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

Just wondered

Don't think so.

Of course not Andy!

We're very happy to have American Researchers on h2g2.

There are Researchers on h2g2 from South Africa and Antartica, Europe and America, all are most welcome.

Is what because who is Americain? Quincy says he's Americain. I do not know of LeKZ, is Americaine or not, but what could this possibly have to do? Are they so prejudiced here?

ANTARCTICA? Seriously?

H.

Nonsense! This place is rather prejudice-free.

Tim Smith - Antarctic Correspondent. Now back at home in America.

Check out his Edited Guide Entries!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/U119367

This is what I thought, that is why I am surprised by the question, but also, who is the 'she' in question? I don't know who is LeKZ, but Quincy is a man. There seems to have been an effort to make them appear to be same person. I can't write English at all well, but I do know rhetorical trickery where it lies, and I can spot cow dung just as well as the next aging hippie. There is manipulation in the words of those with power, and they have not produced any hard proof, so I wonder is it belief, vendetta, what is happening? I know is my tendency to assume the people who have all the power and put a gag on the person they accuse of being someone else who also may not say anything might be concealing something. It is probably senile dementia.

Have you parsed what they wrote. The Editors are making a case by hear say and insinuation. If was evidence for truth, one way or the other, would they not have produced it by now?

S.

Hi Satyagraha!

"who is the 'she' in question?"

A very long story. Link in next post...

"I don't know who is LeKZ, but Quincy is a man."

On what evidence do you based that rather definitive statement?

"There seems to have been an effort to make them appear to be same person."

Where? By whom?

"I can't write English at all well, but I do know rhetorical trickery"

You seem to be doing *very* well...

"There is manipulation in the words of those with power, and they have not produced any hard proof"

What proof would satisfy *you*, personally? Just curious.

"so I wonder is it belief, vendetta, what is happening?"

Why would you think "vendetta"? Of all the possible reasons, what would bring you to that conclusion?

"Have you parsed what they wrote."

Who? The Editors? Personally I doubt *they've* parsed what they wrote. It seems to have been done in haste. People have a tendency here to expect the Editors to be god-like superbeings instead of underpaid low-level BBC employees (hi guys!). Sometimes they just type stuff.

"The Editors are making a case by hear say and insinuation."

If you've seen the Editors make a case, point me to it. They've pointed to two specific transgressions, neither of which, in my opinion, would be grounds for a ban. A suspension, perhaps, but not a ban. On the other hand, if this person does turn out to be LeKZ (and she HAS done it before - obtaining an account here by deception, and specifically by pretending to be a man), she's banned anyway, so there's no need for debate.

"If was evidence for truth, one way or the other, would they not have produced it by now?"

Not necessarily, and for a desperately simple and very, very obvious reason. Said "evidence" may be confidential. It should be made clear on the page announcing the suspension that some of the evidence which may be considered may be confidential. This is unfortunate, but I personally value the privacy this site is obliged to provide, and I think that the privacy of the rule-abiding majority is more important than our knowing every detail of the enforcement of those rules.

Hypothetical example: if you personnally knew a banned person, and knew FOR A FACT because you were there, that they'd signed up again, and you thought they shouldn't, you might email and tell the Editors. You equally might not want that fact announced to all your other friends, especially the one you'd grassed up.

I just hope Quincy ISN'T LeKZ. I'm looking forward to his article on paradigm-shifts.

H.

Satyagraha:

Go here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/U168712

and follow the link to "LeKZWorld".

H.

To echo Satyagraha, the gender issue is a confusing one. The Suspension page includes a paragraph whose essence is mixed up: "Quincy has been contacted and has denied that (s)he is LeKZ, but then again, she denied that it was her when she opened the now-closed Silent Lucidity account."

Would it break any confidences to advise whether Quincy, if contacted verbally, appeared to be male or female? Obviously, a woman claiming NOT to be Quincy would raise several questions, whereas a man claiming not to be Quincy would, I assume, relax most researchers.

x x Fenny (UT for confused people)

Just a quick note in this one.

Hoovooloo said "if you personnally knew a banned person, and knew FOR A FACT because you were there, that they'd signed up again, and you thought they shouldn't, you might email and tell the Editors. You equally might not want that fact announced to all your other friends, especially the one you'd grassed up."

This is close to what happened to me when the Silent Lucidity account was opened. I was in the middle of an MSN Messaging conversation with LeKZ at the time.

But I did not email the eds or otherwise let the cat out of the bag because I assumed - rightly - that she would blow her own gaffe.

I did tell a small number of FoLKZ about it after the event, but only after the event.

Ben

Hi Ben

Thank you for that. I remember you staying off-site during those days, because, as you said, you didn't want to get involved.

An email has been referenced, relating to the two accounts of Satyagraha (in one of the other threads) but I'm staying firmly on the fence on this one. I have opinions, but I'm keeping them to myself.

x x Fenny (UT and unbiased fence-sitting)

I wish I was as wise....

Ben

Here is a strangeness.
LekZ's metasite message area notice has a rule about 'Trolls will be blocked and removed'

??????????

Please explain 'troll' to me. I seemed to have missed that somewhere.
Having experienced 'Silent Lucidity', I thought the feeling I had about Satyagraha was just me flinching in the face of a newness, I didn't want to be suspicious to someone foreign to me. I still don't.

Here is a strangeness.
I went to LekZ's site. I found the voluminous activity and breathless prose. I found french postings. I found emotion dripping everywhere.
I found everything Lekz knows and thinks and wants just spread out and glowing...why does LekZ need more?

And why am I shocked again?

Troll :

An individual who has nothing better to do with their lives than antagonize other people online.

or

An article of wrong, offending or even insulting content, usually posted for the only purpose to provoke reactions against it. This original meaning was extended to include the poster of a troll with the title 'troll'.

Not clear on that last sentence.

Originally a troll seems to have meant the message itself, and later the word became used to describe the writer of the message.

Thank you. The word 'poster' was stuck in my head as a big picture on the wall, held in place with used stick pins....

See you later...