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

This post has been removed.

I just thought I'd point out that Peer Review is *not* the appropriate forum for going after the moderators, *nor* is it the appropriate forum to advertise an entry that has been directly copied from another website (even if the text is in public domain).

Mikey

Yah Boo!

Viva La Revolution!

'Ill repost this every time the moderators remove it'

That smacks of spamming and is against the house rules.

Continually wasting moderators time like that is liable to get you kicked off the site too.

This a waste of Peer Review time, how quickly can entries be booted off here?

I'm not big fan of moderation here either BTW (nobody is I think) but I don't approve of this - you could simply post a link on your homepage if you wish to advertise it.

Goodbye

'Xcuse me Orcus but you're not related to Anne Robinson are you?

I think you missunderstand some of my misplaced frustration, I've now added a link from my home page and won't bother this thread again!

"it" was referring to the entry not this thread, I've already uncancelled it and unmoderated it. and will continue to do so!

I also didn't intend to break house rules and was a resident of the house before the moderators moved in, I also wasn't consulted on the make up of the rules and am a bit peeved that no one else was apparently!

Sleep Well!

No I think I understood perfectly what you meant Zarniwhoop. I suspect you'll find the PTB will get upset if you continually repost something that has already been deleted.

If you were here before the interregnum you should also know not to waste time on Peer Review, it won't make you popular and will discourage people from listening to you.

I'm afraid, as mentioned, one of the requirements for the edited guide is that it have substantial original content - and this entry is largely copied from elsewhere. As such, I'm going to recommend that this thread be moved to the sin bin. Obviously, if you're in breach of the house rules the moderators and TPTB will have words, but that's thankfully nothing to do with me...

Please don't see this as censorship or such - there are guidelines on what is allowed into the edited guide, and this entry breaches them big time - they're the same http://www.h2g2.com/writing-guidelines that we've had for a long time now, and most people seem reasonably happy with them. I've given the same response on much less controversial topics: you're not being singled out for hostile treatment because of your subject matter.

If you *do* want to try to get an entry into the edited guide, may I suggest topics such as "globalisation", "capitalisation", "The anti-capitalist movement", "anarchism", and suchlike - you'll have to be balanced, of course, but there's no reason why you shouldn't succeed in getting such a piece into the guide. Similarly, an original entry on the Mayday Monopoly 'event' would be welcome - especially one written after the event with personal experience of what it was like to be there.

Have fun!

"The arrogance of youth" would be another likely candidate for writing about. There's a lot of it about

This entry is political lobbying. The entries have been removed from the Guide, as has the first posting in this conversation, which linked to the removed Guide entry.

If the Researcher continues to post this his h2g2 account will be closed.

Peta

Yeah, that's what I thought, and hinted at.

Thanks Orcus!

No problem, jsut practising for my future scoutship

Obviously political lobbying has no place in the *Edited* guide, and obviously spamming conversations with this kind of thing is against the T&C, and obviously breaching copyright is theft, and obviously advocating illegal behaviour is illegal and should be stamped on from a height, and obviously something this unbalanced is in danger of being libellous, or at the very least, grossly unfair to an extent which cannot be solved by adding a link at the top, *but*...

{pause}

If you have an entry which is not hugely unbalanced, doesn't breach copyright, etc, etc, etc, but which advocates (say) the UK entering the EU, this ought to be ok? It'd still be political lobbying - but looking at other entries, for example the current talking point, leads me to suspect that it would pass... wouldn't it?

OK !

Hands up I've been a naughty boy!

I'll try better next time!

once again ,

SORRY!

Z

I guess it is time to move this thread to the sin bin

It would depend on the individual entry - it's the sort of thing that would be referred over to me Lucinda. But yes, I expect that that kind of thing would get through. The problem with moderation is that it really isn't cut and dried, not that simple. I would appreciate it if you don't try to test this out though, I really don't need to get into a moderation /political lobbying moderation 'let's test this out to and fro', not if you ever want to see another h2g2 real-time meet-up. Please let me get on with other stuff now okay? Thanks!

Lucinda, Another political entry in Peer Review which is a little more appropriate, but still a bit off in my mind: http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F48874?thread=108510 Presented solely for your consideration and ideas... Yours, Jake

Yep, that was the answer I was looking for.

then!

Editorial Note: This conversation has been moved from 'Peer Review Sin Bin' to 'mayday monopoly!'.

Back to Entry - article deleted.