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

...oh no, not one word. We're off to do something more productive with our work time than reading this drivel, like adding some more smileys.

(Looks good, though we're not allowed to say that. So we won't. Movin' right along... )

Did somebody say something? *looks around in confusion*

(Cheers - always good to know that the Editors listen... )

This looks like another campaign!
We'll be watching you.

peace
jwf on behalf of the Committee for a Campainless H2g2.

La La La - we can't hear you...

I'm not reading it either.

But I am using smileys

Ben

I knew about Magnum condoms, but hadn't heard they'd branched out into ice cream. Is that for men who are not filled up by the small amount of ice cream usually provided in a quart, and need more ice cream to fill their larger hollow leg?

In "Transgressions per Month," you wrote: "Suppose a second researcher has been on h2g2 for two days, and h2 has already transgressed twice."

Could you clarify what h2 means? This entry is so filled with puns and jokes (no complaints here! just need a little clarification) that I couldn't tell if "h2" was supposed to be a pronoun representing the second hypothetical researcher, or trying to say that h2g2 has already censured that person twice. Further, my intuition tells me that these are not hypothetical examples, but real cases whose identities you are protecting. I figured out that one of them was you. Who is this second hypothetical researcher who messed up twice in first two days? Can you drop some hints?

...More comments in a minute...

it's a typo for 'he'...

The examples are hypothetical - they're inspired by real people, to be sure, but not to any huge degree...

I think the suggestions here, if snipped out from the sarcasm in which they're embedded, maybe given a simpler title than Cornflakes and Birdsongs, is as reasonable and viable as the Modest Proposal. (Of course, I never thought the Modest Proposal would get picked up and implemented, but what do I know?)

This is great - and I *love* the footnotes.

I like this. There are some areas where I think the workload would be troublesome, such as ensuring that parolees keep away from certain subject areas.

Also, if a parolee is restrained from contact with Fred, who they've had trouble with previously, doesn't that imply a restriction on Fred? Otherwise, Fred could initiate contact and restart the war all by himself.

(Please, I don't know any Freds. I made the name up. Any resemblance to researchers living or dead is purely coincidental)

But I do like the concept.

I figured that such policing would be easy: just let the moderators know that such and such a person should not be posting in such and such an area. If you're going to spend the time reading every last post for rude words anyway...

contact from a certain person is trickier - perhaps simply make it clear that they should not initiate such contact. Basically I want to avoid people who were banned for excessive flamage coming back to h2g2 and immediately restarting the flamewar that got them banned. But I can see it might be tricky - what do y'all think?

I think it's doable. And frankly, since flamewars usually involve considerable heat from both sides, I don't think it's unreasonable to strongly suggest that Fred leave the newly returned parolee alone.


Mikey

"just let the moderators know that such and such a person should not be posting in such and such an area. If you're going to spend the time reading every last post for rude words anyway..."

I think it could be even easier - just rely on community policing. Enough people (particularly in the problem areas) would know what's going on, and if one of them saw the parolee breaking their conditions, they could blow a whistle.



The 'restraining order' issue could work similarly. If Jack is on parole, and he's not supposed to bug Jill, then Jill knows it (better than anyone else), and she'll let the italics know if he bugs her. Similarly, if she seems to be picking a fight with him, baiting him into situations, he could ask that she be reprimanded.



I don't think increasing the demands on the moderators would be good for anyone. *waves to moderators*

Hi, Lucinda

The events of the other week completely passed me by, however having found out about them, I came across your article.

Like everyone else who seems to have read it, I like it. A Modest Proposal described a fair judicial process and in Cornflakes and Birdsong you have introduced the concept of sentencing guidelines. Excellent!

I like the style too. A scout ought to recommend this to the guide, pity it won't meet the rules (too subjective), but this and A Modest Proposal are important parts of the guide history and should be in there...

Madent

This seems like a very plausible idea, and like most others here I hope something comes of it. The thing I always hated most about the Lifetime Suspension thing was the 'Lifetime' part - people change, learn from their mistakes, and consequently deserve the opportunity for a second chance. It's good to see that the editors seem favourably disposed, too, as this suggests an open-mindedness and willingness to listen, on their part. I personally favour the idea of 'Discretion *with* Guidelines', though, just in case.

Premoderation sounds like a non-starter to me, though. That side of things is bureaucratic enough already...

Lear

A694028
-myre

I like it. With the possibility of reprieve in the future, I think banned people would be less inclined to create new usernames until their year is up.