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

... how on earth do you treat your enemies?

I am sorry I snapped. But really!

We are doing our level best to preserve the site and your constructive suggestions are really good and are helping to shape our proposals. But there is no need to be snide.

Regarding moderation - we are trying to create a system which is better than the current one. By "better" I think everyone means fairer, more transparent, and - fairly fundamentally - which won't bankrupt the site. The risk of bankruptcy comes from (1) employing full time moderators (2) paying insurance costs or (3) being sued to hell in a handcart.

We are discussing all this up front so that the new owners won't have to. If we don't form a workable approach which gives us what we want, then we risk getting what we have now. Or worse.

So if you are going to join in, don't be abusive. Be critical. Be constructive. But not abusive.

Please.

Ben

You call it abuse, which is a shame, because it means I’m unlikely to persuade you of the virtues of the method.

Remember that Convo the other day where we were talking about Wonderment, and how you sometimes lose it? Remember what I said about losing it when you try to reason?

You’re doing a lot of reasoning, Ben. You’re reasoning yourself out of Wonderment, and meanwhile those with whom you reason will post you the next chapter of their very boring and vacuous treaty on self-importance, and you’ll reason some more. You’re suffering fools, and your self-willed gladness is making your face crack. I just tell them what I think. I find it works better.

I’m a bit sorry if I annoyed you. I’m a lot sorry if you think I’m making your job harder.

But if you do think that, just stand back for a minute. See how the flood of engagement that came with the disposal announcement has receded. See just how many of the pedigree writers are involved in the debate you’re trying to conduct. Exactly who are we trying to keep on board here?

I was goaded into the recent engagement. You seem to love some of what I’ve written in these last few days, and loathe some other bits. (Still other bits you’ll probably never see, because they got yikesed). You characterise some of it as constructive and some of it destructive. You go on at me as if I’m vain and sociopathic. It’s all seems a bit extreme, and I know I’m neither. I’m tetchy over people dissing my dad when my mum’s back in hospital, that’s all. And I really shouldn’t let Mina wind me up, when she’s a perfectly reasonable cloven-hoofed ruminant.

I’m going to go chill for a while. h2g2 doesn’t need me right now, so I’ll take a few days to decide whether I need it.

Come on Pin don't get involved with my virtual world on h2g2. Ben is one of the few who knows our relationship. I should never have gone so close to real life, but I do use h2g2 to offload a bit of my real life feeling as I know that you do too.
That hypocritical pillock SWL has yikesed the posts that I made to his message centre but the basic evidence is still there in the thread. The moderators are idiots in their support of him. Although I believe that he has some involvement in that connection. Poor old Ben needs to look deeply at current cliques and establish those who are the sincere and true 'friends' of h2g2.
Trigg and Malabarista have come to the thread late in the day. Lord knows why, hoping to wind me up I suppose but that thread is not the place to do it, I'll post to their space and take it from there.

Sorry AB

Pinniped - You may well have been right in your concern when you wrote A1108243 ,it is a bit late to enter a virtual world when you are in your seventies. I was attracted by the novelty of that world and intrigued by the way that those with a need were united with those having a desire to help. At that time h2g2 was truly unique in the virtual community world and I relished the challenge of trying to understand the people and the technicalities that served them. A bit like being born into a new world. Today that virtual world and the real world are one and the same. As you say the wonder has gone and we are left with something weird.
By the way I am not bitter, 'we' will survive.

>> At that time h2g2 was truly unique in the virtual community world and I relished the challenge of trying to understand the people and the technicalities that served them. A bit like being born into a new world. Today that virtual world and the real world are one and the same. As you say the wonder has gone and we are left with something weird.

Surely that has been true of every revolution?

Don't quite get your point Ben.
To me, at that time, h2g2 was a revelation not a revolution.
I was relatively new to the computer and had linked to the internet only just a few months earlier . Even then a silver surfer.
I suspect that if I had been in that same situation today Pinniped may not even consider leading me here. Certainly my grandkids take me in any direction other than h2g2 and to be honest it bothers me. H2g2 had it all, if there has been a revolution h2g2 have not been part of it.
You know even better than I do, that h2g2 has marched time in this revolution. Standing still with the relative effect of going backwards.
Pin brought me here, and I am glad he did but his children and his brothers children are just as enthusiastic in what they do in todays virtual environment as Pinniped was in his, they could quite easily take me by the hand and lead me into their brave new internet world.
I have found in my long, and in the main happy, life that once you have missed an opportunity it seldom comes your way again.
I fear that unless the full functionality of DNA is carried forward to the new site and somehow brought to the attention of Joe internet public it will go nowhere. It was the overall concept of h2g2 that was it's strength, coupled with a community to bring it alive.
Nuff said.

>> H2g2 had it all, if there has been a revolution h2g2 have not been part of it.

Oh indeed, and indeed, and indeed. I find it hard not to rage against what the BBC did to us, because they bought DNA and h2g2 with it and then had no idea what they'd got or what to do with it. But we are at least still here, no matter how crippled we may be.

To me h2g2 was part of the revolution. It was a genuinely new and shiny thing in 1999, and still new and still shiny when I joined in 2000. The revolution, of course, was the internet in general and what has been called Web 2.0 in particular - ie the heady mix of user-created content (like h2g2, like blogs, like wikis, like myspace) and online communities (like h2g2, like parts of the blogosphere, like facebook and myspace).

Very briefly, we flapped our wings. But the BBC bought us and put a pin through our heart and stuck us on a board in a museum.

We are where we are, and we are limited in what we can be by a number of things, not least the Douglas Adams vision and brand.

But we can indeed be much more than we are at the moment. We need lots of things to be looser - the Unified Guide where opinion and experimental writing is the peer of fact is essential. From a technical point of view, you are right AB: if just about everything that the DNA platform can do were to be enabled, with changes to where the doors are shut and who keeps the keys for things like Publishing entries, then we would be free to re-emerge from the long crysalis-time we've spent here with the Beeb.

I've said it elsewhere, but I seem my role as a gardener. The most alluring gardens look as if they were flung together by a casual but kindly deity and no human intervention at all, but some poor bugger sat down and worked out what should be planted where, and planted up the seedlings in a potting shed and dug out the beds to plant them in. Just now we are at the heavy digging stage, and it all looks like mud and piles of earth. But the problem is that a lot of beds need shifting so the seedlings will catch the sun, and the more invasive plantings need a harsh prune back to let in the light.

Ben

To answer your point more directly

There were lots of exciting possiblities in the online world in 1999 and 2000, and h2g2 was only one example. For example I was (and remain) thrilled and excited by Amazon then, but buying things online is is mundane these days.

The point that I was making is that bliss it was to be alive, but to be young was to experience a constant adreneline rush, and h2g2 was just one raft on the white-water rapids of the internet revolution. Well, now there are even more rafts, but the river is wider and slower and it's mainstream now, with all the dull grubbiness that implies.

It was a revolution though, and h2g2 was part of it...

Ben - The post 10 years ago about the time I joined. Ten years in which I've been a passenger. - A521920
What chance has h2g2 got of regaining that position ?
Nick Reynolds can hardly be regarded as a friend when all his symathy manifests itself as helping us on our way. Isn't the chap supposed to be a BBC Executive leading the way into the Social Media ? Shouldn't he be linking the BBC's online communities together after all we have a single sign up system, sign into one and gain access to all. What's the point of that when there is no link from one the other ? A common banner under which the divided BBC communities can unite ? A snowflake building up to the blizzard that embodies Life, the Univers and Everything.
Can't he see that he has a ready made base for that, an internet addition to the BBC world of radio an television. He is merely playing with the web as a means of pushing the existing BBC services, using the internet not becoming part of it. Pushing Twitter and Facebook and at the same time disposing of the very best of Social Media.
He should fighting for h2g2 in the BBC corridors of power not helping them to dispose of us.
Is that how he should treat his friends ?

>> What chance has h2g2 got of regaining that position ?

None, because that position no longer exists. The world has moved on, the best we can do is tap into our unique strengths as they are now, rather than bemoaning the loss of our unique position as it was then.

This isn't about platforms. We have something that few other web communities have: history. Corporate bulls**t is full of admiration for "storied companies with unique DNA" (see what I did there?) and when you translate that into the human, they mean organisations with a history, where behaviours and self-knowledge are deep in the bone. It is un-fakable, and it really is amazing. Most of us know this instinctively, but few of us are actually pointing it out.


>> Nick Reynolds can hardly be regarded as a friend when all his symathy manifests itself as helping us on our way.

As a corporate shill myself, and having just been spat out of a company that had been taken over and cut by about 20%, I have a lot of sympathy for Nick. They could have just pulled the plug.



>> Isn't the chap supposed to be a BBC Executive leading the way into the Social Media ?

No.

Social Media is a well established thing. There's no way to lead now. The revolution is over. The future is here. In fact the future was here a couple of years ago. Nick's job, whatever it is, is to serve his masters. As are all our jobs, if we are honest.


>> Shouldn't he be linking the BBC's online communities together after all we have a single sign up system, sign into one and gain access to all. What's the point of that when there is no link from one the other ? A common banner under which the divided BBC communities can unite ? A snowflake building up to the blizzard that embodies Life, the Univers and Everything.

Why? AB, I respect you, (I even respect Pin), but that is YOUR vision. It's not the BBC's vision, and why should it be? They are uniquely placed to do all sorts of things (I will never fully forgive them for creatign and then killing Get Writing) but first and foremost they are a broadcaster. Everything else has to support and feed into that. (Which of course is why killing GW was the right thing to do - for them...)


>> Can't he see that he has a ready made base for that, an internet addition to the BBC world of radio an television.

He's a bright guy, of course he can. But that was where the BBC was in 2003. That's 8 years ago....



>> He is merely playing with the web as a means of pushing the existing BBC services,

Yes. That's his *job*!


>> using the internet not becoming part of it. Pushing Twitter and Facebook and at the same time disposing of the very best of Social Media.

I actually think that the nature of the internet is changing, it's no longer the shiny jewel bedecking our brows, its become part of the fabric of our world. More pervasive, more essential and infinitely more mundane.


>> He should fighting for h2g2 in the BBC corridors of power not helping them to dispose of us.
Is that how he should treat his friends ?

AB - that's out of order you know, for two reasons. (1) you don't know what he has done or has not done on our behalf in the corridors of the BBC (neither do I, but I don't say what Nick "should" or "should not" be doing". And (2) it's a job he's got there, he's proably got a mortgage to pay.





What strikes me here is that you assume that the BBC is the best possible place for us, and are angry that they won't restructure their online community to accomodate what we could be.

I differ from you. From the day of the announcement I worried about our "fit" with them, and I am angry and very bitter at how they have curtailed and constrained us over the years. I am angry they broke and bound our feet and look forward to our freedom. You seem to think they are the best and kindest of parents if only they'd undo the bandages.

Interesting....

Ben

Don't spend too much time on me Ben, I could go on for hours.
Must confess I'm a bit of a BBC supporter, seen 'em move from cat's whisker wireless to hd television. must confess they hoodwinked me when the DNA Hub came into being, lulling us into a sense of false security by putting Peta at the head. I honestly believed that when the BBC had moved so many sites over to DNA and introduced a single sign on system they intended to finish up with an overall BBC DNA community with the possiblity of h2g2 playing a leading rolle in it. I suppose the writing was truly on the wall when they started to shut down some of the sites they had created, moved Peta and more or less disbanded the Hub although it does get oiled now and again. However there are still quite a few key sites driven by 'DNA the BBC's website community engine', those along with the message boards means that the BBC will have to maintain a DNA team and all that goes with it. I can't see disposing of h2g2 will give them any great saving. Deep down there has to be a basic reason for what they are doing and out of order or not Nick Reynolds has to be part of it. May well be that Peta, Jim Lynn or Mark Moxon have some understanding, I have tried for ever to get some notion of what was going on.
By the way the BBC have gone further into the internet with their blogging network.
Over the years Pin and I have talked about the why's and wherefores of h2g2, you among others passed muster although as I rememeber you and he had a bit of a cuffuffle some years ago.
We have to respect the great work you are doing now on behalf of the h2g2 community but as things have turned out perhaps we should have been more rebellious way back when you had your doubts.
I fully understand your feelings with regard to any form of redundancy. I came of age in Maggies rampage in the early eighties.
In those days Axe men came into the industry and we had a saying 'Don't let the ba%^&rds grind you down' I have a recollection of saying this to Peta several years ago.

>> I can't see disposing of h2g2 will give them any great saving. Deep down there has to be a basic reason for what they are doing and out of order or not Nick Reynolds has to be part of it. May well be that Peta, Jim Lynn or Mark Moxon have some understanding, I have tried for ever to get some notion of what was going on.

The Beeb never understood h2g2. Now, fortunately for us, financial pressure is forcing them into being honest about it.

I'm excited about the future. It isn't 2001 you know.

PS - Pin and I exist in a semi-permanent state of kerfuffle! We like each other (or I like him), we respect each other (or I respect him), but we don't really "get" each other. Our mis-understandings and erroneous expectations mean we drive each other up, or round, the proverbial. But then the liking and respect kick in again.... He's as wrong about me as I am about him though. You can tell him I said that.

Now that's how editing should be done without any 'kerfuffle'. Cuffuffle sounds better and comes more natural.
Please don't tell me that this is not 2001 I haven't completely lost my marbles
To understand my affiliation to the BBC you have to go way back to the days of the wireless when ToyTown and Larry the Lamb competed with the Ovaltinies for my support and the Radio Doctor was a basic part of the health service. I've paid my TV licence since it's inception with Sunday night black and white Cafe Continental for adult viewing and Muffin the Mule and the Flowerpot men to keep Pin and his brother quiet. The days of wonderment dare I say and the days when the BBC was at the forefront of communication.
To see the beginning of the decline we need to go back 20 years into the 80's, when the mother of communication was in labour and the desktop computer and all that it involved came into being. The BBC had broadcast via wireless, moved into TV with colour and decided that they would educate the nation with a computer literacy programme. Away they went with a desk top computer created in association with Acorn. They achieved a national following and a place in the world of desktop computing, producing a computer and computer educational software that were at the forefront of desktop computing at the time. BBC Basic language was developed during this round of activity, one of the developers is still moving it along today in the form of BBC Basic for Windows. ( http://www.rtrussell.co.uk/ ) much as we may see others doing for h2g2 at some time in the future. . The BBC lost interest, Acorn plodded on and RISC OS came out of it along with ARM developments, ARM Holdings and the ARM chip ( http://www.arm.com )
As a licence payer if grieves me to see the BBC's interest in the internet and the future of communication not getting past first base. They were a leader in radio and tv communication, they seem happy to become followers in the internet world, having stepped aside during the revolution. In their failing the BBC held h2g2 back. They have insulted the name of Douglas Adams by pushing their wares by any means other than their own Web site community that he created and they bought. At the same time that Stephen Fry and other BBC celebrities ask to be followed on Twitter or open Blogs in Bloog@@@ the BBC could have at least acknowledged the existance of h2g2 even if they chose not to develop it. It would only have taken a mention of h2g2 (the web site) on any BBC programme to have pulled in members/researchers and how about if someone had written a series with a web site community (h2g2) as the theme. A sort of social network story..
Has 'Click' ever covered h2g2 ?
Enough, Enough just shut up man.

PS. Writing may be the hub of h2g2, but if h2g2 is to have a future then I.M.H.O it lies with social networking, the mobile phone, ipods and the like. Ask Nick Reynolds where the BBC are going with Freeview and Freestat and could there possibly be a place there for h2g2. A service linking radio, television ,and the internet combined with a website community, driven of course by the BBC's community website engine . As happens now the set top boxes could always be sub contracted out to a manufacture.
Ask him how much reliance BBC Internet Blogging has on the DNA Engine. I reckon I'll go there and have a go. Of course it may be that I am far too late.

Totally agree with you about the future of h2g2, AB, and I agree with you about its past, too. But we are where we are, and the BBC are a closed door to us now. Not a bad thing.

Here's a thought for you and for Pin though, about how to make writing on h2g2 more rewarding, how to make it easier to collaborate, easier to promote good writing, easier to promote your own writing.

It presupposes a new owner who understands what we are and where we are coming from, and who has the funds for technical changes. But stranger things happen every day.

A82710326

It may not be perfect, but the more I think about how people could take it and run with it, the more I like it.

B

Any Entry that I produce is simply for my own use and not for the Edited Guide. That way entries become an editable journal classified and collected in my space. I use h2g2 in my own way.
Pin is the family scribe and the one best able to comment on your Entry. He may well come in after all it is message centre. We normally contact on a Sunday evening, I'll tell him to get himself over here.
I've flogged my rant for 10 years one more go won't do any harm.
F77636?thread=8010317&post=107414480#p107414480

Ben and Pin - You do realise that the BBC have a GCSE writing site It's DNA Driven : http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/mbgcsebitesize/NF8094620?thread=8090773

Pin, thanks for your post this morning. It was good of you to post it and it meant a lot.

B