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

<>

Not entirely so, ... Some may feel that because they personally know most of the Mods, CE's, etc, they might have a little more free license to play fast and loose with what might be deemed acceptable. (If I may put a word or three in Kea's opinions?)

Except that's not an actual effect of the decision, but rather individuals taking it upon themselves to decide they're part of an 'in crowd' which doesn't exist.

Hmmm, does not every decision have a cause and effect? I just suggested one 'effect' of a decision. I am not saying it was wrong or right, just giving an opinion.

If this thread was an Excel spreasheet, it would perish beneath the weight of illegal circular references.

Is there an elephant in this room?

(no not that one -> )

And who dare speaketh its name?

Who the hell do you think you are Kea? Point to another site elsewhere on the web where the daily running decisions are taken by the site users?
You are a nobody, a user of a website provided by a private company in which an interim core team have been appointed/volunteered in order to establish the site and its protocols and procedures. You are NOT a shareholder, you are NOT NPL, you are NOT Noesis and the reason you're not a volunteer is because, as you and at least one other have said you won't abide by the terms to be a volunteer, ie, an ID check. No-one appointed you chief spokesperson for the community, quite the reverse, you sure as hell don't speak for me. Frankly most of what you rant about is out of sheer selfishness at not getting your own way.
There are only 2 major differences between h2g2 now and when it was under the bbc. We have to moderate ourselves and deal with all the editorial process's. For that we need and have the interim core team. When its sorted then we get elections to the various posts. No easy task, process's and procedures have to be worked out.
All I see from you is a 'dog in the manger' attitude of, they're not doing it my way so therefore everything is wrong. Well tough lady, you don't like it? do the other. h2g2 isn't here for the minority like you, its here for the majority, no-one twisted your arm to join.
People are getting so brassed off hearing the same broken record from the same 2 or 3 people with their constant whingeing and moaning because they don't and won't get their own way.
As for discussing moderation cases on site, well, I seriously hope you didn't actually mean that. You would actually sanction an open, public debate on someone, anyone, with issues and problems and subject them to public ridicule like some have on here already? You think thats what 'community' is about do you? You think public lynch mobs are the way to deal with problems do you?
Frankly I think folk should just shut the up and get on with enjoying the site and wait till ALL the process's, protocols and finer details are worked out and having been approved by the site owners first THEN put to the community in a proper,timely and civilised discussion forum. We only need to be told things when a decision is made that affect the site as a whole, not just to seek 'permission' or 'sanctioning' by a few loud mouthed individuals who think they have an alienable right to know all. You don't, we don't, end of story.
I've spent hours/days crawling all over this site in the last few weeks and what I found striking was how so many people were more than delighted that not only was the site back and running but even long standing technical bugs, bugs that have been around for years have suddenly been rectified and all the skins and their functionality suddenly being enhanced. People have been more than happy to carry on and let the core teams and the business side be dealt with while able to enjoy doing what they've always done on h2g2. You can count on one hand the number of people who are dissenting and it comes as no surprise that its the same few who didn't get their way under the bbc and have found they can't get their own way on new h2g2. Well tough. The answer is simple, bugger off, start your own site, see how how much crap you have to deal with.
Don't keep on spouting your crap and behaving like imbeciles here, its not wanted, its not liked and it won't wash.

>>Well, to me at least you weren't actually being very clear.

Well I'm a bit hamstrung. I've been modded twice for talking about moderation. Once was in response to something a SV was saying that I felt was inaccurate and the reason given was that I was breaking confidence from the mod group (I felt that most of what I said was already in the public domain). The other time, my moderation email said that I should be careful about what I say lest I am seen as trying to discredit the moderators, which raises a whole bunch of other trust issues. I asked for clarification about what I could and couldn't say and didn't get any.

Of course I have no idea if you wrote that email. So, believe me when I say, I *am* directly affected by the fact that moderators are named. And as I mentioned, I think the wider community is too.

>>
we should take any complaints about how it was handled as a lesson on how we can possibly handle big decisions in the future.
<<

Precisely. But in order to do that, we would need to have some kind of understanding of what each other is saying. I feel spectacularly misunderstood on this issue, now and in the past. That strikes me as significant because none of the people involved are communication slouches.

Well yes, but surely for a decision to have an overall negative effect on the community as a whole it needs to be something that is not only actually detrimental to the community as a whole but is *entirely* out of the community's control? A small group of hypothetical idiots is a possible effect, but certainly not an effect on the whole community.

Just working on the backlog.

Sho, post 36: 'I think that there are accusations of something approaching bullying going on and I think I can see that in some instances it could look like a pre-meditated or discussed-elsewhere ganging up. But I'm not sure that's what it is.'

Well, I've experienced myself, directed at me, since the changeover. You may not be sure that's what it is but I'm pretty certain.

Back to the backlog. And breakfast.

>>And who dare speaketh its name?

Please do Icy.

Ah, the 'real' BMT Pussycat shows his claws. Atleast one upshot of the thread.

But I don't know the answer, dammit!

*Reads BMT's post*

Gosh.

>>But I don't know the answer, dammit!

I'm really disappointed now!

And now I'm wondering if what I thought was the elephant is in fact different from other people's elephants...

Doesn't matter in a way, like all elephants, it will have be tackled slowly and carefully.

sprout

Did someone call me?

Ok, so now I see the value of the ignore button

For the record:

I am a volunteer (as a guru, as a community volunteer, and as some kind of general dogsbody). I don't have much official status though, which I think is ok. I also think there are many 'unofficial' volunteers, which is good for the community.

When I said earlier about moderation, I didn't mean that the community discuss individual moderation decisions. To be honest, it's a bit weird that people would think that that's what I meant. I did clarify what I meant earlier.

I refer the right honorable mammoth to post 104.

>>And now I'm wondering if what I thought was the elephant is in fact different from other people's elephants...

I know exactly what you mean

Are we allowed to feed the Little Lost ?

Has anyone asked the little one, young , boy or girly? A nice name would seem to be order rather than just that-great-ball-of-hairy-cuteness ...

"I didn't mean that the community discuss individual moderation decisions. To be honest, it's a bit weird that people would think that that's what I meant."

You mentioned the community being able to discuss "moderation issues", to me "moderation issues" are decisions and referrals and stuff, not stuff like whether the Mods should be named.