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

>I think this may or may not have been AB's point in his yikesed comment. < kea

AB's yikesed comment said he knew more about me than I would ever know..there was no supplementary explanation to that expressed in a friendly jokey fashion to mean it was to do with me as an entity here.

It came across as very threatening to me in the way expressed.

Some people here had clearly already read the post..others are guessing. I don't know which category you fall into..or maybe behind the scenes you got to look at it after it was disappeared. There maybe a few on this thread that have read it behind the scenes. If so it would help everyone for *honesty* about that.

I have had time to think and sleep. I found Trig's posts the most calm and helpful.

I see now I may have taken that post all the wrong way..it's just possible.

But this is a very *sensitive* subject for many of us.

You regularly hear of people's email accounts being hacked.

I have a real life friend who had to leave Facebook because of people from his past causing havoc. (He happens to have a very colourful past.)

Today on the news they said some Twitter accounts have been hacked to do with Sky. Apparently nothing is safe now online it was said.

**

Social media is a NEW cultural structure. It depends on an efficient and reliable technology. It often seems leaky from what we hear.

And because its NEW as a cultural structure..we haven't properly sorted out traditions and safe guards yet for people to feel existentially safe as well as literally.

**

Peanut I hope to not get more lectures from you about going on about something so very important to many of us.

Trig I will probably contact you later on your ps about what happened here. I very much appreciate your calm, logical and intelligent style.

>I'd like us to be LESS interested in personal details and transparency, not more.< Mrs Zen

I'd like to be more interested

Seriously what happens online is parallel to real life.

All of us put on front...mine's rather hopeless and pathetic..but luckily I live in a real life area where that is valued and the norm. That's why I live here. New people moving in had better get with the program as far as I'm concerned here. Thank god for the summer riots and smoke filling the air around here.

But seriously it's a creative and wonderful thing to get to know someone..and also enjoy their fronts and playful coats of many colours..but still I only feel drawn to the same as I do in real life I realise.

Viva the unconscious. Our guarantee of true creativity and life and love.

>>
>I think this may or may not have been AB's point in his yikesed comment. < kea
<<

I didn't say that.

You're right Effers, social media IS a relatively new cultural structure. However, h2g2 is the site that pretty much started off the whole social media thing in the first place. All of the sites that have emerged since owe something in what they do to the pioneering work that h2g2 has done regarding operating an online community. Personally, I would rather trust my details to the people here than I would to the huge corporation that is the BBC. Staff come and go there all the time, and I didn't have a clue who had access to my details while we were there. That said, there's nothing wrong with changing your data occasionally. Most of us should do it more often in fact.

The Sky account that was allegedly hacked was the Sky News business account. Someone sent a tweet from it saying that James Murdoch had been arrested. Several people retweeted it without checking the facts. I sent out a warning that Sky TV news had nothing about it and said I didn't believe a word of it. Then came the denials from Sky. It was sorted out fairly quickly in fact. I'm guessing someone used a stupid password like 'password' for the account.

BTW, I did see post 6 and I've seen some posts elsewhere from you where you've taken similar comments as light hearted banter. Someone said there was no smiley on the comment but actually, at least it was showing in Brunel, the post DID have a smiley face after the bit about knowing your details so I thought you would take the 'AB is trying to provoke a reaction from me' approach. It's certainly how I read the post, I don't think he meant it maliciously. If I thought he had, I would have yikesed it myself. Then again, as someone who likes to call out to the most nervous person on the plane 'Don't worry, statistically speaking, it's the safest way to crash', I'm probably not the best person to judge what is 'acceptable' in terms of banter.

I guess a lot comes down to the mood someone is in when they read posts online. On a stressful day a post like that could cause offence, particularly if you missed the smiley. You seem in a happier and more grounded mood today, Effers. If you've got the same weather as I've got here today, make the most of the sun and enjoy it while you're in the mood to appreciate it properly.

@ kea

Post 58

>In anycase since everyone has access to everyones personal space (as far as I know), there is already a lack of complete anonymity because we can see members other conversation etc. I think this may or may not have been AB's point in his yikesed comment. <

You said this. Please explain more if I've misunderstood something.

I always post in good faith.

#46 Should there "be greater restrictions on people accessing other members personal space. For example on some other "discussion sites" you have to become a "friend" of the other member to access their personal space."

So is the above a valid question? Would some members be more comfortable if their personal spaces were off limit to members and non-members alike, with only "Friends" privy to this section?

Hi Effers, Kea was quoting my comment #46. Apologies for any confusion that might have arisen.

Oh and it would really be helpful if people taking part in discussion could make it clear exactly who they are addressing and what their point is. Straight talking I call it.

I find it works well in real life to avoid unneccessary misunderstandings. Online it is doubly important.

Especially in this new era where our previous peers now have roles behind the scenes.

I start to feel I'm back at school.

You can have perfectly good relationships with teachers *as if* equals and in discussions. And then suddenly you twig they had some discussions in the staff room that you could never know about.

There is nothing inheritantly wrong with that. Power structures *must* exist for things to function well.

But I prefer people to really spell that out and front up so I know where I am.

I have no doubt some here got to see that post *after* it was yikesed. That is a completely *new* thing on h2g2..and takes some getting used to. That is your peers in discussion also have a staff room.

Thanks Stoneart for clearing that up.

Apologies kea.

>>
So is the above a valid question? Would some members be more comfortable if their personal spaces were off limit to members and non-members alike, with only "Friends" privy to this section?
<<

No it's not valid in the sense that we have enough to deal with at the moment, without looking at such a fundamental change to the site. Honestly, seriously, if you want to look at what changes we DO need currently, follow Mrs Zen around (she's got a number of projects going at the moment on things that we need more help with).

There is nothing wrong with how the PSs work now. They're not like the private spaces that other forums have. They're different. Personally I think we should value what we have and how that makes us unique as a community (the technical structures we have determine alot about how the community functions).

Even were it a valid question, it would require the techs to do work on it, and there's a fairly long list of things for them to get through before we can do changes like that.

Stone Art,

No it is not something I would like to see changed. It is something that I would actively oppose.

The openess of the site is another fundamental part of the culture of h2g2.

One change that I would like to see is the ability to move messages posted on your PS into your conversations list and away from your intro thingy.

>So is the above a valid question? Would some members be more comfortable if their personal spaces were off limit to members and non-members alike, with only "Friends" privy to this section?<

If that ever happened I would *definitely* leave. That would be the final nail in the coffin of what makes this such a special place. We would be h2g2 in name only.

(It's not the cough that carries you off..it's the coffin they carry you off in.)

Well, I can assure you Effers, I only saw the post before it was yikesed. I'm assuming only the Editors can see a yikesed post afterwards. If there are others who can, I would be interested to know both who and how.

BTW, I've just been outside to feed the pheasants and think I may take my own advice and go for a walk up the pub later. It's a glorious, warm, November morning out there.

This post has been removed.

>> Would some members be more comfortable if their personal spaces were off limit to members and non-members alike, with only "Friends" privy to this section?

That would fundamentally change the nature of the site.

I am not saying that's a bad thing; just saying that is what it would do.



I'm intrigued by this thread.

Based on what's been said here, I doubt that post #6 would have been hidden by the BBC's agency mods many of whom were temps or students.

Modding seems to be more sensitive and contextual now, and covers the full gamut of the House Rules and Ts and Cs, which reference *behaviour* and *patterns* such as flooding and spamming. These are things which affect individuals and the community. Under the BBC the mods were clearly there to protect the BBC not us, and were all about cover-their-ass things like swearing, copyright infringement and defamation of c'lebs.

By the way, you can see from my name that I am no longer a mod. This is because I simply do not have the time, so what I am saying here is said as a researcher and former Mod, but not with any insight into this or any other specific instance.

Massive there

>> follow Mrs Zen around

Please do! I'm always happy to talk about how the site might run, though these days it can take a while to get back to peeps.

Ben, your name is still on this page:

http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A87706704

Perhaps that could be updated?

tbh I had hoped that this thread wouldn't become another thread about moderation

The big elephant in the room is that people who were previously our total equals now have a degree of power over us. That is a massive thing to get used to.

I have been on pre-mod twice, and suspended for a week.

The people with the power doing this to me, used to be my equals in power.

Some people front up and admit it. Some are mealy mouthed when you confront them with a *direct, honest* question.

I've been prone to paranoia since Aunty announced our dumping. Disinterested professionals used to make that such decisions. That's so much my preference I've realised.

I'm not alone though in much preferring that.

It's all very well going on about safe guards, previous baggage and history won't be a feature. That's a damned lie. You don't get rid of human nature..however many safeguards you put in place. I prefer to *face* that *reality*.

Being such a difficult person I have more history than most with others. More to worry about.

Eventually I may leave or I may get used to it and stay.

>> Ben, your name is still on this page:

>> http://h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/A87706704

>> Perhaps that could be updated?

Ah, you've done one of my to-dos today which was to check that page. I was going to use my resignation from the mods to write up the resignation-from-the-mods process. Another paving stone on my personal path to hell.

By the way, I'll remind all present and past mods in this thread that the first rule of Mod-Club is not to talk about Mod-Club.

Ben