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

Well, shall we rally as a collective on the EP front?

Errr... I think we will do what we did as SBVM: each will post whatever s/he thinks and we will be the vocal minority who tries to talk some sense into people.

However, we could use this as a discussion between ourselves to establish common aims.

That sounds like a good idea.

Statement one: The h2g2 italics are not the enemy.

Let's start there.

Right.

Mission objective (1): Get Ed Pol to set out their reasons/standards

Mission objective (2): Decide whether there is some sense in the grid suggestion (A965252)

Agreed - but they are part of the problem in that they are actively discouraging possible solutions.

I have that down to Ed Pol (or the Eds not knowing what Ed Pol wants).

On 2) I think not- it doesn't tell us anything common sense doesn't, it just looks pretty. I'm in favour of coming up with a workable way of using the examples proposal.

One way forward would be to come up with titles and synopses of possible entries, and ask for a yes/no/probably, with reasons for answer laid out.

As I suggested in the "what's the point"-thread (F114453?thread=299253). I think there is little sense in under-categorising the "otherwise objectionable" category of thew House Rules.
whatever the sub-categories are, the Eds and Ed Pol will decise what stays and what not.
what we need is *their* guidelines.

And for that we need access to their minds...

We can read them electronically, of course. But they'll have to be removed first. They must be properly prepared... measured... diced...

Anyone starting a petition to get the head of Editorial Policy's brain in a jar (assuming of course it isn't already...)

An examples chart would give us their guidelines. For example:

Getting into your car without the keys

An article explaining a method of opening car doors without the keys, and without damaging the door.

The above example would be failed, on the grounds that it could be used to carry out an ilegal activity, e.g. break into a vehicle.

FB, this presupposes a brain, does it not?

KerAvon: True, but we need them to give us a list, not vice versa as the Eds are suggesting with their grid.

So let's come up with a fully formed, workable alternative and present it to them.

oops, sorry about the missing "r"

No worries. A missing r I can cope with

Sack the current Ed Pol guys and give the jobs to the SBVM?

SCNR

I feel that there is not much to be formed about an alternative for the Eds.
They will always be the ones to decide and EdPol will be the ones to override them.
If the grid is unnecessary and unusable, there is no point in coming up with an alternative, I fear.
I can live with the Eds deciding on a case-to-case basis as that is the only way to handle such a huge community. But I know the lines along which the Eds move. If EdPol suddenly starts interfereeing I want to know their lines of motivation so that I can a) try to avoid being censored b) protest in a sensible manner if I don't like their decision.

"So let's come up with a fully formed, workable alternative and present it to them."

Everything continues at present, with the sole difference that Editorial Policy are accountable for their decisions?

Fully formed, reasonable, workable, and what we've been asking for for the last five weeks now.

So far...

Well.

FB

Why do you think an alternative is useless?