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

Insanity, in fact, is a form of illness. So all I did is to repeat what she said about herself.

Morning all.

Earlier in this Conversation someone started talking about building something positive from this whole event. Excellent idea! Subcom has some very wise words to say on this front, given that the Zaphodistas are a continuing example of a group of Researchers who are trying to build something positive from something that they perceive as negative (I'm talking moderation, of course).

Could I offer some observations? When discussing an issue that you perceive as negative, it's all too easy to let your approach to the debate become negative too. Early on in the life of the Zaphodistas, the discussions about moderation started morphing into heated arguments, clouded by fanatical declarations of the rights of man, and it threatened the whole fabric of the movement; people threw their goo berets away, but luckily those driving the Zaphodistas realised this wasn't what had been intended, did a swift and laudable change of tack, and now things are much more positive. The Zaphodistas are still going, their petition is well worth a read, and although some might argue that nothing has changed since they started, that doesn't in any way diminish what they stand for. (Remember, Peta joined at one point. )

It's true for most of us that when you're having a bad day, things just look bad. It's also true that misery loves company. So if your postings come across as depressed and based mainly round emotion rather than facts or sober argument, not only will you find yourself surrounded by and supported by others who want to wallow in the whingeing bin, you'll also find that those you're arguing with suddenly lose interest. Trying to argue a point rationally is one thing; trying to persuade others that your depressed outlook on life is the *only* true version is much less likely to work, unless you're only trying to appeal to those who are unhappy too.

Although it's earned me the title of 'sleazy politician', this is something that I try to avoid in my postings. Yeah, I kick the walls when I read stuff on h2g2 too. We all do - the h2g2 team is made up of humans who also have good and bad days. But we don't jump on site and pour our frustrations out into the discussion, because it simply doesn't work. Rational discussion is the only way to go; being passionate about something is great, but wallowing in the mire isn't. Those who feel that h2g2 is going down the tubes are only reading the Conversations that deal with heavy issues, like this one. This Conversation is not typical, though it looks like it's calming down into the much more constructive discussions more normally seen on h2g2. That's a relief.

In summary, things have happened, and emotions have run high. I'm not going to open up old wounds by describing every in and out of the past couple of weeks, because that would not be constructive; it would create lots more emotional angst among those involved, and it would only cloud the issues. But talking about how the community can learn from its past and avoid conflict is *always* a healthy topic, as long as it doesn't sink to the level where logic takes a back seat to emotion.

Those who have taken a sabbatical would surely rather come back to a rational debate than a continuing flame war. If this debate can be continued without sweeping emotional generalisations about the state of the Community, or foot-stamping threats of self-imposed exile, it's probably healthy.

Meanwhile, I'm off to hang out in the positive areas of h2g2; this Conversation has turned the corner to positive discussion, and as long as it stays there, things will be OK. Enjoy your chat.

"Those who feel that h2g2 is going down the tubes..."
AFAIK, I am the only Tube around here. And the whole of H2G2 going down (on?) me is something I do not (wish to) feel. Thank you!



Tube

Hurrah for being sensible and balanced. (Except Tube, who's being mad, and supplying the cabaret. )
As Mark says, keep in mind the distinction between those who are leaving as a form of protest action, and those absent for their own personal benefit: to mull over things they perhaps do not agree with, and gather their thoughts for when they return.
I think it's a positive reflection on both sides of the argument- even when feelings were running extremely high- that Azara has been treated fairly and no one's said anything attacking her.(i.e, she's not done anything she should feel bad about, and no one's suggested she should.) Self-control: just as it should be.

*stamps foot and sulks*

I'm not copying Mark... honestly. I just came here to:

[unsubscribe]

Need to move on...

I won't make any points , as people are left to their own devices to whittle out what I've already said, but I'm not going to unsubscribe either.
There are too many funny moments in this thread for me to leave!

Xyroth,

There appear to be some fundamental inconsistencies in your posting Xyroth. Perhaps you can help me to clarify a few points.

> "I should point out, that I am not against the moderation as such, or any of the other rules, just the way that they are currently being interpreted (inconsistantly, and often unhelpfully). as an example of the problems with the moderation, I wrote a "for information" article about file sharing over at http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A544295. This was fine for days, and served it's purpose, but then it went into moderation hell for weeks, (someone must have yikes'd it). when it came back, it was unmodified, with no explanation,and no clue as to why it had been hidden."

The Entry was edited on in the early hours of Bank Holiday Monday, 7th May 2001 at 12:26am GMT. It was referred to me (& therefore temporarily hidden) on Tuesday and re-instated on Wednesday. So it was actually hidden for two days, one of those being a Bank Holiday when the office was closed. So why are you talking about the entry going into moderation hell for weeks? That's clearly factually untrue Xyroth?

> "When asked about it, the italics did not reply."

Really Xyroth? Are you *sure* you remembered to post your query? (I've used the search engine to look for both the A number and the title of your entry.) Where did you ask me about this, exactly? I'll certainly apologise if I didn't reply to a message posted on my page or in the Moderation Helpdesk. Can you post the URL of your query here please.

Peta

Wonko: "She replied very harsh, maybe you could call it an insult ("sperm-donating male")" - This is a misinterpretation. She did not call you this. "Sperm-donating male" is her disparaging euphemism for her own father.

Your insanity comment is way out of line. She is no longer here to defend herself, so please refrain from ad hoc character assassinations.

Mark, you're gonna ruin my reputation talking like that!!!!

no peta, not at this time, I will have to go look for it. it was probably in the thread about napster though, soon after the link to the page.

another thought, regarding the avoidance of people stalking people they don't like and yikes'ing any post that could be missinterpreted. this could be resolved by a minor code change so that when someone yikes's someone else, the post number, who it is by, and who yikes'd it were stored in a database. with a simple extra procedure that checks for persistant yikes'ing, it would then be easy for TPTB to spot that it was the same people doing it. I think this would make it much harder to get away with in future.

I would like to comment that those sort of comments that people were making about insanity and mental illness are certainly offensive, and if made about black people or women, would be illegal as well. it is partly those sort of comments (and quite a few that were much worse) which were being bandied about by people who should know better that set the scene for lekz's tempory ban.

it was this and the cross thread stalking that definately set the scene, and therefore which we need to tackle.

Thanks for stepping in Col Sellers. Wonko, insanity may be an illness, but does that mean you should be allowed to abuse somebody on that basis? And after talking to Arpeggio, I've also found out that Multiple Personality Disorder is not insanity, either. Sure, it's a mental disorder, but that doesn't mean the person is insane - as long as each personality is sane.

I'm just sick of people stigmatising those with mental illnesses. They're people too, and if you can't see it, then *you're* the one with the serious mental problems.

(Apologies for wallowing, Mark. I agree with the decision to ban Arp, that post was way out of line and, as I understand it, after a warning. But I won't tolerate abuse, particularly when that person is not here to defend themself.)

Hello,

If there was any cross-thread stalking, I am truly sad to hear it, since it seems to be an awful way of conducting business here. Nobody should be treated that way. But in the case of this thread, that doesn't seem to have been the problem (I hardly think Azara was out to get Arpeggio), and I don't think Mark and Peta would be on a vendetta either. I also still don't believe in an anti-intellectual crusade (even if there were a personal vendetta). In any case, I have not been privy to a lot of some of the accusations behind the scenes here (frankly, I've been busy in real life), and so I will remain neutral, since I don't know all the facts. I guess that was a pointless paragraph then.

I do agree that the comments about insanity are excessive and only serve to dehumanize Arpeggio. It's really inappropriate (although I don't see how they're exactly illegal), and, even if you have had bad experiences with her in the past, never really called for. We're all a little worked up now and we tend to say things we later regret. Let's try to move past that now.

Yours,
Jake

If that posting of Arpeggio's was about Peta and Mark it was really rude and totally wrong because Peta and Mark are two great people who work really hard and are really nice and she shouldn't have brought Peta's kids into it because even though I know nothing about them if they've got Peta as a mother they must be great
for Peta & Mark and some too

Hi Niwt,

You started your post with the word "if." Thank you. You've demonstrated a level of maturity and open mindedness that a lot people here (and I don't exclude myself) can learn from.

It's only so I don't get into more trouble for insulting Arpeggio

Hi folks,

it's quite nice to see you are very tolerant, friendly, careing and ever forgiving people. That's an astonishing achivement of democracy. Well. (Did you read the entry about "well"?) Good.

Only there's one unsolved question: How to deal with people who are *not* tolerant, friendly, caring and ever forgiving? How to deal with someone, who, when friendly contracted, first throws in an insult (CS, we *have* a common language, and sperm-donating male *is* an insult) and later accuses this friendly communcation seeking fellow (in case you are lost, I'm talking about me ) to be a pervert (CS, you agree about that being an insult, do you)?

Does claiming to have multiply personalities gives you the right to insult and attack friendly people, including defenceless minors?

How come an intelligent and well educated person as the person claiming to have multiple personalities does such things, which, by the way, have *nothing* to do with having multiple personalities, even if it were so? I think that my hint I gave as an explanation is the most forgiving one, as illness exculpates from guilt.

I didn't do any harm to her as I only repeated what she said about herself, so there's no need for her or anyone to defend her.

Who has to be defended are the many persons who were very friendly to her and who she attacked and insulted. And I think that was done by the decision to ban her.

Wonko-the-Sane

"How come an intelligent and well educated person as the person claiming to have multiple personalities does such things, which, by the way, have *nothing* to do with having multiple personalities, even if it were so?"

Easy: even a self-proclaimed "genius" can have poor social skills.

I think posting 5 by you quite nicely sums it up: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F71894?thread=127866

This is a very interesting thread but I'm not going to post replies because someone might yell at me

Awww.