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

I'm sorry, but if you claim that a system that can sensor the word 'suck' (s-u-c-k) used in a non-sexual context is correct in it's sensorship policies, you must be mistaken. What next, starring out Scunthorpe becuse of letters 2-5?

Deidzoeb - I said "you are free to" - I didn't say that it was the best thing to do, nor that you should do it.

The best thing to do is to have a meaningful, constructive debate on the subject, in the attached fora. Some people are incapable of doing so, because the thought of Acid House not being the best type of music in the world makes them foam at the mouth and the entire world go dizzy. For these unfortunates, there is a yikes button.

Lucinda,

Sorry. I should not have written that as if you were suggesting we all rely on the yikes button in place of debate. But I think you described an interesting view of how it might be used or abused.

Anyway, it's reassuring to see what Abi said about the matter.

MaW,

You wrote, "As a Guru, I've been testing the site for just over a week or so now, and we have discussed the issue of Moderation (which _isn't_ censorship) repeatedly with the h2g2 staff."

A symptom of how many people are affected by moderation (or how many are confused or concerned by it) can be seen in the fact that the second most popular forum shown on the Front page when I logged on a few minutes ago was the Moderation Help Desk. Maybe people aren't using that forum correctly, but as I understand it, that is the place for making requests or placing questions about your personal pages affected by moderation. So this is not just people talking about the new policies or wondering what moderation will accomplish. This is moderation problems as second most popular topic to post about tonight. Scary.

Moderation is not censorship? Come on, you'd be better off arguing why their reasons for censorship are justifiable, than denying it counts as censorship. Deleting URLs, banning languages other than English, refusing all external pictures are clear enough forms of censorship, some more reasonable than others. But how can you deny that asterisks over swear words is censorship? Seriously, you'll be more credible just defending their excuses for censorship.

I know that moderation is hot topic of the moment, but any chance of some burn out on it now guys? It's getting to the point where it's all I ever get to read about, and I'm going to self-implode and splat all over the Ed room if it doesn't stop soon.

Let's just give it a go for a while, see how it develops, and come back and discuss it later, when it's been give a chance to settle down a bit?

As long as there are people still here *later*...

Well, for a while, I thought that too, and even mentioned it in my name (you remember? I said something like, come on now can't we stop talking about it, the site is the means and not the end... meaning that it seemed a bit daft talking about how to use the site rather than getting on with the interesting discussions we were used to) But the discussions continued, and continued, and continued....

Moderation is censorship, by any definition you care to throw at it. If I write something you don't like and you remove it, I have been censored. No two ways about it I'm afraid.

Okay. Right now we have to have moderation. You can contribute to h2g2 or not, that's your choice. If you don't contribute you won't be moderated, so that's easy.

I don't mean to put anyone off contributing, but the servers and the staff and the service are paid for by the BBC, they really are entitled to create the rules around here now. And the rules are the same ones we always had, so get over it.

the servers and the staff and the service are paid for by the BBC.

you might mean: the servers and the staff and the service are paid for by me and everyone else who pays their licence fee.
If the rules haven't changed, why have so many posts disappeared? Why have so many people complained?

Hey great, that means I'm paying for me too then.

I've got a website to run. Anyone here want to carry on the debate with Andy?

Touched a nerve there I think, Andy...

I think the staff are entitled to get pretty p****d off with all this 'moderation/censorship' stuff, because us continually ranting at them isn't going to do any good. They KNOW we don't like it, we know that it isn't THEM who have put the new, spurious rules (such as no links in forums) in place. I'm not going to keep going on about it on site any longer. I'm not happy about all of the changes, but this is still a damn good site, so I'm going to keep off the backs of the people who are trying to keep it that way.

...but wait. I don't know how much good it will do, but I'm thinking of writing off to the people ABOVE the Italics who have these rules as standard - BBC Online. I am quite happy to have moderators moderating, checking posts, *ing swearwords. I understand and accept the reasons for not having pictures on user pages. But I will explain to them the difference between 'just another part of BBC Online' which is entirely written by BBC employees, and a thriving, evolving online community - which they are trying to "research", are they not? I think the first thing they'll find is that, like a real community, this one doesn't like having its privalleges removed. And they ARE privalleges, not rights, so I'm still going to live without them if I need to. I think they've messed up on the "no foreign languages" point, though. I'm sure that it doesn't have to be this way, even if I too am getting tired of the great moderation debate. It isn't the end of the world, it isn't the end of h2g2, it's just slightly annoying, and I shall let it be known that I am slightly annoyed.

Fair enough. It was my hope that the Peta was shipping every one of these posts to the folks at BBC. Either this has not been done, or the BBC is in 'ignore' mode (which would hardly be surprising).

Perhaps Peta or Abi should just hit the Yikes button at this point.

"the Peta"? Oops. Obviously, I meant to say "a Peta".

Somebody, somewhere (I can't find it again) posted the notion that the 'no outside URLs in the Fora' was a technical thing. By confining external URL links to homepages they reduce the amount of bandwidth connectivity between the BBC host servers and the h2g2 servers. This would mean that neither politics nor a polizimentality was behind that particular gripe anyway.

johnwfulton,

They explain their motivation in the House Rules:
"Although this might sound bizarre, it is for a very good reason. BBC policy is that all links on all sites are checked on a regular basis, to ensure that the BBC never links to sites which might offend its users. On h2g2, reviewing all the links is a considerable task, so to make sure the job of revisiting links does not get out of hand, we are doing a trial which involves restricting URLs to Guide Entries only. Depending on how the trial goes, this policy may be revised, but in the meantime, we will remove all URLs from Conversations, except for those to bbc.co.uk sites (including h2g2)."

By that explanation, it sounds like they are worried about the logistics of moderating all the URLs that would likely crop up from moment to moment on message posts, not the logistics of bandwidth. So I think they are worried about the logistics of enforcing their polizimentality. (Actually, I'm not sure what that word means. It doesn't look like English. Are you sure you're not trying to subvert the dominant paradigm or something?)

Hi there Mr T You make some fair points, so here's a reply. :-) Firstly, there isn't a 'no foreign languages' rule. We'll translate them when we can. See this posting http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F647?thread=104169. Writing to the people *above us* won't help because they are totally on our side, working with us, and talking to us on a daily basis. We *do* understand the community, we've been here from the beginning, and we're very much in charge of the project now. As I keep saying, things will change and develop on h2g2 in the future, they always have, done. We do understand your concerns about these issues, and we're taking them on board, that's why we're always here talking to you all! Now I'm going to go out and get on with the rest of h2g2. I'm unsubscribing from this forum now, if you want to carry the debate on amongst yourselves then of course, please do. See you out there! Peta (unsubscribe)

Peta is so bored with this issue she has actually unsubscribed from this forum twice...is this a record? As the person who started this whole thread I think it has beeen conclusively established that moderation is censorship but that the reasons for it have also been thoroughly explored so as free individuals you can make your own minds up whether to go or stay. I choose to stay. I recommend you read the manifesto and join the Zaphodistas. No links, no comebacks. I formally declare this thread closed.

OK so I'm the only one left here. Fine.

I'll just rant on about how they took my name away and turned me into a number for suggesting the BBC servers weren't man enough to carry the load. It can't be because my name was also my e-mail address. The rules only say to exercise caution before posting an e-mail address and since it doesn't go to a foreign site - only to me, it is not really a URL link of the forbidden kind.

Ah, why bother ..nodbody's listening.

*Yes, I have filed an appeal through the proper channels at ModHelp*