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

Have you noticed? There is currently an eerily familiar scenario occuring. Ironically, you have cast yourself in the role of [Editor Whose Name Is Personal Information] while Someone Else has the part of LeKZ.

Per your and other people's arguments regarding Lifetime-Bans at h2g2, if there is a *chance* you were wrong, or misjudged in *any* way, is it right for you to impose a Lifetime Ban on anyone? Is it right for you, as the [Editor Whose Name Is Personal Information] to *specifically* provide that person with no recourse, or opportunity to speak in their own behalf? In this case, it seems they were not issued a Warning. Furthermore, since this seems to be how these things are done, the Rules were not clear, and appeared to the person, whom you have charged with an infraction serious enough to warrant a Lifetime-Ban, to change suddenly and arbitrarily.

Therefore, per the http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A623288, A Modest Proposal v1.03, written by you, (with a dedication), a week's remand seems a fair opportunity for the person you wish to ban, to explain where *you* may have misunderstood and misjudged them. During that week, you will receive emails at the address they have. No correspondence on your part is expected. At the end of the week, per your Modest Proposal, you read them all. Naturally, this process presupposes you to be able to do so fairly and without prejudice. Once you have read the emails, you make the decision as to whether a Lifetime-Ban was *really* deserved, and inform the person in question of what Rules you consider them to have broken.

If you agree to this request for the application of *your own* idea, the week will commence at the time you state your agreement. Please time and date-stamp your posting specifically. No material presented before the start of the remand need be taken into consideration. Given that there are no pro- and con- arguments, to be presented by character-witnesses, and that you control the entire proceedings *individually*, this proceedings would be significaly *less* generous than the proposal, as written by you and adopted here as Policy.

Please inform ASAP, including date and time of your decision for or against allowing the person a week's remand.


No need to use the following unless you think there is.

Summary of arguments:
No, we never wanted to control your life. No, no one can make you do anything you don't want to do. No, we are not operating on prejudice. You thought so. You were wrong. Demonstration will follow.


Thank you so much.

Not my business. Feel free to tell me to sod off. Given my own experience, if I'm even a little bit right in what I think this is about, and what I read so far (skimming, there's a good deal of repetition) in that Lifetime Surfing Cyberspace without hope of a harbour, maybe you want to think about agreeing to this, mate?

It was your idea, and you still have all the control. Don't do what I did. It's bloody bad for the soul.

~SL~

* Mark * Hi Barton! Hi Hoovooloo!

Hi Willem! Bye Willem!