mark out the BBC offices for "special attention"... smiley - yikes Under the circumstances, I don't blame them for being cautious. smiley - blue

Here's looking forward to happier times... smiley - peacesign


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 309

Hoovooloo

"It's not about suppressing certain viewpoints."

If only that were true.

Of course, you can't read this right away, because the Editors are suppressing my viewpoint right now. You might be able to read it later, perhaps. Patience....

H.


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 310

egon

But the postings are just as likely to happen on the message boards. And whats more, the mods are more stretched as they have to remove all mention of the war here.


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 311

egon

Hoo- that last post of yours arrived inside a minute. smiley - yikes


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 312

Peregrine, 22nd Duke of Earl ~ What would Magnum P.I. do ? ~

What is a "really inflammatory post which might draw the attention of terrorists trying to decide on a suitable target" ? Do you really believe that Al Qaeda will decide on their targetting on the basis of what they read on h2g2 ? Dear chap, where are we humble posters to find such "inappropriate revellation[s] of war-related facts such as troop movements" ? Through our own personal spy satellites ? I should add that I have begun a little series which does indeed reveal movements of our troops, and it can be found here - http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/F19585?thread=258855 Do feel free to join in, should you have any information ! Adios Perry.


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 313

combattant pour liberte

huh?

Why exactly?


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 314

Peet (the Pedantic Punctuation Policeman, Muse of Lateral Programming Ideas, Eggcups-Spurtle-and-Spoonswinner, BBC Cheese Namer & Zaphodista)

I saw that earlier, and it was rather amusing. smiley - laugh

I was more thinking of, for instance, a researcher who was also connected with the forces exchanging chat with their other half via h2g2...

"Sorry, got to log off; we're moving out in five minutes"

Unlikely, I concede, but in this age of web browsing mobile phones not impossible...


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 315

starbirth

I understand this is a moderated site and I realize that some moderation is needed to keep some who would over run a site with spam and stupid, harassing behaivor. So haveing a 'yikes' button allows researchers in a thread to self police the threads they are in.

However this is not a very well thought out policy. It reflects poorly on the bbc.


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 316

Hoovooloo

" So haveing a 'yikes' button allows researchers in a thread to self police the threads they are in."

Works great until use of that very button *becomes* the "stupid, harassing behaviour" to which you refer - and it then escalates from there into unreasonable restrictions on use of the site because of repeated abuse of this system. Speaking only from personal experience, of course.

Personally, as I think I've said elsewhere, I think the Peer Moderation experiment has obviously failed, and the site should return to full moderation - possibly even full PREmoderation. Heck, if it's good enough for me, it's good enough for all you.

H.


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 317

Linus...42, i guess that makes me the answer...

Peet,

surely they would use icq or similar rather than h2g2.

(nice one Peregrin btw smiley - winkeye)


Hidden (agenda, that is...)

Post 318

Bernadette Lynn_ Home Educator

Personally, with the advantage of a broadband connection, I don't really care where discussions about the current situation take place - although it would have been nice if the BBC had been able to choose a place that was as well designed as H2G2 to hold the discussions.

What bothers me is not being allowed to post the Journal entries I would normally write about the effect of current events on my family in Saudi Arabia, a topic which concerns me more than a little at the moment, especially after what happened in Riyadh in '91.


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 319

Peregrine, 22nd Duke of Earl ~ What would Magnum P.I. do ? ~

smiley - ta Linus

I think that major point that some may be hopping over here is that our present communications on h2g2 are public - i.e. they can be viewed, and will be viewed by millions of people across not only the UK, but the World.

These conversations, in particular the 5000+ postings "Opinions on War With Iraq", do not just serve as vehicles for our own egos, but as valuable sources of uncensored information for ALL.

Do you believe that the BBC would take the present steps on censorship if the hit rate on h2g2 was a tenth of what it is ?

Put it this way, if I were Alister Campbell (which thankfully I am not) and I stumbled across a conversation such as the "Iraq" one, I would absolutely keek myself. There is no way I would allow people to continue to post threads addressing US spying on the UN etc. I would put the thumbscrews on the BBC (who have just obtained authorisation from HM Gov to continue with the license fee system btw) to keep us all in line.

To comunicate via icq or email, or on some obscure chatroom somewhere, is to give up our right to a PUBLIC forum, and to relegate uncensored and uncomfortable inforamtion to the attic of cyberspace.

Am I being paranoid ? I really don't think so.

smiley - cheers


17 March, 2003: Iraq Conflict Policy Implemented

Post 320

starbirth

Another point was brought up by a researcher. Not knowing much about the make up of the BBC, {such as is the bbc goverment owned?,funded?. Is h2g2 a subsidiary?, branch?. What is the corporate atmosphere?

This researcher brought up the point that perhaps this is an attempt to increase a sister sites hit's by redirecting traffic from h2g2.
I do not have his permission so I will not use his name.

The one 'iraq war' thread has over 6000 posts and god knows how many hits. Many threads are now being 'moderated' besides this one.

Could this simply be some political infighting among managers and divisions?


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