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

Entry: Innocent until proven guilty? - A808436
Author: Researcher 201027 - U201027

Is this okay?

This post has been removed.

Apparently not

But they need a little bit long for that ... after all, Peer Review is a quite exposed place for such a thing ...

Additionally, it wasn't suitable for Peer Review anyway. A better place for the discussion might have been the h2g2 Speaker's Corner (A756605), though I'd suggest now isn't the right time to open up that can of worms.

Jimster

Oh well, chalk up another victory for the censors, and move this thread out of Peer Review.

What was it about, anyway?

Dear Lucinda,

It was about wether the "Mental Health act of 1983" adheres in a sufficient way to either the "Universal declaration of human rights", or to the "European convention of human rights".

Kind regards,
Mikael

And do you have any idea why this has broken the house rules?

Sounds pretty harmless to me.

Dear Cefpret,

I have no idea, it might have been because I also provided the correct internet addresses (URL's) for the comparison:
http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm
www.conventions.coe.int/treaty/en/treaties/html/005.htm

I guess I could also have referred to the fifth ammendment of the American constitution, but I didn't.

Kind Regards,
Mikael

Dear Cefpret,

It might have been because I have now understood the URL to the "European convention of human rights" is:
http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/en/Treaties/Html/005.htm
I.e without the "www", since I can't see my original entry i don't know if this might be the explanation.

Kind regards,
Mikael

Dear Cefpret,

The URL for the British "Human Rights Act" is:
http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/80042--d.htm#sch1ptI

Kind regards,
Mikael

An email was sent explaining why the entry was removed. If the author has any further queries, then we'll be happy to answer them via email.

In the meantime, can you remove the entry from Peer Review please?

Dear Mina,

I have sifted trough my emails since the 22nd and I am sorry I can not find the email you are referring to.
I would be happy to comply with your request, if I at least had recieved that eleged email, and then hopefully would know why, and it what way, my entry broke the house rules.

If you could re-send the email you referring to, I am happy to remove my entry.

Kind regards,
Mikael

Be that as it may, please remove this thread from Peer Review.

Sorry Mina for my spelling,

I mean that alleged email.

I am waiting to receive the re-sent email, so we close this "can of worms" to quote one of the replies in the Peer review.

Looking forward to a happy ending of this whole matter.
Regards,
Mikael

I've forwarded a copy to you.

If you click the Peer Review link at the top of the conversation you should see the word 'remove' at the side of the link to this thread. If you click that, the entry will be removed.

Dear Cefpret,

Since I respect you for putting your neck out, I will remove this conversation from the Peer review immediately and unconditionally.

Kind Regards,
Mikael

I've been dead curious about this entry from the get go, but it's been moderated since I found it. 'Innocnet until proven guilty' is a very misunderstood phrase. A pity I missed it.

Dear Two Bit Trigger Pumping Moron,

I have now received the mail that explains why;
I am happy to forward the mail to you, if you send me an email to reply to.

Do you think this would be against the moderation process??

Best Regards,
Mikael

Surely not; the email is sent to you to ensure your privacy. If you want to forward it to someone else, this totally is your business.