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

Having been told by various members that my posts were not only irritating but definitely harmful to the "gay marriage" conversation, I unsubscribed several days ago hoping that it might revive. It has not yet and it seems that I may well have 'killed it off'.

And yet, while it is falling down the list of current conversations, it has kept its position as "the most popular conversation".

Is this in part that way that a "good fight" tends to attract crowds?

Or is it just the result of the way that "popularity" is calculated on h2g2 over a current time period so that, as with the VAT hike and inflation, an "event" will eventually drop out of the calculation?

It's a good question, but I'm not sure that anybody knows the answer. That "most popular conversation" column on the Front Page is calculated by the system, and I don't think we have any access to look at those calculations.

Thanks for that reply Gnonom..

Presumably there are at least two elements.. One would be the frequency of posting, which is there for all to see. But every so often people "chip-in" to threads saying that normally they just enjoy reading through what other people have to say. And I think that "the system" often measures the number of "hits" that a site or thread receives.

Hence I try to console myself with the possibility that, though I exasperated many other posters, from a "spectator" point of view I may not actually have been as harmful as some people felt, perhaps in that case including some people who thought that the question was a "no brainer" with a very simple answer.



Cass

Thanks for that reply Gnonom..

Presumably there are at least two elements.. One would be the frequency of posting, which is there for all to see. But every so often people "chip-in" to threads saying that normally they just enjoy reading through what other people have to say. And I think that "the system" often measures the number of "hits" that a site or thread receives.

Hence I try to console myself with the possibility that, though I exasperated many other posters, from a "spectator" point of view I may not actually have been as harmful as some people felt, perhaps in that case including some people who thought that the question was a "no brainer" with a very simple answer.



Cass

Hi Cass,

the word popular is not accurate there. It should be "the most posted conversation during a given time"

I´ll explain it.
Time ago, a conversation I was having with another researcher was in that list. I didn´t understand why. Popular?? It´s about two people´s everyday life, nothing popular, just how do you do today, what about your studies... etc.
I felt a bit annoyed for that "popularity" I asked my ACE, and he told me that the conversation could have got to the list in a moment when the site is calm, like for instance a Saturday afternoon.

So, we stopped posting for a while to see it off, but it took a pair of weeks, at least, until it disappeared.

Ultimately I think the answer is that certain elements of the site are broken, and unless they're vital to its functioning, are unlikely to get fixed any time soon, if ever. I wouldn't worry about it.

<<Ultimately I think the answer is that certain elements of the site are broken, and unless they're vital to its functioning, are unlikely to get fixed any time soon, if ever. I wouldn't worry about it.<<<

Agree with that of not worry about it.

This is a place which gives me much, more than what I offer, so I´m not going to get annoyed for this or that*. I´ll just remember that every conversation in this place is public.


*the eyes that appear when someone visits your place ( Actually, I like that), even moderation issues...
meh, "First world problems"

Maria

Thank you for that.. But there was some information supplied a few weeks ago relating to the hundreds of people who had been reading someone's Guide Entry- without them ever knowing; so I wondered whether- as obviously the computer system has this information- this also came into the calculation.

Cass

CASS is really asking how to react to the fact of "various
posters" telling him:

>>..my posts were not only irritating but definitely harmful
to the "gay marriage" conversation..<<

Well, consider the neighborhood.

'They' (can I call 'them' they?) tend to be oversensitive and
inclined to outspoken rudeness when offended. And there
are a seemingly disproportionate number of 'them' on site.
Perhaps, a result of the high level of tolerance among h2g2
researchers. Fair dues. And the convo was clearly labelled
and thus easy to ignore and avoid if the subject was of no
personal interest or concern.

In any case, because I generally find CASS's postings have
a depth of consideration, interesting historical references and
a sincere and honest and unjaded enthusiasm to participate,
especially in conversations one might not be able to have in RL,
I want to offer my advice not to worry about it too much. Again,
consider the neighborhood.

Not that I've actually looked at that thread. Not my cuppa.

No doubt we all get (I know I have) similar responses when we
enter into conversations beyond our areas of exper-tease.



~jwf~

jwf

Well as came up on that thread I have fairly limited experience/contact with "the gay community"- most of my contact with colleagues who were "gay" coming many decades ago, though one of the late-eighties ones gave me cause as Staff Chairperson to mention at the "season of goodwill" what a reflection it was on us collectively that one of our colleagues, in exile from French conscription and perhaps family approbrium over his sexual orientation, had lived among us but had felt such a sense of isolation that during the half-term break he had committed suicide. It took a girl friend in Canada to phone the local Police when she had not heard from him. They broke into his flat to find that he had hanged himself from a door handle.

Just allowing people the space to "do their own thing" is not enough.

And while "fools rush in where angels fear to tread".. I like the title of a French novel from the post-war period "Saints go to Hell". One might add perhaps that sinners get sent there.

Cass

Hoovooloo, it's worse than that - if the bugs haven't been fixed by now, we have no way of fixing them, because we haven't any access to the insides of the DNA engine. We can adjust what goes in, but we can't change anything inside. It's compiled code and we have no access to the source code.

We'll fix them all in the Pliny system which should be available soon.

The Pliny system? Are we going to be transferred from DNA to Pliny?

[I won't ask whether it's Pliny the Elder or Pliny the Younger; wouldn't want Vesuvius to come after me. ]

In my experience it often should:

1) Be Brit centric

2) Quote British media

3) Reference alcohol, politics, religion or sex

4) Subtly denigrate or alternately celebrate any group little represented here.

5) Be academic rather than experiential.

6) Not appear to be too clever.

7) Use euphemisms instead of swear words.

All IMOHO, of course.

"6) Not appear to be too clever."

That must be my downfall, then. I labor valiantly t0 be as clever as I can.I don't think I can turn off that function.

clzoomer

In fact you could say;

"Has this Brit centric, originally BBC based site become an even stronger parody of the xenophobic old school, British site of full on blinder academia that not only ignores experience but focuses exclusively on written reference to a seemingly distant reality?

Are we becoming irrelevant to anyone who doesn't know about walks and pubs in the Lake District or academic reference at arms length?

Are you all nothing more than words, somewhat less than personal experience outside of each little world? Does your experience with an individual person or a month long vacation to where they live make you an expert about their country or culture?

Of course not.

Shame."

Which of course you already did.. Any advance on what you wrote about yourself in 2002?

Vancouver must indeed seem like "outside".. By repute a beautiful place hopefully not yet ruined by excessive popularity.

Cass

Hey Paul, once again the posted word was not specific enough. In that instance I meant the initial post or question.

cass- 2002? You mean like

'I seek no steenken batches here, no record number of entries, no praise or damnation. Merely entertainment, information, friends, some (mostly) intelligent conversations, lots of humour and to share what little I have to offer.'

Sure.

And if we are quoting here- 'My core interest is an approach to history'.

Mine is not.

clzoomer

Thanks for having dropped in anyway..even if you found the atmosphere inappropriate for your needs.

When I first visited your space you seemed to have a feature that I either do not have or have never noticed giving a running total of the number of posts on a conversation.. I found that interesting in the light of this question. But on second visit I could not find it. Have you put up a shield to protect your "outsider looking in" status.

Cass

"Has this Brit centric, originally BBC based site become an even stronger parody of the xenophobic old school, British site of full on blinder academia that not only ignores experience but focuses exclusively on written reference to a seemingly distant reality?"
[Casseroleon]

If all this true, then travelling just a few stations further would bring us to solipsism.

I don't think that experience is really ignored. It's just a reflection of the limitations that experience often imposes. There are anecdotes about Boston [Massachusetts] grandes dames who didn't trust anyone who lived further west than Worcester. The two cities are thirty miles apart, for heaven's sake! This sort of thing could happen anywhere there are people who settle into narrow ruts.

For what it's worth, Douglas Adams began his career in England, but ended up in Los Angeles. John Lennon began in England, but was in new York at the time of his death. I'm not arguing here that eveyrbody in the world will eventually move to the U.S. , but if life can't be an adventure of discovery, then why did whatever powers that be put us here?

Of the places I've been, I have special fondness for Hong Kong, Quebec City, San Francisco, and London. However, I was on vacation when I was in these places, and I had such a good time that my experience colored my appreciation of them. Imagine being miserable anywhere, and wanting to get out as fast as possible.