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

Maybe I’m missing something, here?

I’m new (or at least recent) to H2G2, unaffiliated with the BBC, somewhat disappointed with what I have found here, and a bit confused by this problem.

On the one hand, I had hoped to find a DNA friendly site that combines information and ideas, wit and wisdom, facts and fun. What I appear to have found is a site dedicated to not-rocking the boat; no-laughing allowed; and the attitude ‘we can’t say what we will accept, but we know it when we see it.’ Also present are some really great people; some who can write, some who think, some who want to have fun, and some who have an exaggerated sense of their importance here.

Overall it’s a great site. Overall the people are friendly, helpful, and strangely dedicated to one dead man’s vision.

It bothers me to know that the kind of stuff I would most enjoy writing will never become an edited entry, even if other pieces will. But, this isn’t my site. I am perfectly capable of creating my own site, mind you. Still, I’d like to think we are here for the sense of community; to see and be seen, read and be read.

There are encyclopedia sites that probably do a better job on the dry stuff, so I would resist the site being merely that. Unfortunately, those who pay the bills are paying the cost to be the boss. I am forced to respect that no matter how much I feel I belong, no matter how much I work or contribute, it will never be my site.

I have no real rights, here; and no vote. There is no freedom of speech. No one is obligated to post my rantings. There is no economic, political, spiritual, or other pressure that I can bring to bear.

I have been forced to acknowledge that I can choose, of my own free will, to stay or go. That is my only real choice. If I’m here, I play by their rules.

I don’t expect to go to a public park and start rearranging the bushes. I don’t go to someone else’s house and tell them they have to put away magazines I don’t like. I don’t expect to visit an office building and have the right to post my writing on their bulletin boards.

Everyone here needs to make a choice. Unless you are holding the purse strings, you need to decide. Is it worth it? In the larger scheme of things, are we better off with the site or without it?

If we all left, no one would support it very long, and it would disappear. But, as Prosser said to Arthur Dent, “Have you any idea how much damage that bulldozer would suffer if I just let it roll straight over you? None at all.” It may or may not hurt us as individuals, but the only thing it would do for the BBC would be to save them the money.

Do we want it? Or, don’t we? Last one out, turn off the lights.

>>What I appear to have found is a site dedicated to not-rocking the boat; no-laughing allowed; and the attitude 'we can’t say what we will accept, but we know it when we see it.'

Which h2g2 are you in?

>>Also present are some really great people; some who can write, some who think, some who want to have fun, and some who have an exaggerated sense of their importance here.

Oh, this h2g2...

>>Overall it’s a great site. Overall the people are friendly, helpful, and strangely dedicated to one dead man’s vision.

Most of us are great fans of DNA. It is a great vision

J,

I cannot tell what part of the first quote you were referring to, or if you don't see any of it this way?

Certainly you would have a right to your opinion whatever you meant; but I was referring to the 'do not be controversial', 'do not be too funny', and 'we reserve the right to delete entries, even if we have already determined that they are okay' aspects that I've run into.

I have not yet suffered these fates, myself; but only heard of them from those who post. I have been told, by some, that my series on "Wilderness Survival on Earth" is to HGTTG-ish, and too 'trying to hard to be DNA-ish'.

2) Yes, I do mean people like you, at least on the first three counts. I won't jump to conclusions here, but some of our peers seem to feel that we researchers are in charge.

I am also a great fan of DNA. All his books (including both 'Liffs'), audio tapes, CD's, VHS, and even a 12-inch, 33rpm, vinyl HGTTG. There is not a writer to whom I have been more devoted. (this is where I say, 'However')

However, this is not the site I would have expected. Not bad, mind you; but maybe not as good.

I remember how confused I was when DNA wrote of his disappointment with the TV series, which I had considered a marvelous achievement. I was even more upset when he wrote that he had gone off humor. It was as if Albert Einstein had said that he no longer believed in gravity.

I was similarly flummoxed when his vision for a website sounded like little more than a free-for-all encyclopedia. Thank God it's not that bad. I'm not leaving yet. At least the conversations are as good as they get. And, I rarely come by but that I learn something. (the sad thing is I could do that last part with an encyclopedia.)

>>I cannot tell what part of the first quote you were referring to, or if you don't see any of it this way?

What I appear to have found is a site dedicated to not-rocking the boat; no-laughing allowed; and the attitude 'we can’t say what we will accept, but we know it when we see it.'

That's only the BBC's view and sometimes the italics view. Largely, the italics have a great sense of humor. They can't say what they'll accept because it's simply too time consuming, I gather. There are too many concepts and exceptions. As for not rocking the boat, of course the italics and BBC aren't going to. The researchers do it enough

>>I won't jump to conclusions here, but some of our peers seem to feel that we researchers are in charge.

It's kind of amazing. Everyone knows that h2g2 wouldn't work without researchers, the BBC and the italics. We're all in charge of different things. The researchers are more or less in charge of the community, Peer Review and writing the entries. BBC reserves the right to make itself in charge of anything, but isn't in charge of everything. The italics try to make sure that this runs well, and are largely in charge of the editorial aspect. This is how I see it anyway

>>However, this is not the site I would have expected

As has been repeated frequently, it's not a fan site.

Thanks for clearing things up.

I agree that we all have our input, it's just that there is one guy, or one group, that has a switch somewhere labelled 'everybody out of the pool', and it isn't me.

More's the pity that it cannot incorporate elements of a fan site. I guess I'll have to find one, or build one, and split my time between the two.

Perhaps it just remains that I was wowed by DNA's writing, but left a little flat by his vision. Nobody can be a genius at everything.

Ah well. I'll be around for awhile. It sure beats solitaire.

Hello, FordsTowel.

Welcome to Hell.

You can have everything you want, but you have to pay the price.

I've been here almost two years and learn something new every month.
(never mind that it's usually something I knew before but forgot)

When I found H2G2, I was barely online. I had just had the computer built by an acquaintance of mine and I really had no idea what I was doing.

H2G2 taught me most of what I know about computers and the net today.

Douglas himself was part of my education in modern humor.
Having tried to write it myself, for radio and here, I can tell you that it is a deadly grim business.

As for this site? Hey, I have no real complaints because I don't know any better. I judge all other sites by this one.
The Beeb is like any parent, sometimes they pay attention, other times they don't.
But the fact remains that they paid for something that apparently there were few other bids for.

As a writer and a really bad cartoonist, I have found almost no censorship here.
Either I have good manners...
or I'm working above the radar...


Hi, Jodan!

You have to expect some ing. Personally, I don't think it happens unfairly that often. Three entries have been hidden out of 5000 in the EG? And one was a possible copyright issue.

As a fellow really bad cartoonist, occasional contributor to the post and EG contributor, I think this whole thing is being blown out of proportion...

Hi (TS)

> "one was a possible copyright issue"

Oh? None of these were for copyright vios:

* breaking into cars
* testicle cuffs
* home-made pr0n

Oh?
Okay. I trust you.
I'll go back to what I was doing.
Let me know when something important happens.

Thanks!

Hi, Lucinda, long time no see!

I didn't know that Breaking into Cars was hidden

I was talking about 'The Hanging Gardens of Babylon'

HI tr,
and thanks for the warm welcome. Congratulations on the getting-to-the-web bit. Glad to have you.

I may find myself complaining a bit here and there; but, in the larger scheme of things, there's nothing terribly oppressive to me here. I have plenty of creative outlets for my muse, and am only too happy to share some here.

I look forward to seeing some bad cartoons. They are often my favorites.

Hi J,
That's just the kind of thing I was trying to get across. It's really sort of a tempest in a teapot. My most serious concern was that nobody would bother to read my stuff. I suppose I should have been more concerned whether it was worth the read.

Tonsil does the cartooning now. I'm much too important

There is no logical argument that I can offer in the face of that self-confidence.

FT, the writing drives itself.
Sometimes you get noticed for the wrong reasons and sometimes you get ignored for the right reasons.
The accolades are few and far between and sometimes the mere fact that you actually tried has you sharing perspective with the almost illiterate.

If you haven't already, check out just off the Front Page.
A plethora of writing, lying and bad cartoons can be found there.

<./>ThePost</.> is a great place to read. Also <./>RF5</.>

I agree with the references to 'The Post'. I've just become acquainted with Wowbagger's 'Life on H2G2' cartoon area, and I found it hard to not continue through the lot.

I did manage to save a few for next time.

They change it every week.

I just think it is interesting that Douglas Adams himself will be censored according to the above guidelines. Several parts of 'So Long and Thanks for all the Fish' for instance will be unsuitable for this site.

AGG/GAG agrees.
That was part of the original manifesto.
I can't quote it exactly, but the part that Jwf had a strong hand in said something like: We believe that the rules governing the edited guide would have prevented the founder himself from being published.

They run stuff on the tube with warnings: may not be suitable for children, impressionable or unimaginative minds.

I think the point that has been made many times, that this message on the bottom of the page:

"Most of the content on h2g2 is created by h2g2's Researchers, who are members of the public. The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of any external sites referenced. In the event that you consider anything on this page to be in breach of the site's House Rules, please click here. For any other comments, please click on the Feedback button above."

pretty much covers it. The House Rules are fairly explicit. To keep changing them or adding to them without any real new problems is to create a problem where one did not exist.

The part that says, "The views expressed are theirs and unless specifically stated are not those of the BBC", should cover a lot of ground legally and morally.

off the main topic- FT- if you want a douglas adams fan site, there'e one at http://www.floor42.com