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

I was debating with myself whether to post this here...post 501... a kinda mystical number... but since agcB threatened to if I didn't, I will.

It's about a poem I wrote in my journal the other day that's kinda about this whole situation, and what h2g2 is to me.

>>I don't think I've ever been compelled to write a poem in my life before, (other than those inane attempts when I HAD to for a class assignment) But there's something about.... what this h2g2 COULD be, and what it already is, and the way it affects people's lives.... it's like a picture being painted from millions of words, a group of people working together with whatever skills they have, even if they never know of each others existence. As long as it is allowed to exist it'll be there. And maybe 20 or 50 or 200 years down the road people can look at it and get a picture of what our lives are like today. And maybe it'll help people to realize that in some ways, whatever it means to be human doesn't change, even though the circumstances do.

To me that matters. A lot.<<

> "Presumably everyone also wants as much freedom of speech as possible."

Just more than I have now - I'm not interested in absolute freedom of speech. Just the same amount as I have, say, down my local pub.

I'm a little concerned that anyone here would think that I was quoting from one of Lekz's unedited entries when I made my earlier reference to 'garrottings' and 'dysfunctional family away from home'. I happen to think that if someone is banned their unedited entries should be deleted - someone who leaves voluntarily is likely to delete their entries, and someone who is banned should have the same option.

Anyway, my references were to conversation postings, which most researchers soon realise are kept permanently, no matter how much posters may later wish to withdraw their posts. I used the 'Search the conversation forums' option on the Advanced Search page, which anyone can find by following the link at the top of every page.

For the record, searching on 'dysfunctional family away from home' turns up two posts from LeKZ, the poem I quoted earlier and a post signed Arpeggio.

Searching for 'Jewish American Princess' turns up a post where this phrase is used by LeKZ. If anyone still believes that LeKZ would never use this term, perhaps they could explain why the one and only use of this phrase in a h2g2 forum before the X-post controversy was in a post from Arpeggio's account?

For anyone who still believes that LeKZ's English background would stop her using 'axxhole' rather tha 'axxxhole', searching the forums for 'axxhole' will show that before the present controversy, not only was LeKZ the only poster to ever use this term, but that it turns up in 4 different threads, used by 4 different personalities.

It's a sobering thought that using distinctive words and phrases makes it very easy to single out certain postings. I think that I will have to watch my own vocabulary a little more, or use more smileys!
Azara

Ok, I am not legally bound not to reveal the contents of Peta's email. Good. On the other hand, I try to treat all incoming email as confidential, and will not forward them without permission, implied or otherwise. I will be circumspect, though not quite as absolutely silent as I had been beforehand now that I know that I need not fear a week's suspension.

The reason for the removal of the link to the FoLKZ archive, as far as I understand (not terribly well) is that it was in breach of the law, and we are not (and never have been) allowed to link to illegal sites. The specific legal breaches cited were:
A) breach of copyright.
B) defamation/slander/libel/that kinda thing.
I am not a lawyer, so I cannot accurately judge the truth of these claims. Those interested will have to form their own opinions in the matter.

I have been informed that providing the subscription email address counts as 'directions' to the FoLKZ archive, and I can sympathise with that viewpoint. I have asked for clarification over whether it counts as directions to tell people that they can mail me for the FoLKZ URL, and have received no response as yet.

I have been informed that providing a link to the main topica front page, together with the name of the list, also counts as 'directions'. This seems wrong to me, as you simply cannot get to the FoLKZ list from those two pieces of information.

I hope this helps, though I suspect it will not.
-Martin

Azara.

Interesting. A bit depressing. Surprising? I don't know. I have checked, and you are accurate. Original posting dates, as if anyone cared, were May 17th for "JAP" and June 18th for "axxhole" (interesting to note that if you search on "asshole" there are LOADS of postings using *that*. It's very obviously an acceptable word, so anyone censoring themself while typing it is wasting their time!).

Again, in case anyone is interested, this information will NOT be passed to my independent decoder (hands up anyone who remembered that that was happening) No results yet.

H

hmmmm...

regarding backing people into corners, this has never been my intention, (as I think I said near the start of this thread), but I am keen to highlight creeping restrictions (some of which have been mentioned in this thread), and to try and get more transparancy of decision making.

There is a simple reason for this. This community relies on it's researchers. the people who are most likely to be able to contribute to threads, guide entries, etc are exactly the ones who are likely to be frightened off by the appearence of an authoritarian management making arbitrary decisions. (note: I am not calling the staff authoritarian, or there decisions arbitrary, only pointing out that some of their decisions and timings can appear that way.)

The simplest way to prevent this problem (of people being frightened off) is by trying to be as open and transparent in the decision making, and trying to be as consistant as possible as well.

Perhaps there can be set up an area which gives examples of the types of things that are and are not allowed, especially as regards phrasings, which are particularly prone to being inconsistantly moderated. if necessary, bbc equivalents to the offending url's and email addresses could be used.

Hey there -

I have (finally) put together the beginnings of a proposal for an 'Arbiter' volunteer.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A603596

I'd be interested in any feedback. Thanks.

-7rob7

This is a great idea - we need people who can defuse a situation with aplomb, while keeping the conversation on track. This proposal could easily be combined with Colonel Sellers' Magna Carta - have you guys gotten together?

Peripherally. The premise it that they do, indeed, go together. I'm going to send him the link tomorrow..um..later today. My eyes are crossing right this minute.

Thanks; I hope it builds into something everyone wants.

-7rob7

Where is the good Colonel's Magna Carter?

***B

Hmmmm.... said Magna Carta was posted on a website that must remain nameless for the sake of all h2g2 , and I can't see from the Colonel's page anywhere it's been posted here @ h2g2.


Mikey

No matter, it has arrived in my inbox! *grin*

Thanks to those concerned.

***B

7rob7, and I guess some other folkz too, have done a great job on the proposed arbiter scheme.

It never ceases to amaze me how much we all care about this virtual playground. You do KNOW it is nothing but ones and zeros don't you?

***B
'We have captured lightning and taught it how to make sand think'

This is a copy/paste of my suggestion at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F55683?thread=130663&skip=40&show=20 WARNING: Suggestions ahead. My ideas only. Ok, after rambling quietly to another Researcher I came up with three suggestions; short, middle and long term: 1. Give us information. TPTB create a black-board, which is accessible like the Preferences, Who's Online and My Space. A) The Board should contain notices of administrative changes in advance (like "The Mod-Desk will be closed from ... on, due to ... "). This will help to minimise the feeling of being jerked around according to the whim of TPTB among the researchers. B) The Board should also contain updates on the House-Rules and their interpretation. So that it is publicly stated that we can quote BBC/H2G2's mails and such. This will help to build a consensus of what's acceptable and makes a handy and easily accessible reference in case of dispute. Over time this will go and cover more and more of the rather unclear aspects of the House-Rules. C) Further, the Board could contain some statistics to show the extend of Moderation for the last 24 hrs, i.e. number of Mods, total number of postings, number of postings, number of modded posts, number of complains, number of complains decided in favour of the user. This will give us something to actually discuss when we're talking about the extend and quality of Moderation. The users effectively don't know anything about that ATM. That breeds dissatisfaction. D) Depending on BBC's policy the Board could contain some internal info; like "TPTB applied for additional funds to employ another Italic but that was turned down by the BBC". To give us some insight into what you're doing up there in the Tower. 2. Number the Moderators. That is to say: assign a number to each individual Mod. And provide statistics of who modded how many postings in the last 24 hrs. In the form of Moderator 1: 123 postings read, 7 moderated Moderator 2: 50 postings read, 20 moderated .... This would enable us to do some form of quality control. Any maybe the Mods would get some sort of a face and stop being "the invisible hand that takes apart our postings". And if you, PTB, think that this is useless, because all the Mods moderate pretty much the same percentage, than there's no reason not to show us that fact. If they all mod the same percentage that means that they do it evenly, and that there are not one or two of them who nit-pick everything. We can't know that, now. 3. Limit the Monarchy. Let organised groups of researchers have an influence on things at H2G2 or the Power's opinion. This could be done in the way of having something like parties and elections (Like the Mayor of London thing back when) and the speaker of a group/party is the only one to be allowed to post at a certain space (could call that the Parliament) while all non-speakers can only read. This would keep the topic-drift low and the intra-thread flaming down. Should make the whole thing more effective. And given that the Board advises changes ahead of time H2G2 staff might get some consolidated opinion of what the majority thinks and can hit BBC about the head with that to maybe influence a decision. These groups would have to be allowed to be formed fairly quickly to accommodate new developments. Ok, #3 is the hazy long term idea. It'll be a "female dog" to implement, but TPTB won't get around our opinion anyway... And I should think that once we reach 150,000 users some higher degree of organisation will be necessary. The most important one IMO is #1. The least important one is the mid-term #2 Tube PS: 4. Collect the final decisions on Moderation. If not publicly available, then for in-house use. Create a BBC/H2G2 common law to guide the decision makes. It ties in with 1.B) above. That will improve consistency of Moderation. None of the Italics has responded to that so far. Tube

Great idea this Arbitration/Mediation thing.
And I volunteer for that one, too. (even if that would mean that I'd have to cease being a judge at the H2G2 Kangaroo Court... )

Tube

PS: Comments on the proposal have been posted there.

These arbiter and charter schemes sound like excellent ideas. I'm unsubscribing from this thread now, but I wanted to let people know that this is not a door-slamming - I just think that after two weeks of this thread it's time for me, at any rate, to move on. If anyone has any points they'd like to raise with me, they're welcome to drop a message at my space.
Azara

I want to say something that has recently been troubling me more and more.

Here you all talk about moderation of postings - but do you know, involved in this affair there has been a huge amount of NON-MODERATION that has been harmful! For instance: people asking that their own postings be moderated, and being refused, or yikesing the postings of others, where a good case for defamation can be made, and being dismissed. I feel that in this instance a lack of moderation contributed to the problem! I know of quite a few people, myself included, who asked for their own postings to be removed because those postings were made in anger and haste. But those postings were left to stand there and then helped to make matters worse. Anybody care to comment?

I -personally- do think that some input from TPTB would be helpful now.
Peta and Mark asked for some ideas and there seem to be plenty about. Before we start putting heaps of manpower and time into further refining them, some indication on whether these ideas are *feasible at all or even desired by TPTB* would be nice. I acknowledge that the Italics cannot within two days come up with a fully worked out plan how to implement our ideas and I know that they are busy doing things.
But before I input a lot of work into, say, the Arbitration Scheme, I would like some assurance that something like that is possible at all. never mind the details, something like "sounds promising, add some flesh to that skeleton and get back to me then” or "I don't think that'll get past the BBC's policy, but I'll check it out” would be sufficient. Thanks!

GTTaD: I can see what you are getting at, but can't ATM think of a more sensible suggestion , sorry.


Tube
(off to bed now )

Well, posting in haste, my initial reaction is that you cannot have it both ways, Grief. Either you accept moderation, or you don't.

Let me rephrase that and make it less personal, because I don't mean it as an attack. Either WE accept moderation or WE don't.

I think we have to acknowledge that one of the ways in which this site is structured is that the threads comprise a permanent record.

That's the way it is, and the way it always has been.

The Ts&Cs are reasonably clear about the grounds for moderation, (apart from the infamaous 'otherwise offensive' clause). And second thoughts is not one of them.

*Off to bed in a minute*
*Aware that I may regret posting this in the morning*
*Shall I post or shall I not?*

a part of the record called Ben