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

I wanted to reply on the feedback page, but I will post here instead.

About the man with little people in the television:
To me, that snippet shows great compassion with the human being.

The engineer was factual. The man with 'little men' just could not grasp the techno, and in order to remain functional in his own concept of the world had to keep the notion of little men. It may be wrong scientifically, but it is hurting no one. I can't see that DNA judged the man who could not grasp technology!

Now, the guide entry (Edited!) that raised all this can be seen as another story about a person believing in 'little men' (or equivalent).

Do you really think she should be edited out of the Everything aspect of the guide, whether she was a complete loon or not? Do you really consider yourself to be able to make that judgement? I know I don't.

But maybe I find people interesting, not only facts. And I find things people do (and believe) interesting, even if it is not science. I actually find you a little interesting, being so insistant on wanting no records of peoples beliefs in a wide place like this... Is it dangerous, in your view?

I made a comment to FM about Serephina's crystal entry. But since Serephina has joined the conversation, I've gone over and addressed the Crystal entry in the correct place, in its Peer Review thread.

No, I know you don't just write articles about witchcraft but you have written a large proportion of them. You have also written about crystal therapy, which I (and most other people) think is a complete and utter load of rubbish. You have made past assertions about the effectiveness of this practice that are totally unsubstantiated.

I can't prove whether string theory is wrong - in fact, some scathingly say it's 'not even wrong' - but it is a mathematically sound and rigorous theoretical discipline that comsumes up a huge amount of intellectual effort and deserves to be written about as an academic movement, at the very least.

So I am not allowed to comment about an entry and the conditions under which it was allowed to be published in a thread attached to it? Is that what you're saying? I want to be clear about this.

And I also made every effort to take on peoples suggestions with that entry and still am doing so. I'm not inflexible or unwilling to see others viewpoint and change things accordingly. I'm actuallly rather sceptical about crystals myself, but people believe it as they believe in god or little green men in ufos.. whether the belief is right or wrong it is a part of things.

Of course you are. But in fact, I asked the editors to move that thread (which I started) into Editorial Feedback, and they did so, so the thread which Mrs VV is attacking you for "reviving" is in a place dedicated to discussing Editorial policy.

No, I don't think people's beliefs are dangerous at all. I have never demanded that they be edited out of the EG. I have however demanded that I be allowed to comment upon them. As you will see by the way this thread has developed, some people here think that my counter-arguments are dangerous and should not be allowed in the PR thread but rather directed at the Editors where they can't rock the boat in any way.

By the way, Wilma: I was a Scout for a tour of duty that lasted *years*. I have written 25-odd EG entries, about eight of which were Pick of the Day, and recommended countless more. I have helped shape huge numbrs of entries through PR. If anybody can be said to have worked constructively then it is me. If I'm sounding a discordant note now it's because I've sung in the choir for so bloody long that my voice is hoarse.

Oh, honey, you can say what you want where you want how you want. I was under the apparently erroneous assumption, however that you were seeking a positive outcome. I am fast coming to the conclusion that you 'vocalise' for the means not the ends. I have heard you and others make the same arguments over and over again. Initially, I sympathised somehow, saw the points being made, and wondered why you were all huddling in the places where you could not have the effect you were seeking. I liken it to a bunch of old guys in a dark pub rabbiting and grumbling about ASBOs, the state of the nation, reality TV and mobile phones. You want something to happen as a result of all this talk or not? You want results, then go talk to the people who can change things here. You want a people's revolution? Declare yourselves. What you are doing is, to me, despicable. You are targeting individuals who are doing nothing wrong (the entry *was* after picked, subbed, edited, Front paged and archived) All Serephina did was reseacrh and write the entry. Can you see the inequity? I bet you can't.

Well, I've tried that. I did it in the Scouts group. I am not a Scout now so I don't get access to that outlet any more.

By the way, dear, I am not targeting Serephina. I'm targeting the people who can do most to change things here and don't: people like you, the Scouts. People like I was once, before I lost hope. Like you said, the entry was after all picked, subbed, edited, Front paged and archived. And judging by what I've seen so far, this process will carry on in the same blithely insouciant way it has done recently. As for me, I was merely commenting that there is a way of averting this headlong rush for the cliffs. And, as Gnomon points out, the thread was moved to Editorial Feedback, after all, so how *exactly* would you like me to make such comments if not there?

Oh, I see: somebody has *yikesed* the original comment that I made that has led to all of this. Even though there was nothing in there that was racist, harassing, offensive, or even attacking someone else. They just didn't like what I was saying.

Utterly pathetic.

That is a little much ..yikesing you i mean

Like I said, I have no problems with you at all. How can I? I've never met you.

I would however like to give some background to the way I come across here. During my everyday life I am required to be all things to all people. When I talk to people here I treat them as a disembodied voice at the end of an Internet connection. That is because I have very little investment in them beyond what I come here to do. So, if I come across as overly robust at times, that's because I like to be in a place where personal feelings can for once play second fiddle to discussing ideas.

There are one or possibly two people here I would class as personal friends and with whom I weigh my words carefully against their feelings. But I don't see why I should be bound to a code that demands I treat *everyone* as such. Moreover, I have very few personal quarrels with anyone here, least of all you.

>>So, if I come across as overly robust at times, that's because I like to be in a place where personal feelings can for once play second fiddle to discussing ideas.<<


No!! Not in the least!</>

However, you are a sanctimonious twerp who will only ever listen to himself!

Okay, you don't have the same belief's as Serephina, but what gives you the right to force your 'ideals' on her or anyone else?

You are not preserving the memory of DNA, you are dictating what YOU believe as being 'his' ideals.


Oh.. I trust that isn't too fluffy for you!

Morning all and hello

Can someone give me a quick resumay to whats going on??

RJR

Bring it on! Actually, I was temptyed to yikes this, but I think I'll leave it in as it adds a little colour

As it happens, I am not forcing my ideals on anyone. You can believe in what you want. Neither am I dictating DNA's ideals. We both happened to believe in the same thing, which is that there are such things as facts and evidence matters. When something is demonstrably false then there is nothing wrong with saying so, especially in a factual writing site. Either crystals do or don't heal people, period. You can't have it both ways. Now, if that makes me a sanctimonious twerp, I am quite happy to be one any day. Better that than an over-credulous dupe. I'd suggest that the one's who go around in a coccoon of their own dreams against the outside world should practice listening, not me.

Christ: is it any surprise this palce is going to the dogs.

"Can someone give me a quick resumay to whats going on??"

Oh, just standing up for some outdated concepts, such as truth and accyracy, that's all.

What I've actually said is that the *existence* of belief and faith is factual, and therefore an entry on a belief system such as Wicca is well within the remit of the Guide. Subtle difference but there you go.

It's a shame some experienced Researchers have chosen not to participate in the project any longer, especially because their patience is very much appreciated by younger / newer Researchers. Giving up and then complaining about the standards of the Guide is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Nevertheless, it's your choice.

Every Researcher has a 'lifespan', or so the experts tell us, and some people get burned out and lose their zeal for h2g2. It's sad, but entirely understandable.

But there's a difference between becoming jaded and being a bully.

FM. If someone did an entry on acupuncture, would you disagree with it?

Oh, I'm no bully, just a bear. Bullies get a kick out of making others feel small. Don't think I'm enjoying this.