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

post 849, Ben.
{http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/FP55683?thread=127664&post=1272449#p1272449}

OK, I am going to take PR's 849 and reply to it. Sorry about the length of the thing. I often skip posts as long as this will be.

Before I reply in detail I must state one or two things clearly.

1) I have not read the infamous 'Intelligence' thread, though I did read an awful lot of LeKZ's other posts

2) As events unfolded I have changed my views several times: thinking first that LeKZ's posts tended to be too strong for the context in which they were posted and were frightneningly full of anger; secondly that her ban was done in indecent haste; and finally - given the structures here - that it was inevitable she would be banned.

3) I remain in email contact with LeKZ, although we disagree on some issues, the emails remain kind, caring, respectful and often humourous, and I enjoy receiving them.

4) I have never logged on to FoLKZ, or read anything posted there.

5) I think that h2g2 is the poorer without LeKZ, but I am not sure whether it was ever 'big' enough to include her.

> Hi, this the last time I'll be using the name 'playboy reporter'
> on the guide. (this is to safeguard my personal details So I'm
> taking this opportunity to tell the jerks at h2g2 exactly what
> I think of them. They know who they are.

... I am not feeling won over by your use of the word 'jerks' - and I am not entirely sure if I am one of them or not ...

> What irks me is this:

> LekZ comes to h2g2. She fires off extremely abusive, threatening
> and defamatory postings about me and other people over the course
> of several weeks. She is rightly banned. Not once did any of the
> people on the above list bother to ascertain the facts or bother
> to enquire about my well-being. All I have ever heard from them is
> 'poor LekZ, what an injustice'! LekZ has fired off far more hate
> speech about me than I ever did about her. Hoovooloo and you should
> have gotton her facts straight before you started lecturing to me!

PR - most people react to what they see and feel. If none of the people on the list (which has been moderated away) enquired about your well-being it is probably because they did not feel drawn to your personality as it appeared on the screens of their PCs.

I have not checked through the threads to find out who posted the most hate speech. It is hardly something to be proud of though. I suspect that you are right in terms of numbers of words, LeKZ posted at length, and frequently. But she had the time to do so.

>Hate speech is hate speech whatever the source.

Agreed, PR - have a mirror, take a look in it, what do you see?

> If you are disputing the facts Hoovooloo I suggest you take a
> look at a certain other website where LekZ continues to make
> abusive and threatening remarks - for instance see her post 'stupid
> bloody git' where she threatens to kill me. That is hate speech my
> friends - It's also illegal.

No comment, but it does sound to me in (some) of LeKZ's character(s) to do that.

>In short, no one is to blame for the banning of LekZ than LeKZ.

I agree with you on this one. We all of us provoke the responses we get. You, me, LeKZ, Christine Hamilton, Jeffrey Archer, Mother Teresa, all of us.

>I have been on the receiving end of some of the most vicious and
> abusive hate speech I have ever seen and no one bothers to enquire
> about my well-being or even speak up about it!

Well, PR, LeKZ made friends. As I have indicated, I started off disliking the way she posted, and even posted messages of support in the personal spaces of people she was fighting with.

I don't know if you have made friends here on this site, but posts like this won't help you to do so.

> How dare LekZ talk about me like that! How dare you talk to me
> like that Hoovooloo!

Err... freedom of speech; hurt feelings; profound offence; feeling under attack? All the same reasons I guess you posted this, PR.

> Frankly, I've had a gustful of it! I put in one last post to try
> to make a peace offering to them but they didn't take it so now
> I'm considering legal action!

Who are 'they'? I know your original post was moderated, but I am unclear about who 'they' are.

Some peace offering though. "Accept my peace offering on my terms, or I'll sue the ass off you". Yeah, right. (I am sorry, there are times when only sarcasm will do).

> The same people have also been harassing the italics!

Like Tube, I want to know if I am included in this list. If so, I will hold my hand up to it. I will dispute any action which I think needs disputing, and support any action I think needs support. As a result the Italics have had both 'harassment' and support from me. As have Hoovooloo and Grief/Pillowcase to mention a couple of others, and indeed LeKZ herself. I do this in my personal life too. It is called honesty.

> The italics are the very people that have done the most work
> on h2g2 - h2g2 'belongs' to them and h2g2 could not survive without
> them. The italics therefore get to decide how the website is run.

I am really glad you put that 'belongs' in inverted commas. You are right, h2g2 probably couldn't survive without them. But it does not follow from that that they get to decide how the website is run.

This website now belongs (no inverted commas) to the BBC. It is the legal ownership of the site that grants the right to decide how the website is run. No moral rights here, just legal ones. The italics are employees of the BBC. They have a lot of influence over the site, and absolute responsibility for it. But that is it.

> Having an account at h2g2 is a privilege not a right! If you
> agree to use h2g2 you agree to play by the rules or piss off and
> find another website.

Agreed.

> HOW DARE these people now start harassing the italics and bombarding
> them with schemes telling them how to run their own website!

We dare because we want to IMPROVE h2g2. We believe what we are suggesting may help to improve it. We know that the italics have other things to do than create intricate schemes. So we are doing the dog-work first. We have the best interests of the site at heart. And, PR, we ain't harassing them or bombarding them.

> It looks to me that far from making h2g2 a better place, the schemes
> Colonel Sellers and Rob are proposing are simply a way for some members
> of the community to start pushing other people around.

As someone deeply involved in the Arbiter scheme, I can confirm that the objective is NOT to start pushing other people around. Au contraire, one of its objectives is to STOP people being pushed around by other researchers or by the italics.

It worries me that it could be seen as a way of pushing people around, and I will see how we can protect people from the feeling that way. One way is that individuals can decline mediation or arbitration, or terminate the process once it has started. It is an opt-in process, not a mandatory one.

> The goal of Barton and co is in my opinion to turn h2g2 into an elite
> 'high IQ' society where anyone who 'doesn't measure up' is treated like
> trash. How is that in keeping with Douglas Adams dream?

Well there are some astonishingly high IQs here - there are also some sweetly naive people too. I cannot comment on DNA's dream. My view is that the site is big enough for most of the people here, regardless of what 'Barton and co' (whoever 'and co' may be) want to do.

> It's not my place to suggest what Mark and Peta do, but I will tell
> you what I would do if I was one of the italics.

Fine - I often give the italics unasked advice - and they usually ignore it.

> If I was one of italics and the people carried on the way they've
> been going on my website I would boot them right out of here on their
> backsides in a heartbeat! Terminate all their accounts! End of problem.

And I love you too!

> Further more if any of these idiots dared to bother this website again
> or make ANY offensive remarks on ANY other website I would report them
> to the BBC Legal team and ask the police to deal with them.

I feel another donation to Amnesty coming on...

> I'll back under another name when the idiots are deal with. Until then
> I've got better things to do than waste my time trying to reason with morons!

Do whatever you like. As I quote until the words stick in my throat:

"I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
Voltaire was a wise man living in turbulent times.

I am sorry if you are offended by the places where I disagree with you, PR. In fact most of the time I am disagreeing with HOW you have said things, though in some places I also disagree with WHAT you have said.

I do agree with a lot of what you have said, it is a shame that you pollute the message with offensive phraseology.

a girl called Ben
who only has one account, and intends to keep it that way

How can the User Playboy Reporter (U110017) post here (and in other threads) without these posts showing on hir personal space? It's a nifty feature and I want one too!

Tube

Before this escalates, can we just pop in and say something to put Playboy Reporter's recent posting in context?

Playboy Reporter wanted to send a final message to h2g2 and then stop using his Playboy Reporter account. He has been the focus of a number of seriously threatening messages (not on h2g2, but related to his h2g2 usage) and is genuinely worried that someone will attempt to trace him personally. Because of this his decision to take up a new identity seems to be a very sensible one. Personal threats are not acceptable and *no-one* should be expected to to tolerate them.

There is nothing to be gained from starting another flame war in response to his leaving message. Please, could everyone let Playboy Reporter leave quietly and resume a new, more constructive identity.

Thanks.

Hi Italics!

I agree with what you say about threats.
I do not want a flame war (I do take your posting not as insinuating such a thing and I feel that my postings regarding PR's two final postings as not paving the road to a flame war)
I have not been on the FolKZ or whatever fora.

But I feel that I might enquire whether in a posting which refers to an activity I am actively involved in (Arbiter Scheme) and later calls unspecified Users "Idiots" "Morons" and suggests them to be removed from the site, does infact apply to *me* as well. This is the closest I have ever come to being insulted here and I would really like to know whether I was included in that reference to the ones involved in the Scheme. I feel that I was, because I am named as a co-editor and I would like to have some clarification.
If Playboy Reporter choses to assume a new identity and does not asnwer to my question, fine. Hir choice. But may I please ask that question anyway?

Thanks!

Tube
wondering whether "leaving quietly" fits with posting #849

Y'know, I logged on just to work on a couple of non-Arbiter (What!!!) entries - it gets so tiring ripping down the infrastructure all the livelong day - and now this. I feel that PR's post - which allow me to state emphatically I am glad to see unmoderated - speaks quite loudly all by its lonesome, and needs no further deconstruction by moi. (Note: that's French for "me"; no need to look it up.) There's really nothing for me to add that agcBen and others haven't said (and will say) better.

This may change. I reserve the right to get stupidly bent-out-of-shape at some as-yet unspecified time. So sue me.

Two quick clarifications. The members of the Arbiter Development Team are directly involved because they accepted my pleading invitation to help. I had an idea - broached during the initial one-week suspension and not after the 'lifetime ban' took effect - that desperately needed some much-appreciated seasoning by more experienced members of the h2g2 hoi polloi. ('Nother note: buddies of Beavis may look that one up for themselves.)

Also, unless you and I have formally exchanged direct pleasantries, please refer to me as 7rob7. There are a lot of other 'Rob's' onsite, and we wouldn't want you to go condemning any of them by mistake, would we? However, if you wish, you may continue to call me "moron", etc., and I'll call you, oh I don't know, how 'bout: [infantile rearranging of PR's nickname that I decided against posting. Darn.]?

So please watch that the tar you're slinging about doesn't strike the innocent. I'm the one readying the torches and pitchforks, and you should be very careful that your statements cannot be misinterpreted to include others who deserve your respect rather than your rage.

Odd. I'm not feeling as refreshed as I ought. Funny, that. Thanks for a swell start to the day. We must do it again soon. Kiss-kiss.

-7rob7, who did not write an 'Embitter Proposal'

Son-of-note: Posts #883 - 886 appeared while I was writing my reply. No undying harrassment intended. Thanks.

Tube - use of the 'unsubscribe' button, I imagine.

Wow! That really does the trick

Tube
taking two years to find that out

Great to see the italics pro-actively spreading sweetness, light and fire-retardant foam. *waves to the italics*

However, like Tube, I want to know if I am included in the list of morons or not. (I think I would take it as a compliment, and would be disappointed too be left out).

I would like to quote the final sentances of my overlong deconstruction addressed to PR:

> I am sorry if you are offended by the places where I
> disagree with you, PR. In fact most of the time I am
> disagreeing with HOW you have said things, though in
> some places I also disagree with WHAT you have said.

> I do agree with a lot of what you have said, it is
> a shame that you pollute the message with offensive
> phraseology.

The italics are right, no-one needs or deserves threats, and it is good to know that PR has decided to continue to h2g2.

However, I do hope that he manages to refrain from directing attacks and insults against individuals in his next incarnation here.

*still trying to be part of the solution*

***B

I hope that this experience with the unpleasantness of having such threats directed against himself will encourage Playboy to not direct threats against other people. I deplore all such threats, and I am saddened to see such things occuring on h2g2, whoever has been targetted.

-Xanthia

This post has been removed.

Oh no, not again

***B

Nice subject-line, Ben.

I felt it was "a little strong", too.

Tube

The last moderated post was me. It's too bad it can't be displayed, considering that Playboy Reporter has said far worse. It was an answer to him.

A highlight of it was that I proposed the theory that his "threats" are just as much an act of histrionics as his departure, his return and subsequent warped interpretation of the intelligence thread, the threats he *did* make to Barton, the stupid accusation that Einauni was LeKZ and threats to deal with her... in short, everything he's done.

There. That much should get by.

Oh yeah... I also want to reiterate a question I asked, to all those who abused LeKZ. Given Playboy Reporter's behavior, do you think he was worth it?

Well, in any case the wording's better.

Well, in any case the wording's better.

Well, I did not think the Colonel's posting was that strong! Who on earth is this not-to-be-mentioned-any-more guy? I mean he's being pampered like he's royalty!!! He definitely has delusions of grandeur... Just a brief note - agcB, LeKZ never once on Topica threatened to kill PR or anybody else and it is not in character for any of them. I read the entire thing from beginning to end and there was not one actual threat against any person in it. People were criticised, insulted even, but not anywhere close to the worst I've seen so far ... in fact, nothing any stronger than the nameless individual calling us jerks, idiots and morons here. Calling a substantial group of people jerks, idiots and morons ... please, pray tell, is that insulting or not??? I am getting confused here...

And this guy is extended the courtesy of being allowed his nasty parting shot in preparation for setting up a nicey-nice safe new identity and userspace here...

And I'm in danger of getting booted off the site merely for referring to him here ...

again ...?

Hoovooloo, how DARE you talk to him like that!!! Errr... how did you talk to him, again?