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

From the ACE's Code of Conduct

'Any critical or negative postings from Aces will scare off new Researchers, and this will only harm the project.'

As one of your number's comments has made a member of this community leave after over 6 years service I think you should be ashamed of yourselves.

I have noted some of the conduct of ACEs recently and I am ashamed that I once carried the badge.

DD
Ex-ACE, ex-Guru, 100+ Edited Entires

I feel in the dark, who left? and please do not generalise, perhaps some people you may have found disagreeable but not all of us are the same

Dr E Vibenstein U40285

>>I have noted some of the conduct of ACEs recently and I am ashamed that I once carried the badge.>>

DD, I think it would be more fair to say the conduct of *some* ACEs - it's hardly fair to put the blame on each and every ACE.

Eloquent,

I apologise that I appeared to tar every ACE with the same brush.

However, looking through the postings of certain of your number this has been ongoing for sometime. Surely someone of you should have pulled the offenders up, in the ACE forum initially, or on here.

That is why the Code of Conduct was introduced surely.

This has been discussed at great length in the ACE forum infact

Then why was the ACE/s in question allowed to continue?

It was not reccomended by anyone that people were attacked, but people felt the thread in question was getting out of hand and people that went in with the best intentions ended up inflaming the matter, which is naturally regrettable but it must be pointed out that the people who were being *attacked* were not always entirely cooperative themselves

Well I am only remaining on hootoo to get all my unwritten articles finished. I am not starting any more.

I'm ashamed that the spirit has left the building.

*spitting her dummy out and having a tantrum*

Pity none of you noticed that the bombastic actions of one ACE in that thread was the equivalent of half a dozen or more experienced researchers ganging up onto one.

EV overstepped the mark by referring to the contents of the forum in an open thread. Things escalated from there.

The spirit of hootoo really fled when researchers began to make up accounts pertaining to be the "thoughts of.." That was very sad, indeed. In that situation the ACE's moves swiftly and quietly.


*puts her dummy back into her mouth*

I've noticed the spirit drifting away from Peer Review threads for a long time. Instead of being a process of improving the entry in the writers style it has become a place to take out individuality from the writing styles of the writers. Unfortunately some of the volunteers have been the worse offenders.

I was once told my a two week old ACE who had been online for 4 months that my style and content of writing was not suitable for Peer Review!!!

Strangley I already had over 70 entries at the time and the entry is now on the edited guide. However, this sort of comment made me seriously consider my stay on hootoo.

You guys have to be careful what you post, no matter who you post it too. I have been an ACE during flame wars and troll attacks in the past and the volunteers have always managed to take the majority of the established community with them. This is not hte case at present.

I think, before we all start looking for blame, we should remember why this kicked off in the first place. I agree, there are a few people who should be ashamed - of their bullying, hounding and harassing another Researcher - and it's a dreadful shame that a number of excellent Researchers have decided to join/lead the mob.

Before you blame the Aces, DD, you should perhaps find out why they criticised EV in the first place.

Elsewhere on this site, someone has started a conversation entitled 'headbanging' to describe their frustrations over this incident. I can entirely empathise with this frustration - no matter how many times we remind everyone to use the Complaints Button, some people refuse to do - and then have the cheek to accuse *us* of not doing anything. We didn't receive a *single* complaint about Lord Wolfden's behaviour this weekend, but we did receive a horrific amount of complaints about the Mob, circling the castle with torches ablazing.

If we lose decent Researchers like yourself, DD, that will be a terrible shame. I hope it won't come to that and that a sense of proportion over this might yet take hold. But I will not be party to bullying just to appease people who I otherwise have a lot of respect for. I simply couldn't justify such an action.


Jimster

>>people that went in with the best intentions<<

Woah! That certainly wasn't how it seemed to me - I tried to engage the 'Ace' in question in rational debate on the thread in question - asking whether they had any constructive advice to offer - and was completely ignored. My impression was that the 'Ace' concerned was far more interested in throwing their weight around than in calming anything down - the language used was intemperate and offensive.

I thought it was pretty disgraceful at the time and I still do. If I hadn't have found this thread, I would have complained.

(I could try and fluff the fact that my last *was* a simpost, but the applause was for DD )

Jimster,

As you may or may not be aware I have been involved in these sort of incidents in the past as a community volunteer. I have looked through the thread in question which is why I have not commented on EV's departure until today as I was reading the blog.

Maybe it is because I am involved in politics that in the past I have been able to smooth these things through when I was a community volunteer. There has however been a lack of diplomacy on the part of many parties over this issue, something I was able to avoid due to RL committments, for a number of months.

Some of the language an atitude used by the volunteers to attempt to sort out this issue has been overharsh, overcritical and overpersonal. They are bound by a higher code of conduct than the mere researchers out there. That is where my objection comes from.

Normally I have been able to back wholeheartedly the actions of the volunteers, something I'm sure you know. However, over this they have merely added fuel to the flames instead of acting in the best interests of the community.

I will still be here for some time just maybe not very vocal.

DD

Peer Review is an area where I have only ever attempted to guide my own newbies.. I am too much of a coward to try it myself just yet. I am sorry you have been upset by some reviewers.

I don't think that particular thread will ever be persuaded by us ACE's, it has been continuing in that vein for too long.. there again, free expression is still encouraged and rightly so.

It is a shame that those who started out attempting to help that one researcher then banded together to pursue him through other areas too.

Jimster,

I thought you would know me better as not attempting to bully anyone. I'm pointing out a matter of principle I'm not acting at the behest of anyone but under my own steam. I've given myself a built in cooling off period of completing the entries I have started, that could take years!!!!

DD

I think Jimster has hit on the point completely

>>We didn't receive a *single* complaint about Lord Wolfden's behaviour this weekend, but we did receive a horrific amount of complaints about the Mob, circling the castle with torches ablazing.<<

I can only speak for myself on this one, but I've taken the advice about the complaints button to heart and I've used it on several occasions. But it doesn't seem to me to work. If there isn't any swearing, or unsuitable political opinion expressed, the moderators send it straight back.

So, if you're attempting to use it to draw their attention to: spamming, flooding, deliberate attempts to provoke or irritate (or even with the eye of faith, non-deliberate postings which provoke or irritate regardless, where the poster has been asked - politely - not to do it at least five times that morning alone) - you get a lovely little e-mail saying that it doesn't contravene the rules. Which it doesn't.

U48304 It appears that the site is haemoraging low U numbers. These are people who survived Rupert, got used to the new BBC restrictions, the Iraq war restrictions and several flaming wars, clique wars and trolls.

These are people who moves through goo with a live DNA. These are also people who are or have been voluteers for a period of years! These people do not leave over something slight. This must be something major if 'founding' members from 1999 so far I have counted 4 are consdiering or have actually left the site.

And Jimster that is not me bullying that is me deeply concerned about H2G2 and the legacy of DNA.