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

Hi also, PSD,

And to be accused of being racist, as in WhiteAinsley, was in very, very bad taste, as I said earlier.

It was not me, it was Sue-L.

I really hope you will apologise - I have never, ever accused anyone of being racist in my life, and was very upset by your comment!

Well, it wasn't me, Sue -but I'll apologise for now until whoever it was gets back to this thread. I have to admit to mixing up individuals a lot on the Food Board, and two Sues (with, I notice, another two just joined), just makes things worse especially on controversial threads.

again.

Dee

Scribbler - agnosticism does actually seem to be a very sensible and logical conclusion really, something it really isn't given credit too. Personally though, I just can't believe in a god. I've thought about it plenty and although at times I can easily see how people can believe in some god (although I do find the Christian God, and many of the other gods, very difficult to understand really - the whole issue is fascinating but, for me, too contradicting), I just don't myself.

And, don't worry, I wasn't trying to make fun of any councelling service hospitals might offer - it's a brilliant idea. I did just find the idea a bit comical when you think of all the people they could come across - every religion, sect, cult, non-believers, semi-believers, agnostics... They'd need to have so many tickable boxes for the form to work at all!!

* should probably have read
"really isn't given credit for"

Not quite sure whether that sentence works anyway! (But it's not an English exam, you get my general idea)

Hi folks

The way I see it humankind has always tried to explain our existence. As we’ve discovered more about how life has evolved we’ve steadily discounted each and every explanation until we’re now left with natural selection.

Early tribes endowed rocks, trees, rivers, etc with supernatural powers – the Egyptians thought the sun was a god – the Greeks and Romans believed in a pantheon – as do the Chinese and Hindus – Christians/Jews/Moslems all believe in an all-seeing all-knowing god.

[And through the ages, men (almost exclusively men) have used this to gain power. They’re still doing it. Imagine the pope (to take just one example) making an announcement to the faithful, dressed in a T-shirt and shorts. No one would take any notice!

Put him in a tall hat (how tall, I wonder?) and some silken robes, and all of a sudden his words have more gravitas. It was ever thus.]

The reference I made earlier to atheists/humanists believing in one (or three if you consider the trinity) less god(s) than Christians believe in can be found here:

http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=285

Cheers, Paul

Hello all,

We were alerted to this thread via the moderation system. We're just popping in to say we're happy to welcome new users to h2g2 (indeed - welcome!) but we do have to point out that we can't allow people to start new discussions over here to somehow bypass systems of moderation on other message boards. Any that do this are likely to be failed and if this is done repeatedly then your account may be at risk.

Though we welcome lively discussion (you'll find lots of it on h2g2) we can't allow our site to be used as a medium by which other users (including users on other sites) can be baited, or as somewhere to post messages which have been failed as offensive on other sites. We're here not to state any wish to censor anyone, but simply to point out that our resources are limited - we run on a bare minimum of staff, and we do have to call a halt to threads that get out of control from a moderation point of view.

In sum, what we're saying is: normal rules still apply - you can find them here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/houserules

(It really does just go to show, you can't be too careful. )

h2g2 Editors

H2G2 editors - thank you for such a nice message!
I think the reasoning behind moving over here was so as not to cause unnecessary offence and pointless arguments - ie, nobody here believed that what was being posted on the other thread was offensive but, as others seemed to, it made more sense to post here. That makes little sense I know but, basically, in our eyes the messages weren't offensive so posting them here was more courteous? Something like that.

(Another Mitchell fan then? )

x

Hi h2g2 Editors

Thankyou for clarifying your guidelines, and I'm exceptionally happy that my post has been restored, as it was not to be offensive - but to add a little humour. I know it wasn't food related hence I posted it on here.

I was going to have a rant to why it was complained about, but I knew you would see that here was no reason for it to be hidden -
AND yes it's very funny.....
a personal favourite of mine

Rosie_Ro

the joke is post 47 so you can see what the fuss (or unfuss) was about.

Lotte, I'm glad no on heard by embarassingly loud snort of laughter at your joke!!
Thanks for putting it back, editors

x

I wasn't concentrating *at all* when I posted that...

I meant
"no one heard my"

All of our content is constantly open to review, so there's no guarantee that everything will always stay on the site forever.

Also, as we're a site with limited resources, we have to be especially careful to abide by the rules. Getting it wrong could be disastrous for us. However, as we said, we try not to censor unnecessarily. We also didn't want to be hosting an argument that's been stopped on another site. (We've got enough of our own! )

But in answer to your question...this particular manifestation of the h2g2Editors thinks Mitchell is *fabulous*!

Princess Lotte, - that one is going on my email circulation for jokes.

But at least the original re-posting of the banned joke has been removed, that was the main problem or complaint of the content of this "conversation". Anything after that was a by product of the first post, so thank you Editors.

p+t - congratulations on your victory

h2g2 editors - you are contemptible.

I didn't complain about it scribbler.

But glad to see that it is gone and the Editors have made it clear that this is not a place to try and get round the messageboard rules.

The rules for this place and the messageboards are the same as far as I can see.

Paulthebread has tried to get round the rules, on your h2g2, but a lot of people seem to have been upset by comments here, as well as this url being given as the place to see stuff modded on the food boards.

I don't really see it as a victory, just common sense kicking in.

ATB

It's true I thought they were more grown-up on here. How wrong can you be!

Dee's post - which she called a joke (and it made me smile a rueful smile) - was about the sensitivities of different religions to different foods.

If we can't have this debate here, h2g2 editors, just where can we have it?

I left the last post hanging because I didn't want the serious question in that post modded.

And this next bit may offend...


I find the fact that modern-day, educated people allow the elders of an ancient tribe to dictate their eating habits rather odd. After all, we've invented fridges since those rules were drawn up.

Will that get me modded?

If I say I find the whole idea a bit ridiculous, which is my honest opinion, have I gone too far?

I find the fact that we're not allowed to air the theoretical possibility that a Muslim or a Jew (for example) might be offended or leave the board at the mention of pork (say), completely bizarre!

For that is all the banned joke suggested.

Are these religions, or people's religious views, so fragile that we need to be censored to spare their feelings?

I honestly despair!

It looks like this could get very difficult... No one is setting out to offend anyone - but it seems like those who want to be offended are chasing after those who they perceive to be offending them!
(and that *doesn't* mean I agree with every comment made on here. I'm just making an observation).

If you think about it in terms of "real life", a logical conclusion of this could be a group of easily offended followers-of-a-religion literally following some follower-of-another-or-no-religion who wanted to have a debate, just so that they (the followers-of-a-religion) could be offended.

It seems to me that no one wants to hurt anyone, so can other's not just stop pressing the complaint button?

Sue,

Got your email and message on FB and can only apologise.

It would appear that I made the human mistake of muddling up two Sues who post on this board.

As you have correctly pointed out it was the other Sue who objected to WhiteAinsley's name, alleging it to be racist, with the effect that he now goes under the tag Ainsley O'Naan.

Sorry Sue for the upset I have caused you and I do apologise to you for my mistake.

Fiona