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

officially that is. i don't know when i'll get removed of all the lists and all that. some people my wonder why the fourth person to get involved in the original conversation in AWW and has been involved throughout is quiting it, so here are my reasons:

1. i have been insulted at least 3 times. The majority of times from Ben. most recently she told me to F off, with the F standing for a common slang four letter word. She also said i spent 'weeks of h2g2', in a way signifying i'm unreliable. she has also stated that i wouldn't be 'sensitive' enough to 'polish' certain UG entries. In the past she's claimed i wasn't one of the main people involved in the SOG. of course she was only concerned with the previous 3 weeks, which were the 3 weeks after my mum's death which occured in January of this year.

2. i stuck with the UG all those months ago when i was first insulted by Ben and i think perhaps someone else but i really can't remember who, because i thought it was worth it. I realised the UG, in my absence, had gained a direction that i did not think was right, so i started up the SOG, which you can find at U218740. This was basically a group of encouragement, acceptance, and making the community stick. The idea is that any entry goes in and the author's encouraged, so that they write more entries. The idea was always that SOG entries could sometimes be submitted for the UG as well, and that the SOG would be a resource for entries for the UG and other groups. The CAC has already made use of this resource well, featuring one entry a week in their Post Column.

recently, with the UG getting prepared to become activate, i gave the UG a proposition. an idea that would build the SOG into the structure of the UG and AWW, so that there would be no clashing over entries, there would be a used system so that both the UG and SOG would be supported with entries from AWW, and the CAC and Post would also have the structure in there to be used themselves, and there would be practically no rejection, so writers, whatever the quality of their entries, would be encouraged. Authors would either want the chalenge to work on an entry and get it into the UG, or the happiness of it become part of the SOG (CAC or Post as well, esecially for things such as serials).

this proposal was rejected.

3. in fact, it was not only rejected, but i was told that the group's focus was the UG. it was this that ultimately caused me to leave the UG.

The UG volunteers are effectively taking control of the AWW and building a framework for the AWW. being solely focussed on the UG nmeans that yes, it will be easier in the short term, but in the long term there will be problems, and it will be harder for other groups to use the AWW without interupting the UG. i will certainly be interupting the UG no less when i am scouting the AWW, not intentionally, but it's impossible not to. I'll be accepting the rejects into the SOG anyway, but i will also be looking for particular style entries for the SOG. conflict abd confrontation, the thing's the BB4 house should have but doesn't, will most likely occur now and then in the AWW.

Also, i do not think the UG hs the right to just 'take over' the AWW. a lot of Miners want to rename it the Underguide Review, but it isn't meant to just be for the UG. other groups already use it, and have used it way longer. my vision was for a group that worked with others and becme part of the alternative writing side of h2g2, not took it over.

i have been told that in a few months they will reconsidor my proposal. i truly hop they do and that in the end the SOG can be worked into the framework. however, before then, i cannot stay a part of a group where certain researchers have been insulting to me, a group that is focussed on itself and not h2g2, and a group that i do not agree with.

i have always looked at the UG and how it could be used to benefit h2g2. it seems the members of the UG are focussed on getting it implemented and think there has to be a UG focus and that other groups go secondto the UG. i do not want to be a part of a group that from the very start is not focussed on what will be best for h2g2 in the long run, but that is instead focussed on what will benefit the UG in the short run.

spook

but typical - which is itself

Ooh! It is ages since I was last involved in a good flame war!

Spook is right, I have been a tad terse with him more than once, but the insults flew in both directions as they tend to on these occasions.

I continue to wish him well with SOG.

Ben

I was curious to note that spook reported that I had told him to f**k off. That is very unlike me, it is a word that I use as a lot of people here know, but not something that I tell people to do unless I am with very good friends. I cannot remember the last time I used the phrase in anger, but it isn't within the last 6 years, that's for sure.

When I checked, I found I was right. The quote is:

"But my point, spook, is that you are slagging us of for working hard - so back the f**k off"

This is which is slightly different. I was telling him to BACK OFF, not F**K OFF. Ok, not very different, but different enough for me to want to put the record straight, even if it paints me in a rather vicious light.

Ben

I'm not going to argue with you spook, instead I'm going to say what I've done-

- I'm removing you from the volunteer lists like you've asked
- I've warned Ben.
- I'm adding a bit to the code of conduct for this situation

I'd like to clarify one paragraph though- "this proposal was rejected.
" the proposal was not rejected the general consensus was that we have to focus on the UG right now, and perhaps we would implement your idea later. I'm still willing to discuss a relationship between the SOG and UG later on, perhaps in a few months.

I'm sorry to see you go spook

"recently, with the UG getting prepared to become activate, i gave the UG a proposition. an idea that would build the SOG into the structure of the UG and AWW, so that there would be no clashing over entries, there would be a used system so that both the UG and SOG would be supported with entries from AWW, and the CAC and Post would also have the structure in there to be used themselves, and there would be practically no rejection, so writers, whatever the quality of their entries, would be encouraged."

Spook, I don't think that's an accurate description of the proposal that was discussed in the UG forum, or the part of the proposal that led to disagreement. You suggested that entries marked for moving out of AWW (essentially rejected by UG) should be marked by Anna as "Accepted for SOG." Some miners said that they did not agree with the suggestion, or that it was something you should take up with Anna or the Italics, instead of the Underguide.

Whether or not the AWW would be used by CAC or the Post or SOG was not entirely at issue, and wasn't really decided as firmly as you imply. There has been discussion about whether the name should change to focus on the Underguide, but even that seems to be up in the air still. I'm not aware of anyone who suggested that the forum should not be used by the other groups, only that the name of it might change.

"i do not want to be a part of a group that from the very start is not focussed on what will be best for h2g2 in the long run, but that is instead focussed on what will benefit the UG in the short run."

I do not think miners have taken any actions that will harm h2g2 in the long or short run. This disagreement doesn't even prevent you from using rejected entries in SOG still. SOG isn't even harmed. Miners can ask for entries to be moved out of AWW, Anna can move them, you can still find them on the public page where we post those messages, and you can still mark them all as accepted to the Spaced-Out Guide! The only difference is that you'll have to contact the authors instead of having them automatically marked by Anna.

I think you are focused on getting everything done your way, and it is unfair to accuse the rest of us of being selfish or harming h2g2 just because you didn't get your way.

Deidzoeb - that was the proposal. perhaps you misunderstood the proposal, bu that's what it was.

Jodan - perhaps not a rejection, but a postponement. and what is a postponement? a rejection for a period of time until the proposal is re-considered. i, as you, am not ruling out future dealings, and may rejoin the UG in the future, however, for now, i disagree with the UGs direction.

Ben - i think you misunderstood the comment i actually made as slagging up. what i was saying was that it may be good thata bunch of you spent loads of time commenting on entries, but when the forum hits the frotn page due to that it isn't something to really celebrate since only you few miners have been the oens to get it there. but when 20 people from h2g2, miners and non-miners, are posting laods there, then the community is really using the forum and it is a real achievement that you lot have made the AWW into an active forum. i think you missudnerstood that comment as an insult on your hardwork, when it was merely a comment on celebrating over things that i personally do not think should be celebrated...yet.

spook

Postponement- "To delay until a future time; put off"

The phrase was - "about 3 or 4 of you decided to post to all the forums in there and ave chats to each other"...

I have promised Jodan not to respond to you, so I am not responding, merely putting the record straight, again.

B

since when was having a chat a bad thing? it's pratically all i do on h2g2!