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

Silent Lucidity U187192

Quincy U188685

Satyagraha U188650

wallflowergirl U188644

Brainless Blonde Babe U189044

Brainless Blonde Babe v2.0. U189229

Thirdgirl U193541

Any particular reason why you left these out?

H.

"Any particular reason why you left these out?"

Yes.

Silent Lucidity, wfg, bbb and bbb v2.0 wouldn't have existed as accounts had the first banning not happened. They are redundant, to one degree or another, with an account already listed.

Q and S are not listed for exactly the same reason that the five parody accounts of early February are not listed.

Thirdgirl would not, in my opinion, appreciate a link to his personal space, which would effectively point people to his creative writing, which is still available there because he didn't know to unsubscribe from the associated conversations before requesting that the account be closed.

>Silent Lucidity, wfg, bbb and bbb v2.0 wouldn't have existed as accounts had the first banning not happened.

A bit disingenuous, that, isn't it? What you're saying here is that that person wouldn't have signed up here, in direct contravention of the site's rules, FOUR times after having been banned, if they hadn't been banned. Well, erm, DUH! It just seemed to me that if you're listing all the accounts which are no longer active because of disagreement with the way the way the site is run, listing all those accounts would seem to make perfect sense. After all, every one of them represents anti-authoritarian protest against the rules you've apparently got a problem with, given that every one of them represents knowing and explicitly dishonest disregard for those rules. Seems to be the perfect demonstration of your point, to me.

>They are redundant, to one degree or another, with an account already listed.

But not everybody knows that the person operating the Arpeggio account, although banned, knowingly started FOUR other accounts in direct and dishonest contravention of the rules for no particularly pressing reason at all. I would have thought that given your problems with the rules as they stand that you'd want to celebrate and publicise every time that those rules were successfully broken.

>Q and S are not listed for exactly the same reason that the five parody accounts of early February are not listed.

The slight technical difference being that the parody accounts were apparently very clearly NOT being operated by a banned person, whereas every piece of technical evidence available to the h2g2 tech team, who know more about these things than me OR you, point to the Q and S accounts being further examples of successful rule breaking by the operator of the Arpeggio account.

If you don't accept that technical evidence, then that makes the holders of the Quincy and Satyagraha accounts innocent victims of the Editors of h2g2 and their reliance on the technical evidence and the rules - in which case I'd think they'd be top of your list. I mean to say, at least there was a REAL (perhaps debatable) reason for banning the holder of the Arpeggio account. The Q and S bans, if you insist that these were actually innocent third parties, were for NO good reason at all.

>Thirdgirl U193541 would not, in my opinion, appreciate a link

Very good of you to protect the poor likkle fink. Thirdgirl U193541. Bright enough to make a splash as a creative writer here. Bright enough to read the terms and conditions and realise that by writing here, the BBC gained some rights over their work. Bright enough to check the terms and conditions. Bright enough to complain about them and get the account shut down so that they've no further control.

Thirdgirl U193541. Not bright enough to check the terms and conditions *before* signing up, not bright enough to take EXPLICIT ADVICE offered by Lucinda about how to blank out entries, not bright enough to put the writing in entries where it was editable, but instead put it in postings where it is non-removable, and not bright enough to think that if a major multinational multimedia corporation is offering you the publicity and editing resources of its website for absolutely NOTHING, they must be getting SOMETHING out of it.

That, to me, is a quite startlingly SPECIFIC piece of ignorance. Thirdgirl U193541. Rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty, and then some.

H.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=183468&post=2011724#p2011724 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=184190&post=2023006#p2023006 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=182982 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=183339&post=2009354#p2009354 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=183188&post=2007535#p2007535 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=182708&post=2001593#p2001593 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=182302 http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F84877?thread=182462 Lest we forget. H.