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

Entry: Don't run with scissors - A1042714
Author: Roger - U227116

This seems to be an interesting article with a clear warning message.

Um, I know y'all are having some fun and games, but do we need to drag it into Peer Review?

This entry does not meet the Writing-Guidelines. Would you remove it from Peer Review?

Thanks.

I wonder how this one sits with the House Rules

It sure as hell don't belong in PR. Did you submit this SEF? As an ACE you really ought to know better.

I think the submission might be a spin-off of a conversation SEF and some others were having on the h2g2guru mailing list. But as I said in my first post, I really don't think it needs to be dragged into PR -- it's not the place for "in jokes", which is the category this seems to fall into.

I'm wondering about the copyright issues involved in using BBC graphics. Mina said that we (meaning any h2g2 Researcher) should yikes anything we have doubts about and let the mods or the Team give it the thumbs up or thumbs down.

On the other hand Frankie Roberto has made a website using h2g2 graphics which as far as I know hasn't been pulled

I don't believe it was the author who necessarily did the graphics. There's this one by Jim Lynn, as well: A732377

Ok, I think I've managed to remove it from PeerReview. Simply clicking on the deleted button does it, right? I'm still so new though, it's all happening so fast

Yours confusedly, Roger.

Nope, this is still in Peer Review. Because when you delete an entry, you don't really delete it, you just hide it, and the associated conversations are still associated. And the Peer Review thread for an entry is essentially an associated conversation of a sort.

Anyways, I'll try and fashion you a link that you should be able to click on to remove the entry from Peer Review:

<./>SubmitReviewForum?action=removethread&rfid=1&h2g2id=1042714</.>

I've removed this from PR. SEF - don't do this again because it's just annoying. It's not big and it's not clever.

I've only just got back online. I was going to remove this once I found that Roger hadn't but the doorbell rang.

The main reason I did it was because I hadn't been actually tried many of the buttons in PeerReview about which I should have been able to inform people as a Guru. I wanted to do my tests on the dev server but that was unavailable as you know. When this article came along it looked as though it (and the author) were fair game for a spot of testing. If the dev server is back in operation now I'll be able to complete my tests there.

What do you mean 'fair game'? I get the feeling that I'm part of some bigger picture here, and you're not telling me about it

Could someone perhaps explain what's going on?

Still very confusedly yours, Roger.

"I wanted to do my tests on the dev server but that was unavailable as you know."

Actually, the dev server has been working fine at least since yesterday afternoon, and you submitted this article after midnight, so you could and should have used the dev server. In any case, even if the dev server were down, I really think it could have waited until it came back.

If you wanted to test Peer Review, perhaps you could have written an article yourself and submitted it. That way you could have then experienced the whole process, not just the technical bits. And you might have enriched peoples' lives in the process.

If you were already a guru, Roger, you would have seen some of the off-site conversations which partly explain this. I'll see if I can do so without revealing anything too much.

The h2g2 part of the BBC, unlike some other areas and other organisations who should know better but don't, is sensible enough to test out any new software with a few volunteers to try and make sure it doesn't break/crash before inflicting it on the majority of users. The testing site or development server is what I meant by the "dev server".

The other conversations took place on Yahoo in the volunteer group there. When I had been unable to access the dev server a few days ago for some more testing which I felt I needed to do, Jim had said it wasn't always available (you don't need to know why). When you first registered and started some conversations here you seemed to have upset Mort. I didn't see whatever you'd done on your space as the messages arrived very late in Yahoo (a serious ongoing problem there). All I found was this article where you had forgotten to tick the "not for review" box.

So, since you yourself had seemed from the conversations to be trying out lots of things, I thought this would be a good article to use in my own testing. Even if you hadn't been aware of the tick boxes and the functionality of peer review already (by virtue of being a doppleganger) then it would serve as what I thought was a mostly harmless introduction to these things. I like multi-purpose things (like double-entendres and puns). Unfortunately Jim removed the article before I had a chance to test the location of all the buttons in all the skins and before you could find out how to (or indeed whether you could) remove it yourself.

... and that's what is called a simulpost round here, Roger!

You didn't say when the dev server would be back, Jim. You implied finality on the current round of testing as noted by someone else in the group. I don't spend my time constantly looking for the dev server and this article just suddenly came along (reasons given in message to Roger). I was having enough trouble even getting into normal h2g2 pages. The site has been very bad over the last week for some reason.

I've explained elsewhere why I'm not submitting anything important to PeerReview.

You've explained one mystery only to replace it with another SEF. I'm not sure why you're calling me a doppelganger. Do you think someone is pretending to be me, as that would be very strange.

From reading your space SEF, I see that you are one of these 'bugfinders'. Are they some kind troublemaking group? Everyone seems to be very suspicious of everything they say.

Natalie has also given me a very clear message about the badges. Many thanks to her for being so clear while everyone else was so cryptic.

Yours clearly, Roger.

You've explained one mystery only to replace it with another SEF. I'm not sure why you're calling me a doppelganger. Do you think someone is pretending to be me, as that would be very strange.

From reading your space SEF, I see that you are one of these 'bugfinders'. Are they some kind troublemaking group? Everyone seems to be very suspicious of everything they say.

Natalie has also given me a very clear message about the badges. Many thanks to her for being so clear while everyone else was so cryptic.

Yours clearly, Roger.

I founded the bugfinders, so i should probably explain...

The bugfinders main purpose is to find bugs on h2g2 and report them to Jim Lynn, who then fixes them. We like to have a laugh though, so we often try to reveal the bugs in an amusing way. Because not many people get our jokes, they get annoyed with us, and tell us to go away. You can feel free to tell us to go away as well.

Sorry to have bothered you, and I hope you enjoy your time on h2g2.

Tango

Might I make a serious request: Don't try and be amusing with bug reports. Just report them with enough detail that I can reproduce them (offline in email if you think there's a security issue involved) and I can make sure they at least make it onto the buglist.

Amusing bug reports are usually neither in my experience.