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

Please post character witnesses to support the banning of Silent Lucidity here.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F35246?thread=151528&latest=1 Such a nice friendly person

As Jim Lynn said 'The IP address associated with Silent Lucidity matched Lekz's completely.'

Sure it *could* be a coincidence. Sure it *could* be another person entirely with exactly the same interests and axe to grind.

But I don't believe in coincidences. Ever.

Goodbye Silent Lucidity. I hope it was 'fun' while it lasted.

The writing style of Silent Lucidity is quite distinctive. And so very similar to the writing style of LeKZ (Arpeggio). I'm sure there is no mistake. I recognise certain phrases, the way she talks to people, the dog with a bone that will not let go. The demands, the bad language, moderated for h2g2 of course, the people she chooses to talk to, the threads she chooses to post in, the phonetic typing. I'm in no doubt the italics are right.

No argument from me either, the style is to similar to be coincidence.
And, well, if the ISP addresses match, not really much of an argument is there?

It's not just the interests and the axe to grind: it's the posting habits, also. Last night (GMT) Silent Lucidity was the top of the lengthy posting list with an *average posting length* of over 2000 words - longer that the recommended length for edited entries! Arpeggio is the only other person that I ever noticed posting such long comments in the forums - she even had an argument with the editors about it, as far as I recall.

More interesting is the very distinctive habit of using British idioms but getting them slightly wrong: this is something that caught my eye about Arpeggio way back in June when I commented on one of her entries in Peer Review. A phrase caught my eye on Thursday, where S/L said in posting 1281 of the LS thread
'How do you explain the discrepancy in your opinions, if you can do so without further slagging off on anyone?'

I've never in my life heard that usage before! 'Slagging off ON' someone rather than 'slagging someone off'??????????

I went and had a look at the Folks list, and surprise, surprise, LeKZ gets this idiom wrong TWICE: in a posting of 17th Nov 14:28 PST she says 'he's slagged off at and about us', while in a posting of Nov 16, 2001 17:39 PST she says ' we are NOT here to slag on anyone'. Most people who are confused about an unfamiliar idiom will avoid it - LeKZ is the only person I've come across who will blithely use it anyway, and S/L follows exactly the same path.

What I wonder is, if Silent Lucidity is indeed LeKZ (which I am 99% sure of from the writing in their posts alone), were her friends aware of this? How many of the people who were so confidently assuring us that LeKZ is amazingly truthful even considered that she was here under a false name? Or had she involved some of them in her deception?

Azara

Tsk tsk Azara. Lurking and cyberstalking are NOT acceptable behaviors. And I'm sure there was a life being saved, somewhere.
Humph.

A reminder, from the author of the policy currently being implemented: keep it polite. This *isn't* aimed at anyone who has posted before in particular, or anyone who I think might post here. I just thought I'd say it.

Also, this is for *character witness statements* please. I'm sure the Italics will disregard posts merely speculating or dissecting writing styles. If you have had a *specific problem* with the behaviour of "Silent Lucidity" (NOT LeKZ - just this apparent manifestation of her) then say so here. Someone else has said most of mine for me - cheers .

If this policy is going to be effective at quelling months of wrangling and most importantly be seen to be fair and not just an excuse for what the Italics have called "synchronised jumping", people should only post *specific* objections here. Bringing people's friends into it in particular is not necessary.

As I say, the above is only my opinion, and I am perfectly comfortable with the fact that I relinquished control over this policy the minute I committed it to an Entry in version 1.0. However, this is how I'd like to see it work. Keep it short, specific, and provide a link if you can. 's is a case in point, although if it'd been me I'd just posted the link - it speaks for itself.

H.

No sarcasm at all....

I think that LeKZ may really feel this *is* a matter of life and death - someone here can bring one of her 20,000 personalities back from limbo, so all the deception is worth it as far as she's concerned.

Ah well... the only people who will take good advice are the very ones who don't need it, right?

Azara

Character witnesses....hmmmmmmmm
Where shall I start?
To be quite honest, I haven't got the time or the inclination to bother.

I support the decision to ban the researcher known as Silent Lucidity, whom I believe to be the person known as LeKZ, Arpeggio et al.

Galaxy Babe

Hoovooloo,
>>this is for *character witness statements* please. I'm sure the Italics will disregard posts merely speculating or dissecting writing styles.

I appreciate what you are saying, but online, writing style *is* character, and that was what I meant by writing style. It reads like LeKZ, and LeKZ was Arpeggio.

The entry says that the ban is not for the behaviour of Silent Lucidity, but because she is Arpeggio. And therefore LeKZ.
So the writing style is relevant.

If the editors want links, I will provide them. Until then, the word character means what distinguishes a person. Online, I'm afraid we are left with writing style.

Hoovooloo,
I think we have all learned some lessons from the endless Lifetime Suspension thread - mine was that things that seem obvious to me may not be obvious to other people.

If Silent Lucidity is indeed LeKZ, then since LeKZ has already been banned the ban should still apply. My point about writing styles was to underline the inescapable connection I see between LeKZ and S/L.

As to her friends - I would take a very poor view of the character of someone who allows their friends to go out on a limb defending their exceptional truthfulness, while at that very moment they are indulging in an extensive course of deception. For me, deceiving one's friends is a very poor character reference indeed.

Azara

Mina/Azara: agreed. Just trying to avoid "synchronised jumping". Not suggesting it had started - just hoping to quell it before it did. Wanting Modest Proposal to *work*, apart from anything else.

H.

Bummer. Again.

Compulsions are remarkable, are they not?

*sigh*

Tal

All I know is that I was shadowed very closely by 'it'. I logged in today to find a very strange series of postings on my space.
I have read a thread that featured Arpeggio and I found that intimidating. SL was another personality, but frightening and desperate and taking things the wrong way or sideways.
It was digging into and responding to threads that were weeks and months old.
I was trying to talk rationally to this person but they were looking off to the side and talking to someone who wasn't there.
Whoever this person is, now I'm thoroughly frightened.
One of the postings this morning would have been insulting if I had chosen to take it that way. The language was insulting. The intent was undiscernable. But I thought that there was nothing to be gained by......

All I know is this person swooped out of nowhere, seemed to know too much, too soon, and was dragging baggage like a mountain.
If they're gone, I breath a sigh of relief.
If they're gone forever, I'll sleep easier.

Ok, I have a lot I could say at the moment, but I will keep this uncharacteristically brief.

1) LeKZ was banned from operating an account here again
2) Silent Lucidity is LeKZ
3) Silent Lucidity should therefore also be banned

I will add one comment to the above, which is to say that those involved are all humans, and that there is a lot of pain and anger flowing around at the moment. For that reason, I am disappearing off-site again.

a lurker called Ben

*pulls up a stool, settles and takes out knitting bag* Ooo - goody! A character assassination. Will there be cake? Well, truth to tell, I could prove the thesis of this inquiry and put an end to this lynch mob (the purest form of Democracy's tyrranny) but to do so would mean breaking the house rule of 're-posting on behalf of a banned researcher'. Let's just say a certain banned researcher e-mailed me and drew me into the Lifetime Suspension thread which until yesterday I had avoided like the plague it is. It immediately became obvious to me that I had once again been suckered by an appeal to my sense of fair play. What amazed me was that the thread had gone on so long without anyone but Tefkat and plaguesville smelling the rat. http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F55683?thread=127664&latest=1 There are trolls and then there are Supertrolls. My hat is off to anyone who can manipulate so many people, so insanely, for so long. So long. So long. So long. peace jwf (living and learning)

"What amazed me was that the thread had gone on so long without anyone but Tefkat and plaguesville smelling the rat."

Don't jump to conclusions. I smelled it. I wasn't 100%, but c'mon. Nobody would just walk in, actually *read* the Intelligence/Life Sus backlog, AND come to all of the same conclusions LeKZ had come to about the ban, phrased the same way, AND pursue intense discussions with Hoovooloo, AND have such a marked interest in Multiple Personalities and Child Abuse and Domestic Violence, AND immediately get the pun that is the name "Einauni Muznobotti", AND probably something else I'm not thinking of just now. All you had to do was lurk a little, and you'd have to have a bad cold not to smell *something*.

GTBacchus, who has *better* than 20/20 hindsight

The first thing I thought when I read her page after she popped up in a forum I was in, was 'see, LeKZ isn't the only one'. I recognised a lot of her in SL straight away. I was just too trusting to think it would be her until later, when there was no doubt and I changed my mind to 'there's no way it's not he'r about a day later.

I think a lot of people recognized what was going on and figured that the situation would end up resolving itself, one way or another, without our interference. It was incredibly obvious, after all.