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

My apology, Clarke. I misunderstood.

Out of interest, do you hate moderation more or less than any act of deliberately and proudly posting something that breaks the House Rules?

xyroth #711: "do you the h2g2 editors ever own up to any errors being the fault of one of you rather than the lawyers, the bbc, the moderators, etc."

Of course we do, when we make them. One good example was when we decided in 1999 that we would be 'translating' the Guide into American English to cater for a global audience, and announced it to the volunteers (and, we think, on site). We soon changed our minds, given the overwhelming negative reaction to the idea, and as you can see, the Guide is still in British English.

However you'll very rarely find u-turns like this happening these days in public (ie on site), because:

(a) Important decisions are discussed among the whole editorial team, and a consensus is reached. Editorial decisions like this are never taken on a whim, but only after careful thought, but the process of discussion isn't done on site, it's done in the office.

(b) With a lot of decisions, we bounce them off the volunteers first on the private mailing lists, and if we're really stuck for a solution we'll ask the volunteers for their ideas (and with around 200 of them, this is a good way of working through various solutions before any of them are applied). Again, this doesn't occur on site, but we suggest you ask the volunteers how open we are with them before decisions are made.

(c) An *awful* lot of speculation and debate surrounds most things we post, and with contentious issues obviously some people will disagree with our decisions. However if we haven't changed out minds following this speculation and debate, then it's because those arguments obviously haven't convinced us. We make sure we discuss people's disagreements in the open, but that doesn't mean we're being stubborn and refusing to budge: it just means we haven't seen anything to change our minds.

(d) When relevant, we ask the lawyers and other BBC departments for their take. If their advice causes us to revise any previous decisions, then of course we will explain that the change of policy is down to their advice, as it's important to explain the reasons behind any changes of policy. (This is particularly relevant with the lawyers, of course - none of the Editorial Team has a legal qualification!)

xyroth, you appear to be hinting that we never back down or apologise for our decisions, but you haven't mentioned any examples where the Community's consensus was that we made a wrong decision, and yet we still refused to budge.. or any examples where one of us 'passed the buck' unfairly. Can you point to some specific examples where we were wrong or tried to avoid responsiblity? Then we can discuss specifics, rather than speculation.

(As you say, we are always reversing editing mistakes, and we're also continuing to reverse moderation mistakes, so it's probably not worth bringing these two up. Over to you - we look forward to seeing your examples.)

You also pointed out that in your eyes the Editors refuse to admit fallibility while the Guide Team do it quite a bit; we answered by explaining that the Editors make decisions in a different way and on different matters, which is a very valid point, not "a very good example of exactly the type of problems that I am talking about". Fixing typos is hardly in the same league as dealing with suspensions, and the points above explain why it's not relevant to compare the two.

{quote} (Colonel Sellers)

Towel: I have posted my response to the forum on the Ace page that Lucinda created. I think that that particular topic drift is hurting what has otherwise become a constructive conversation, so let's move it somewhere else. I also feel that the other Aces might benefit from this discussion.
{endquote}

My nick is Towelmaster.

I will leave you all here to get back to your original subject. I would like to leave with a final observation. Since I only came here with regard to the dragging up of the There's no Intelligence Out Here -thread that I am supposed to have started, I would like to bring to mind what the first post was in said thread :


{quote}
Subject: No Intelligence around Here
Posted Jun 10, 2001 by Arpeggio - Keeper, Muse, Against Sequiturs, à propos of nothing in particular Post: 1

How stupid (defined as: ignorant, know it, and want to stay that way) can people be?

There are no limits to human stupidity. It would be almost as difficult to write a paper on stupidity as on 'Intelligence', because the topic is at least as large.

How stupid are people likely to get, HERE? I wish I knew, so I could be forearmed. I am new here. In three weeks, I have had two entries recommended. I could probably sustain that level of function indefinitely. Right now, I don't really feel creative. I'm too busy feeling kicked about like a football.

Thanks for the warm welcome, friends 'n neighbours. It's been especially toasty being flamed for no good reason today.

Arpeggio

{endquote}


As you can see this post was not specifically aimed at me. The reactions to my posting by some researchers have thaught me one perhaps valuable thing :

"Some researchers do not appreciate it when someone stands up to someone who is being insulting to the community in general."

Let's call it Towelmaster's Dictum.

O.K. fair enough. please continue.

TM.

It was nice that y'all went out of your way to answer this one, but I don't think anyone besides xyroth was really worried about it. This challenge was not one that would help anything, just seemed aimed to make the Editors looks bad.

...Translating the Guide to American English?! EEEEK! Haven't you ever seen the awful DUBBED version of Mad Max? Bleccch.

In an attempt to bring this thread to its lowest possible point, in the hopes that later posts will all be better by comparison, let me just say,

TowelMasters said "dictum."

"It was nice that y'all went out of your way to answer this one, but I don't think anyone besides xyroth was really worried about it."

Well, he asked the question twice and we didn't answer it to his satisfaction the first time, so we figured he should get a more detailed answer.

Sorry if it's drifting the topic a bit, just doing the customer support thing.

Ah, Beavis and Butthead. You're right, it can't get any lower thanks Subcom!

At the risk or starting a thread which reads...

"did"
"did not"
"did too so"
"did not neither"
"did did did did"
"did not not not not not"

Imho the post which sparked LeKZ's one week suspension was not sufficient to merit the action taken, especially since the issue was resolved to the satisfation of both researchers in two or three posts.

I think that the Italics are on record as saying that they were not monitoring LeKZ's posts at the time, so I am curious about how it came to the attention of the Italics, and was acted on so swiftly.

So there you go guys - "did"

*oh no not again*
***B

As Monty Python once said [excerpt from a longer sketch]

(...)
Mr Vibrating: Now, let's get one thing quite clear... I most
definitely told you!
Man: You did not.
Mr Vibrating: Yes I did.
Man: You did not.
Mr Vibrating: Yes I did.
Man: Didn't.
Mr Vibrating: Yes I did.
Man: Didn't.
Mr Vibrating: Yes I did!!
Man: Look this isn't an argument.
Mr Vibrating: Yes it is.
Man: No it isn't, it's just contradiction.
Mr Vibrating: No it isn't.
Man: Yes it is.
Mr Vibrating: It is not.
Man: It is. You just contradicted me.
Mr Vibrating: No I didn't.
Man: Ooh, you did!
Mr Vibrating: No, no, no, no, no.
Man: You did, just then.
Mr Vibrating: No, nonsense!
Man: Oh, look this is futile.
Mr Vibrating: No it isn't.
Man: I came here for a good argument.

(...)


Tube

"I think that the Italics are on record as saying that they were not monitoring LeKZ's posts at the time, so I am curious about how it came to the attention of the Italics, and was acted on so swiftly."

The Moderators monitor every single Posting and every single entry, and they alerted the Editors to it as a potential flame war about to erupt. There's something called an 'escalation procedure' that every single message board in the BBC (including h2g2) implements, and informing the Editors of potential flame wars is one of them.

Sorry, Ben, not sure what you're saying when you say "did". Did what, exactly?

Lol Tube.

My post wasn't a random act of wallowing in the past. In post 722 the Italics asked for specific examples.

Italics - I do know that you consider that incident to have been sufficient cause (my phrase) for the one week suspension, given that a final warning had been issued.

And to be honest, when you respond to my post I expect to let the matter rest again. I only raise it because you asked for specific examples...

***B

Sorry - thought we had responded. We presume you want a reply to this bit, then, which isn't a question, just a statement of opinion.

"Imho the post which sparked LeKZ's one week suspension was not sufficient to merit the action taken, especially since the issue was resolved to the satisfation of both researchers in two or three posts."

Fair enough - that's your HO, as you say. As we have explained in many places, Arpeggio was specifically warned not to get involved in any more arguments, she told us to suspend her account if she was involved in any arguments, she was then involved in an argument, and we suspended her account.

We've expounded these reasons plenty of times, including in this Conversation, so we also hope we can 'let the matter rest again'. Whatever, we're off home now, as the office is closed.

for the Bank Holiday weekend!

Now wait just a darn minute, there, mister; hold yer horses:

'Mad Max' was dubbed ???????!!?!!?!!!?!?!?

> "Some researchers do not appreciate it when someone stands up to someone who is being insulting to the community in general."

The curse of the civilised man is that he must remain civilised even to the uncivilised. For otherwise he shall become that which he despises and despise that which he has become.

-Xanthia

Mad Max was indeed dubbed. Apparently, some Hollywood brainiac thought Americans would not understand Australian English. Come to think of it, I may never have seen the movie except in Americanized dubbed version. Do they still say, "Watch it, honey. I seen him lick his eyebrows before!" in the original Aussie version? (Sadly, no one has been able to turn off the dubbing machine implanted in Mel Gibson.)

I probably shouldn't make the pronouncement without having heard the Aussie version. Maybe we Seppies really wouldn't be able to understand it, especially an Aussie a buzzer to his throat after voicebox is cut? But watching the absurdly deep voice come out of Gibson is too funny to take seriously. Besides that, have you ever seen any dubbed version of a movie in which the voice-over people did a decent acting job? (Oh no, there goes Tokyo, go go Gojira!)

Xanthia-

"The curse of the civilised man is that he must remain civilised even to the uncivilised. For otherwise he shall become that which he despises and despise that which he has become."

Wow. Perfect explanation of how/why people who respond to trolls are dragged down to their level. And if you think you're responding to a troll, whether your response is painful because it's flaming or just a waste of your time, it doesn't help to later claim you were magically compelled to respond. [A wink's as good as a nudge to a blind but vocal minority! Say no more.]

Damn, I could have sworn it was upwards of 12 hours ago since I unsubscribed! Oh well. This place is fun as long as you poke people in the gut from both sides of the dispute.

*dancing in the ashes of an old flame-war*

note to editors: I don't have any examples of the type you are asking for.

the reason that I raised the point is because you see quite a lot of "sorry, it was their fault", but approximately no "sorry it was our fault" type postings.

the reason I came back at your reply is due to the fact that this reply you made was a very good example of the editors appearing to ignore the main point and answering a minor one to avoid the main point.

this sometimes makes matters a lot worse, and there were a few examples in the lead up to the expulsion of lekz.

This gave me a golden oportinity to bring it to your attention, so you can now be very carefull to check that this is not happened before you post in future.

now letting this point drop.

... hmm... Mel Gibson Dubbing Shock ... do you think that is how he managed to get Aberdonian, Glaswegian and Edinburgh accents into a single sentence in 'Braveheart' or do you think he did it for a bet?

Non existant

Sorry about missing Post 731 last time. Comes of dropping the phone line, while I read and write.

***B

re: #737

Yeah, it is fun isn't it? Poking someone in the gut who's been barred from even saying "ouch" much less "please stop that" but who is still reading the pokes. Fun, fun, fun, as the Beautiful South once said, or was it the Housemartins?

H.
Just off to kick a puppy.