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

Fair enough.
I didn't read more than the last four pages, but I'm sure many must have had suspicions all along.

Dare I conclude, if many of you suspected and said nought, you probably had the best intentions and secret hopes that in her latest incarnation, she might be less ..uhm ..Lexx, and become an accepted member as SiLu. She was not quite so vitriolic or volatile as the original.
I too hoped she might have learned her lesson.

Sadly, her last minute attempt to draw me into it, in support of SiLu, without admitting the deception, angered me because I felt I was being suckered.

Off with her head!

jwf

Let's put it this way. If I were to see another persona that I thought I recognized as some form of LeKZ, I'd probably not say anything that would start problems. If it were to engage in what I consider to be abusive or destructive behaviors onsite I would if I felt it were necesary.

- Rules are promulgated for the benefit of the/a community.
- The public has the right/free-will to join or not.
- A joiner/member agrees to abide by the communitys rules.
- IF a member does not abide by the rules, the member has
agreed (by joining) to abide by the rules, AND any consequences
resulting from not abiding by the rules.
- To keep the community safe/viable, and to be fair to ALL
members, rules MUST be enforced, and consequences as outlined,
MUST be enforced.

Thus, no matter how we might really wish to turn the other cheek,
SL/Leks must go.

I agree
Rules were broken, more than once.

Sadly it appeared that, only hours after signing up here, a personal vendetta (started off this site) was set in force culminating in it being played out on public fora for all to see.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F35246&thread=151528&skip=0&show=20

Although many of the SL posts did appear to be of a more even-tempered and lighter tone, the delight at word play and digs at certain other researchers were plain to see. How anyone could profess to read through all the backlog of the LS and other 'controversial' fora and fully grasp the complete picture is barely conceivable. Couple that with extremely long responses, visiting the offsite mail group, emailing members of that group and still finding time to sleep, it shouldn't be surprising that quite a few people had their suspicions aroused.
If this had been a genuine attempt at rejoining h2g2 as a more concilliatory member, with an interest in the good of the site and its members then, I feel, she could have been accepted back and welcomed for her valuable imput. Sadly this did not seem to be on the agenda.
Though with many interesting qualities to offer, the original subscriber just couldn't walk the fine line between constructive and destructive criticism and often displayed outright aggression.
After being offered the courtesy of her postings to a second account, formed for good reasons and acknowledged by her in hindsight, remaining onsite, one could have hoped for a softening of attitude.
As it was, this third time of registering, she wove a tangled web and was caught.
If I thought that there was any hope of her returning in the future and being able to work alongside the genuinely warm ambience of h2g2 I would have settled for considerably less than a lifetime ban.
Weighing all the events of the last 6 months, however, the lifetime ban is the one which gets my vote.

shazzPRME

I read a lot here and 'there' although I don't expect I've been seen doing either. As some people know, I do have a full picture of events.

I've given the matter a lot of thought, but I don't believe anyone else could have written this, or would even want/need to. It's very personal.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A659315

I agree with the points made in Shazz's posting.

Barton made two points, firstly that SL is a separate part of LeKZ, possibly even unaware that he is part of LeKZ, and secondly that Arpeggio, not LeKZ, was banned. He argues that SL should not be banned for being connected to the Arpeggio identity. I understand the principles of this but I see no practical way to deal separately with individual personalities within one body, even in the virtual world of the internet. To do so would be saying that if a multiple personality 'A'(to keep this impersonal) included an unknown (to them) personality 'B' and if B committed an offence, then the courts would be unable to impose any penalty on A because A was unaware of B's actions.

As I see it Arpeggio signed on as representing the multiple, if for no other reason than that they allowed other personalities to post. SL is part of that multiple, unknown or not.

Someone else said they hoped h2g2 would to able to cope with multiple personalities and that chat rooms are excellent therapy. I 100 % agree with both comments. But, speaking in general terms, in the case of sites like h2g2 they can only cope with those who can keep to the house rules. I hope the internet's value as therapy will be recognised by people in a position to set up sites where those who are unable to do that can talk. Sites with suitably qualified management to deal such a membership, set up so that chat threads can be private and members have the security of being able to block themselves from others when they wish to or to opt into different levels of membership. Maybe one day h2g2 would be able to incorporate that. I think its too far in the future to be a part of the decision on this issue.

So it seems to me that:

a) SL is already banned, under the original banning of Arpeggio, representing LeKZ.

b) Any arguments against banning SL are about the original ban and should be discussed as such, if there is anything new to say beyond the debates that have already taken place, and in the light of LeKZ's two further visits to h2g2 after that ban.

I hope for the sake of LeKZ friends and everyone SL spoke to here that Barton's outline of the possible situation is true and that SL was unaware of LeKZ and vice versa. If it is not the case then the deception of LeKZ friends and the more vulnerable of those he talked to here seems very wrong to me, whatever the reason. I know it doesn't break any house rules.

Hi all,

Arpeggio claimed to be very intelligent and she never gave me a reason to think otherwise. I am therefore rather disappointed to see her return to h2g2 in such a very obvious way. I would have expected her to keep her cool for at least a week or so after subscribing as SL.

O.K. For whatever record : I am *personally* convinced that SL is indeed "The Researcher Formerly Known As Arpeggio".
Her writing-style is quite unique and immediately recognizable. Combine that style with the 'instant knowledge' she had about all the cr*p in the LifetimeSuspension-thread and related entries, Topica, etcetera, and the fact that her contacts with the same people Arpeggio used to talk to were re-established within days, and I would say yes, this is Arpeggio. I fully realize that I can never be 100 % sure about it, but I feel that being 99 % certain is as good as it will ever get.

Finally, the choice of words and the aggressiveness of Arpeggio's attitude towards anyone who does not agree with her can also be found in the posts of Silent Lucidity. As I think Barton posted somewhere else, Arpeggio is extremely sensitive/vulnerable, the moment you state that 'she is wrong', let alone when you state that 'this is not true'. It is a shortcut to her detonation-switch. And I think that it was already being flicked.

As for the original ban : It makes no difference whether that ban was justified(and yes: I think it was). The fact remains that she was banned for life and then decided to get back in through the backdoor, even though she specifically stated that she 'would never do such a thing'. After she was banned she went on and on about the injustice of the h2g2-system, and that rules were being applied arbitrarily, depending on the person in question. In short : some people receive(d) special treatment(according to Arpeggio). By allowing her to come back to h2g2 through the backdoor, the staff would make themselves completely ridiculous. In my opinion the staff cannot let this go by unnoticed. Rules apply to everyone, even to someone with 2.000+ personalities.

If we keep this discussion realistic, then we all probably agree that it is impossible for the staff to keep an eye on people with multiple personalities. The workload alone would be unbelievable! Furthermore, the staff would be treading on thin ice if they would try to 'guide/assist/whatever' such people, including Arpeggio. The staff are not qualified to do so and they might be vulnerable to lawsuits if anything went wrong. And the problem would then be not about a banned researcher with a problem, it would be - for instance - about a suicide-attempt because of advice given by BBC-personnel, i.e. serious stuff.

Arpeggio herself did a bit of incredibly destructive work on one of our researchers which almost resulted in a completely wrong course of action that would have damaged said researcher as well as her child. She poses as an expert in whatever topic of discussion she is involved in at the time and does not seem to realize that her knowledge is limited like anybody else's. I do not feel the need for defamation, so let me suffice by saying that she is a loose cannon. It's a shame but that's the way I see it.

For someone so proud of her own honesty and principles Arpeggio has rather disappointed me by trying anything so obvious as to create a new h2g2-id.

TM.

While I haven't posted to the SL forums, I have been following the trail. I arrived once Mina and others were already dealing with the situation...

SL seems to have a similar tack to Arp, and doesn't seem capable of being nice to anybody. Maybe SL doesn't want to, or doesn't know how. Either way, they're upsetting a lot of people - I say a ban might help.

Whoami?

There seems to be an awful lot of discussion in the other thread as to whether SL, being an alternate character/personality of Arpegio/LeKX etc should be banned, due to the fact that he/she is a multiple personality.

I think the editors will be the first to agree that they are not qualified to deal with the legal implications of a split personality.
(No offence guys, but I hazard a guess that a degree in psychology wasn't part of the job requirements) - Although it might be useful from time to time .

If SL is the same physical being, as Arpeggio: disregarding all talk of personallity then as Arpeggio/LeKX is banned, SL is not being banned, the editors are merely enforcing a ban which is already in place.
whisky

Split personalites are still the same people, since all are affected by the actions of one, and Arpeggio banned all of LeKZ. The writing style is identical- hrm, would two different personalities write the same way?

We do not need Arpeggio to come back.
--SmartGamer

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F35246?thread=152667&post=1498369#p1498369, for an almost but not entirely unrelated discussion of responsibility for action. I also note that one of the FoLKZ in the "Don't Ban" thread is now suggesting we need *two* weeks to discuss this. We don't *need* a week. There is nothing to discuss. SL is LeKZ is banned. This is hardly the ideal initiation for this policy, since there really doesn't seem to be any question that anyone with a rudimentary grasp of the external reality most of us share didn't have answered by the technical proof of the ID of the owner of the SL account. On the other hand, I should be extremely churlish not to applaud the italics for rigidly applying this policy, even in such an open and shut case as this. Well done. H.

I do not know, and have had no dealing with, the entity known as LeKZ, Arpeggio and Silent Lucidity. I also have no experience or knowledge of multiple personality disorders.

In my ignorance I can only make 2 observations / questions:-

1) An individual who logs on under a new pseudonym after being banned is circumventing said ban. This would not be allowed for most individuals.

2) Is it right for a community such as this to reinforce and encourage the divisions within an individual's mind? Would it be healthy for LeKZ et al to continue being here in their current guise?

I don't know. I'm asking. For balance I'm making the same post in the "Don't Ban" thread.

GEOFF

Some people on the 'Don't Ban' thread seem to have the idea that the question of whether LeKZ was banned is actually debatable.

The problem seems to have arisen because the name 'Arpeggio' was used in two different ways: when Barton refers to Arpeggio, he means one of LeKZ's many personalities. However, it is clear that when the editors used the name, they meant the person with the screen-name Arpeggio - it is standard editorial usage to always refer to people by their screen-names. If I called myself 'Azara's Right Hand' and then got banned, I would not be entitled to post here using my left hand instead: it is fairly obvious that the ban would refer to the person with the screen-name 'Azara's Right Hand' rather than my actual hand only. In the same way, I think it is clear that the ban on Arpeggio was on the person with the screen-name Arpeggio.

Was the person with the screen-name Arpeggio the personality Arpeggio only, or was it LeKZ? Arpeggio's entries were generally marked copyright Leilah el Khalil Zendavesta, and a number of more formal posts (to Peta and other people) were signed in the same way or just with 'LeKZ'. Most posts were signed Arpeggio for LeKZ, Cassandra for LeKZ, Kurtis for LeKZ, and so on, with a wide variety of different personalities, but nearly always 'for LeKZ', which contradicts the idea that it was only one personality using the screen-name.

(By the way, if anyone feels that it is in some way discriminatory or insulting to refer to a community of 20,000 personalities as just one person, I think it's important to remember that this applies in quite a number of legal matters: someone with DID is entitled to only one passport and one vote. They are required to make only one yearly tax return, and they certainly don't have to sit a driving test 10 or 20 thousand times so that each of their personalities can pass.)

I think it is important to remember that the ban was on the person with the screen-name Arpeggio rather than on one specified Arpeggio personality, and that the person with the screen-name Arpeggio was definitely LeKZ.

Azara

Azara: start here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F55683&thread=127664&skip=1345

for an entertaining exchange on the concepts of multiple persons and responsibilities.

Hands up who agrees with Barton.

Alright - hands up who even *understands* Barton?

Never mind.

H.

"Couple that with extremely long responses, visiting the offsite mail group, emailing members of that group and still finding time to sleep..."

I feel stupid now for not instantly making the connection on the day I saw that Silent Lucidity reached #1 position of "Longest Average Entry in the last 24 hours" on the info page -- 12 posts, average length 4800+ words. That's almost 60,000 words in 24 hours!

Guess this statement doesn't reflect anything good or bad about Silent Lucidity, but watch out when you notice anyone hit higher than 2000 words in 24 hours!

Hi Subcom

I hope that you didn't think I was grinding an axe about people who make long forum entries. The entire phrase was:
>>How anyone could profess to read through all the backlog of the LS and other 'controversial' fora and fully grasp the complete picture is barely conceivable. Couple that with extremely long responses, visiting the offsite mail group, emailing members of that group and still finding time to sleep...<<
I am sure that there are plenty of researchers who can easily hit the 20,000 words in 24 hours, if they put their minds to it, without being remotely connected to the subject of this discussion in any way.
The important word in the sentence you quoted was 'Coupled' I feel.
Just a friendly clarification of my posting.

shazz

I may be exposing my ignorance here, but don't the lists on the /info page give post lengths in CHARACTERS rather than WORDS?

I speak as someone who regularly appears in the list (although not as high Subcom at the moment ), and who didn't honestly think I wrote *that* much!



H.

Yes, Hoovooloo, you're right - it is measured in characters rather than words, mainly because it's way easier that way.

Hi shazz,

I didn't intend any sarcasm in that, or anything against what you said. It really is startling when you see numbers on that list which are double the highest amounts usually posted. I mean, it's not evidence of wrong-doing, but I bet a survey of the top five all-time longest average postings in 24 hours would show Arpeggio and Silent Lucidity jockeying for top position.

(Every time my name slides up into the #1 or #2 slot, I get worried. My writing prof would surely scream at me, "NEEDS CUTTING!")

Sorry if I made it sound like it's necessarily bad when people are able to hit 20,000 words in one day. Just that doing so consistently should now serve as a warning sign that it could be another new login for LeKZ.

Hoovooloo, thanks for pointing that out. The damn thing says, "average size 1145whatever." It's good to know that the time I spend here is only 5000 or so characters each day, instead of 5000 words. And it makes more sense that SiLu could have been typing 60,000 characters in 24 hours instead of 60,000 words in 24 hours. (If average length of word is maybe 6 or 7 characters long, then still 10,000 words per day, give or take? finish a novel every few weeks at that rate. Wish I could write fiction that fast.)