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

So, thank you.
(lurking, lurking everywhere)

You're welcome on general principles, my dear . But what exactly are you talking about? When I first read this tonight I figured you meant my statement regarding LeKZ in the inventions thread. ( I was throwing down the gauntlet there. That one ...OOPS...should I say they? have irritated me for some time with hir clever inconsistencies and downright nasty behavior.) And I answered hir tirade, hopefully in a sane manner. Wish she/they would learn to communicate more appropriately. There's a lot of value in that one/them, though it might take a cybershovel to dig through the turds before finding the gold Slap me.... I know, I'm bad.

Anyway, thanks for your support. Even if you were on about something else, your post gave me a bit of additional momentum to do something that I felt needed to be done, which I've been avoiding for some time.

Regards,

MoG

Got it in one - no slap needed.
I'm gald to have given you momentum, and look forward to seeing the results of it. A Guide Entry perhaps?

LOL! Don't think so! I just went and ed her in her own space, where she was ranting about me, or rather, what she thinks I am, based on 1 1/2 lines of post and my user name. grrrrrrr. Made my heart thump to read that bushwah. And especially disturbing to see how other people (who I respect) reacted to the spin. Every day is another learning experience, eh?

I've just seen that. Phew!

Let's hope for calm after the storm.

Something you could do....
I took my analysis from the thread and put it here
http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/A578216
for my own reference and in case anyone asked. It's only a bit of fun, but very good. I probably should cut and paste my own reply as to the accuracy. I'll do it later, when I get back from wo*k and make it all look nicer too.

I remember that one. I'm still looking at that thread periodically--find it amusing and sometimes enlightening. Regarding what a MoGgie is, though, Ive been involved in all sorts of conversations since last August, in some of which I *chose* to air my personal views. Poor, pathetic, insecure lil MoGgie has been exersizing her omnipresence for some time. I haven't yet felt the need to display it all in one gestalt. Guess my ego hasn't yet overtaken the universe. Maybe next week...

It's very rare for me to let my personal views out for an airing, but I lurk everywhere, enjoying the sight of others excercising theirs. So I've read some of your postings. I'm the shadowy figure in the corner of the Atelier, the pubs, coffee shops, you name it. I even read the personal journals that end with "I don't know why I'm writing this, nobody will read it". Like my namesake, just occasionally I emerge from hiding and surprise people.

Someone here once suggested that I chose the name of a huge, ugly and very old fish because I had a self esteem problem. Irony's wasted on some don't you think?

Yes, irony IS wasted on some. Pity.
I lurk a lot more than I post, too. This is quite an interesting place for that.
I'd better go look at the other places I've been posting. Seems as if Colonel Sellers is planning to start slapping me around, since someone else has been put on "time out" and can't do it herself. hehehe Another friend who lurks alerted me to that lil factoid. ALMOST makes me want to go post controversially, just to see what happens

for us, and one for anyone else who's lurking in.

cheers!

*waves*

Well, since you say you lurk around me, I thought I'd return the compliment... Anyhow, I owe you a response on that 'royal we' thread, and I'll give you one there in time, if that's ok with you? It just might be delayed a bit, for various reasons - but it will hopefully clarify my reactions and make them less disturbing - who knows. It can't hurt, anyway, right?

Funny, I remember saying what I thought MoG was, based on 1 1/2 lines of post and three of four user names - and getting it completely wrong. And Coelacanth - got yours mostly wrong too, if I remember. *sigh* The problem is, people are too complicated - if everyone was just 2-D stereotypes, life'd be so much easier for me... but I'm glad you're enjoying the analysis thread, anyway - it's been good fun, though I was somewhat put out to find it haunted by a skeptic {they get everywhere! }

Perhaps the two of you should consider collaborating on an entry on 'lurking' - etiquette for lurkers, pros and cons, motivation, that kinda thing. If you do, drop me a line, and I'll come by and share a few thoughts there, see what sort of stuff happens. Though I know it'd make a change for Coelacanth to be writing rather than reading...

oh, re: "time out" - wouldn't you say that the ability to recognise when you will be unable to reply to a comment without doing so in a flamefilled manner is a sign of wisdom, and one of the things which we on h2g2 particularly encourage? Something one should congratulate, in fact?

Back on Peer Review {where, incidentally, I'm looking forward to seeing that entry on lurking }, the typical advice is to make sure you give as much positive criticism as negative criticism. I also try and make clear that I am always criticising the *words*, not the *person*. Doesn't work all the time, cos I screw up like everyone, but I give it a shot, at least.

Umm, I had a point somewhere, but I lost it. Oh yeah - Xanthia was going to correct a typo you had...

> "someone else has been put on "time out" and can't do it herself"

I think you perhaps meant the phrase - "someone else has put herself on "time out" and won't do it herself". It's a subtle difference, of course - but I do try and avoid misunderstandings in these cases. After all, one never knows who is watching, does one?

-Lucinda

Hi Lucinda Nice of you to drop in. Feel free to grab a cocktail.

I can't imagine making a guide entry on lurking. I'm an amateur, not an expert. I wasn't even aware that some people consider it rude or invasive. I guess it just never occurred to me that anyone would post something in a place like this and consider it private. My mistake.

Thanks to Xanthia for the correction. That probably does better describe the situation. And I do think it is a sign of wisdom for her to refrian from flaming, given the situation she's put herself into here. I think it's a shame that Colonel Sellers would offer to hunt me down and do it for her, though. Does she need a flunky to go and try to harass people who have disagreed with her until they get fed up and leave the site? No-- that's not exactly what was said, but that's the flavor that was left in my mouth when I read that mess. Is there anything constructive going on there that I've missed?

You know, I'm not interested in flaming LeKZ. I just wish that she'd put some of her professional expertise to work when she goes and slams people. She claims to have about 20 years experience in various social sciences, but she can't seem to consistently treat people with respect. It looks to me as if she takes great pleasure in "proving" other people are wrong, rather than conversing in a manner which would persuade them to consider her input. It feels like airing her superiority is her purpose. I can't reconcile that kind of behavior with her claims that she is trying to educate people and reduce abusive behavior in the world. Deliberately slamming people makes them mad or induces feelings of powerlessness, and they tend to go take it out on someone weaker than they are. So what's the point? And more importantly, what are the results of that sort of provokation? She KNOWS what some people do in those situations. She doesn't know if someone she's just ed is going to decide to slap someone in their life around to release their frustration. I'd think she'd be especially careful about how she uses her words because of that. Maybe you could suggest that to her, if it hasn't occurred to her already. She respects you and considers what you have to say. Obviously I can't do so, because anything I say to her seems to be taken as an attack from a pesky deity wannabe.

That's sooooooo funny, her take on what that name means, when it's really just about me being accountable to myself for my actions.

My writing skills are not as well honed as yours or hers, or many of the people's here on h2g2. But I find it difficult to believe that they are so poor that her twisted versions of what I have actually said are what she genuinely thinks I meant by my posts. My feeling is that she's cleverly picking and chosing bits and ignoring the whole, in order to present me as a maroon. I really don't understand the point to that, other than plain nastiness.

Anyway, enough of that ramble. Thanks for your time-- I'm hoping that at least some of this makes enough sense to you that you don't just dismiss the whole as ignorant tripe.

Regards,
MoG

Well, it's kinda like if I'm in the park with friends, just chatting about life. Everything I say is 'in public', and I'm not trying to hide what I say - but I'd be a little distressed to find that someone else was listening to every word I say - and I'd be more distressed if they suddenly came up and started disagreeing with me. Sure, it's public, but I'm not talking to everyone, much of these times - that's why such conversations are on my page, rather than somewhere big and public.

Myself, if I lurk I try to do it in such a way that nobody realises I've been lurking, and put it down to empathy on my behalf. Because, frankly, I need the help! The other reason is that if you say that you lurk a lot, people will expect you to have read an unrelated forum that explains what they mean by something, so if by chance you have not, there can be misunderstandings. Invasive is of course a biggy - posting a message on someone's home space, whether after lurking or straight off, is often seen as an invasion, and many people get defensive when they are attacked on home turf. It's odd for there to be 'territory' in a virtual land, but it certainly exists.

Constructive? Well, Barton had explained how he would deal with the same thing. Xanthia explained how she'd have sorted it. Previously I explained why, in my opinion, those who post from positions of ignorance or partial knowledge are a benefit, not a negative, and there was a brief discussion of pop-psychology and its woes. And there was some support and kindness towards someone who appears to need it, just at the moment. Oh, and it's been a good place to blow off steam on a number of topics, some h2g2-based, some not, and thereby avoid blowing the steam in other people's faces.

- unsalted for lower blood pressure

Looks can be deceptive, can they not? I'm no empath, but consider this situation. You've spent most of your childhood life being physically, mentally, and emotionally abused, in one form or another. And someone comes along who effectively dismisses such abuse as only happening in a few hundreds of families. Would you respond calmly and in a measured manner? Or would you respond emotionally and aggressively? I dunno what I would do, and I hope to never find out.

> "Deliberately slamming people makes them mad or induces feelings of powerlessness"

Very correct. Naturally you will realise that many posts directed *at* LeKZ fall into this category, and I've certainly noticed feelings of both anger and powerlessness in her recently. What are the results? Well in this case it'd be self-mutilation and nightmares, amongst other things.

This possibly all looks like special pleading - it's not. However, you appear to have reached a conclusion about LeKZ which I do not feel is warranted by the facts. The conclusion I have reached is of someone who is fitting into h2g2 a lot better than she was initially, and will continue to improve, if people would just leave the constructive criticism to those of us who are able to criticise constructively.

-Martin

Thank you for your response, Martin. You know, I don't make a habit of bursting into people's home pages and disagreeing with them. That's why, during the Playboy Reporter debacle, when I was disturbed at the way the peer review was being used and then followed the trail she left there for someone (Peta maybe, don't remember exactly) to come join in the bashing festivities started on her page, I kept my mouth shut. Almost didn't-- I thought it was a cruel and unnecessary henpecking party going on there, and not the way one should treat anyone who was TRYING to make a legitimate contribution to the Guide. But, as I hadn't been involved in the peer review process (was just lurking) I decided it would have been invasive to pop up in that conversation on her page. Funny thing is, after seeing the results of that mess, I wish I had said something, tried to do a little bud nipping. Not tell y'all how to behave, but more like "hey-- is this really the kind of thing you want to be posting? Would you like it if it were being done to you?" I felt as if I'd seen some nasty abuse going on and walked away from it because it was none of my business. IRL I would not be so passive.

When I did enter into her conversation on her page the other day, it was after addressing her in the inventions thread and TRYING to state my views without attacking. I could have carried on there, but that struck me as inappropriate. So I went and popped into a thread where she had been opinionating about me. Dunno, guess I could have created a new thread to have that conversation with her, but she'd already copied some of my posts in there. It struck me as the appropriate place to go. Do you think I should have just kept my mouth shut and ignored it? I honestly don't think it's fair that she should be excused her emotional outbursts on the basis that she's been abused and that those of us who weren't should have a different set of rules. If she were stupid I'd find it excusable. She's not. If she didn't continually pull out her professional expertise for OTHER people's correction, I'd find it excusable. If she weren't extremely adept at conveying her point I'd figure that she was writing things she doesn't quite mean. That's not the case.

I wish she didn't feel that I'm on some kind of mission to torment and badger her. I'm not. I'm saying, yet again, that I was just trying to make her think about the results she's causing with her actions. That's all. It's unfortunate that her history causes her to view constructive criticism as anything other than a personal attack. It's also unfortunate that I have no control over how she has chosen to percieve my responses to her. That's why I haven't gone and addressed her again, though there are some things which she has attributed to me (for example, turning my birth control invention idea into involuntary sterilization for poor people and suggesting that I think those who are supported by tax dollars should be eaten. That was hilariuos. But no, it's not what I think.) I don't want to escalate this thing for her. I don't want to be some kind of unwitting catalyst that sends her into one or another sort of destructive frenzy.

So I guess that's why I'm sitting here typing to you. I'd like to be able to go out and publicly clear those misrepresentations where they occurred. It irks me that I can't do that without doing more harm than good. And I need to put it somewhere so it doesn't just eat at me. Martin, sorry to lay it all at your doorstep. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to defend myself in a place where damage control exists. I appreciate that, no matter what your opinion of "me" actually is, you seem able to restrain your criticsm to something constructive in this place.

(please take any typos with a grain of salt. Gotta dash off to work-- no time to edit)
MoG

It's a tremendous pleasure to find myself being slagged here, before I have made a single act. In post 4, MoG complains of LeKZ: "where she was ranting about me, or rather, what she thinks I am, based on 1 1/2 lines of post". And now I find myself being criticized for 1 1/2 lines of post in a forum. Hypocrite.

That was a conversation among friends. We (not the royal "we," but people in general) speak differently when we're among friends. We don't say exactly what we mean, but talk around it, expecting that they know us well enough to read between the words, not make any hasty generalizations, give us the benefit of the doubt, etc. When I saw that LeKZ was disturbed by what was going on there, I volunteered to look into the matter. But when I do so, I leave my prejudices behind, evaluating each post on its own merits, before jumping in. If peace could be made, I'd make it. If LeKZ was being too hasty and emotional, I'd let her know. And if she was right, and you were just being a b***h, I'd let her know *that*, too. And then I'd proceed to let you know. Usually, these things are the fault of both parties. My comment was intended to make her feel better, let her know she was not isolated, while promising to look into the matter. I'm sure she understood that I was not offering to act as anyone's guard dog. I doubt she would appreciate such an offer.

I wanted to stay uninvolved with the ugliness in the inventions thread. I offered to get involved only because a friend has felt herself to be unfairly maligned in the situation. And now, like it or not, you have decided to make me a full participant. You've even dictated the role I would play in this incident, against my will. Very well then... I shall play that role.

Your petty whining about me has changed my tactics. I cannot read your posts in the inventions thread with any sort of dispassionate judgement, because you've already p****d me off. What's worse, you've shown yourself overly prone to the sort of hasty generalization and uninformed, inflammatory drivel that fuels this sort of incident. I have two words for you: stop it.

I don't know what you hope to gain by your tactics. Whatever specific argument you had with her in the inventions thread should have stayed in the inventions thread. Instead, I'm seeing a personal crusade. You're posting defamation to her personal space, and now to yours, which is the H2G2 equivalent of talking behind her back. You're confessing to lurking over everything she does, and picking it apart. You are, in effect, committing harassment. And you know that she has had her hands tied by previous events on H2G2.

I've seen this sort of thing before, in the case of another researcher, this one a young guy with a tenuous control of his emotions. When the smoke cleared on the incident he brought upon himself, he should have been permitted to learn from it, and grow from it, and continue to be a part of the community. Instead, various vultures circled around him, knowing he'd been disarmed and disfavored, nipping at his feet, waiting for him to react and doom himself. It was not acceptable then, and it is not acceptable now.

LeKZ's particular history and emotionality make this an even more sensitive issue, as Martin has said. But even without that, your behavior does you no credit. You dislike her? Fine. Communities exist just fine with people who dislike each other. Just stay away from her for a time. Perhaps, when the emotions have cooled, you'll be able to approach each other with a fresh perspective, unburdened by all of the emotional baggage that has sprung up between you in the pointless conversation at the inventions thread, and elsewhere. Until then, you should just stay away from each other. I'll be passing the same advice on to her... actually, I don't have to, because I know she's monitoring this conversation. She has a right to, after all... it's about her.

But mark this: she does not have the respect of the community required to settle this matter if the harrassment continues. I, on the other hand, am not in any jeopardy of losing my account anytime soon. I will use whatever standing I may have managed to acquire to bring these activities to a halt. I think you know that your activities do not shed a favorable light on you. It would not be any better for you than it would be for LeKZ if this became another incident that spilled over into the entire community... and it looks right now like it's headed there. All that's required now is a message across one of the volunteer mailing lists to drag in everyone under the sun. Do you want that?

Just stop it. Let it drop. Don't lurk on her space, and you won't have any reasons to post these whines behind her back. She'll do the same.

I don't recall any invitation to 'bashing festivities'. The amateur psychologist in me wonders if your personal regret at not intervening early enough to prevent that incident has coloured your view of later ones - I certainly know that defending LeKZ from the subsequent onslaught has coloured my view of similar incidents. However, such things are in the past, and we should both try and move on from them, I feel.

Should you have ignored it? Well, what you posted was certainly *not* constructive, in my view, especially given that such constructive things you did say had already been mentioned and apologised for by LeKZ in an earlier post. Sorry to be negative about this, but that's just how it came across to me. Perhaps you could have emailed someone you trust, and asked them to put across your message on your behalf. Failing that, ignoring such will at least ensure that the situation gets no worse - just shout at your computer screen if you need to vent... {done that...}

LeKZ' history does not excuse her behaviour, but it does explain her behaviour, at least partially. That's why I brought it up: because the way you are seeing her behaviour seems to me to be inaccurate, and it may be misleading you and causing problems. It wasn't special pleading, as I said, it was just an attempt to inform and clarify. I certainly understand your need to write some of your feelings down so that they don't eat at you, though. Indeed, that would be the same reason why LeKZ writes them down.

Thank you for declining to escalate this matter, and for bearing my stream of (mostly hypocritical, it must be admitted) criticism in good humour. Perhaps I could offer to broker some kind of gentleperson's agreement between you and LeKZ to neither read nor post to each others threads, and to keep any criticism or irritation at each other off h2g2. It could run for as long as you both wanted it to, and perhaps provide a little closure in this delicate issue?

-Martin

It had to be said...perhaps. I'm sorry I'm intruding, but this seems to be the sort of thread where just about anyone is invited.

I want to establish that I speak without intolerance. I try to, anyway. I travel around cyberspace spreading goodwill and hope, and trying to be objective. I don't agree with some of the postings which have necessitated the previous thread, and I think that victimisation (continued pressure on a person who has already complained of harrassment) was unprovoked, but I am hopeful of a better understanding in the future, after all involved and irate parties have taken some time away from each other. This is after all what happens in real life (just look at how well Russia and America have been getting on in the 'Nineties, after thirty years of Cold War).

Please, please, take a step back - take two steps back - and don't read anything you disagree with.

x x Fenny (optimistic, for Zero Intolerance and the religion of One-World)

Well, hello everybody! What a lovely surprise party! Refreshments are at the bar in the back.

First: Colonel Sellers. My apologies are in order. You're right, I shouldn't have discussed you in the way I did. I misinterpreted what you have kindly explained to me, ran my mouth without having a full picture of the facts. As we are ALL well aware, that happens sometimes, especially when people are upset. That's not an excuse for my behavior, by the way. Lesson learned, and I bet I'll be a LOT more aware of how I'm posting on my space in the future.

So now I get to deal with the effects of my causes, huh? ASK AND YE SHALL RECEIVE, MoGgy! That's supposed to be my line! I can't help but get a kick out of the irony in this situation. (I'm laughing at myself, mind you-- not at anyone else here. I WAS a fine case of the pot calling the kettle black, and didn't even note that little factoid til you pointed it out to me.) Thank you.

Now, onto more serious matters. You could email the volunteer groups. We could have a bruhaha. It would definitely be unpleasant. I suspect that I might not be looked on quite as harshly as you seem to think, given that I don't have a history of becoming involved in flame wars. Lost my temper and was snide with someone who decided to attack me for an observation I made. I also backed off and chose to stop (without you having to command me to) because I don't want to be a part of anyone hurting hirself. Note my prior post to Martin, if you didn't see that already. I suspect that things might go worse for LeKZ than they would for me, if the whole mess were brought to the attention of the community. I am NOT interested in seeing her account closed. I am NOT after some kind of vindication. She has many valuable assests for a place like this. It saddens me that she has trouble tempering her approach. I don't even exactly dislike her, just disagree with some of her tactics at times. I've learned a good bit from her entries, sometimes have found her wit to be impeccable. It would be a shame for her to be removed. I don't believe I've ever said anything on h2g2 that would contradict that.

So let's just let sleeping dogs lie, shall we? I'm sorry to have forced you into the position of guard dog, though I must say, you play the part well.

And Martin--
I'm thinking that you shouldn't need to spend your time as an agreement broker, when you'd probably much rather be spending it on the peer review and creating Guide entries. Thank you for the offer, though.

I've been thinking about your suggestion to make an entry on lurking, and would be tempted to do so if it wouldn't be totally subjective. I'll probably post some sort of "Lurkers Anonymous" notice on my page somewhere as a public service message, though. In my case, lurking is nowhere near as sinister as it might sound. I have neither the time nor the interest to follow anyone's every move. Just bounce off some of the conversations that certain people get involved in sometimes, because they seem to be interested in some of the same things I am, or because I like the way they write. I use it kind of like a random search engine. Never know where it might go. Is that a breach of nettiquette? That's not a rhetorical question, btw. I don't know if it is or isn't. So I'm asking.

MoG

And finally Fenny--
Don't worry about intruding on my page. As a relative newcomer to the internet, I guess it never occurred to me that anything out here is really private if it's accessible to anyone who wants to go there, or that there would be reply buttons at the end of every post if they weren't intended to be used. (I'm not being snide here-- I really WAS surprised when I learned that some people feel differently about that) Besides, I'm a social creature, always enjoy interacting with people. And I LOVE a party! The more, the merrier!

I don't know if it's appropriate, and I certainly won't go do it myself and stir up any more ruckus, but if you think it's wise, drop off this with LeKZ for me. I regret that things blew so far out of proportion. Call it a sub rosa truce. I agree with the consensus that the two of us should avoid all confrontation for some time to come. It isn't constructive.

Thanks for joining in.