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

Wait.

'The first casualty when war comes is truth' - Hiram W. Johnson.

Clearly that observation is as true now as it was when Johnson said it back in 1917. He was a Republican US Senator, ironically enough.

Still no sign of moderation! Boy, they're slow...

- Jordan

That's quite splendid. I shall have to remember that.

- Jordan

Umm... the house rules over at the message boards say that if we want to post long messages that we should come over to some other strange site by the name of h2g2.

* sniggers *

http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-perl/h2/h2.cgi?x=y&board=greatdebate&state=houserules

Yes, they are really having to bend over backwards, like contortionists with a cannon, in order to shoot themselves in the foot.

And what part are we playing in this
foot-shooting exercise?

Oops, I shouldn't have said "shooting."

But I can't think of a euphemism that
would work.

Well I'm bystanding and trying not to get hit by the shrapnel while waiting to see if any survivors need help. However, other people seem to be actively doling out the gunpowder and proffering lighted matches. Yet another group have declared themselves to be non-combatants and have dived for the nearest concrete bunker - preferably on a planet orbiting a completely different star.

Why did i go to bed last night? All the interesting discussions happened after i went.

I don't think DNA supports automatic moderation, someone would have to yikes the post, and then a human mod would hide it.

I like those house rules sending people to h2g2...

Tango

Don't like the rules.
Came back this morning to have my name moderated.

well i think it sucks

What exactly does editorially balanced mean anyway?

I'm against it as well. Has anyone started a petition?

Really not trying to spam, but an excellent resource for discussing the issue freely (and submitting articles if you so desire) can be found at www.tinyplanet.org . People from many nations are talking it out now, which the politicians seem to have failed to do.

This post has been removed.

I don´t agree with you blickybadger.

As an national broadcast corporation the BBC has to respect all the people and terefore can´t afford to be known as an party in this discussion. They have to maintain their image of impartiality, especially since they also report about the war.

And nobody likes a newsagency who takes sides.

I dont mind if my stuff is moderated for the sake of those with faint hearts who may be offended. However to frame the quetion better I will put it like this are we stiil at the same point culturally that "Not The Nine O'Clock News" satirised about TWENTY YEARS AGO. That events outside of the "waspoid" world are less important?

If my posting was pulled because it impinged on the BBC's veneer of impartiality thought it only proves my point. That a state funded corporation is essentially no more impartial than any other reporting body.