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

Or we could just be waiting for another Thursday to go whooshing by.

Hey, I wonder if Mina's email in-tray has a hole in the bottom and all this stuff has just been falling out again without her noticing. If it were possible, the missing images could be littering the BBC's intranet highway. That Walthamstow one might be anywhere by now.

I hope not. Those pictures took me too long to just lose in the maze of the BBCs internal network.

What do you mean be removed? You quit?

Atled

I don't know that the other ones have necessarily been lost - just that there have been a few volunteer threads left dangling here.

I didn't quit. I was removed from the groups. A couple of other people did quit though. I don't think you would necessarily notice any difference unless you happened to stumble across any conversations on h2g2. Similarly other people in the group never qualified in the first place. That wouldn't be obvious either unless you found the threads (or the lack of them).

^. .^
= ' =
Guru
CommunityArtist

Hi there, I have received them thanks very much. I'll get to your application as soon as I can. There's a bit of a wait at the moment though I'm afraid, but hopefully you won't be waiting too long.

^. .^
= ' =
Guru
CommunityArtist

Hmmm. This makes interesting re-reading.

No kidding. It really does in light of the other threads.

Some of those posts don't sound like Tango at all, do they? I would never have thought of improving my spelling and punctuation in order to disguise myself.

The innocent questions read much more sinisterly, especially now that we know they know each other, and have before this. Rather contrived.

I say we somehow get everyone to unsubscribe to the other thread en masse, and see what happens. I think without an audience, he'll either have to put up or shut up, and I'd be willing to bet it will be the latter.

I also think I might yikes something, with info to all of these threads, to show just how pervasive his misrepresentation and meanness are.

You seem to be proposing a conspiracy to unsubscribe from whatever thread you mean. I believe you are all quite capable of misreading things, being deliberately dishonest and choosing to be nasty individually, even if you do tend to gang up. So why do you suddenly need to have an "everyone" implying some sort of previously established exclusive group despite the word actually used since you do specifically exclude at least one person from your "everyone".

In regard to the other malicious insinuations, I don't think anyone other than Tango posted as Atled. I suppose there may have been instances/people I don't know about, missed or forgot. I can only say for certain that I never did. Not that any of you are likely to let mere details like the truth get in the way of your persecution.

Oh, ho...so you do actually pay attention when people call attention to your actions!

SEF, I did not imply that you posted as Atled. What I *did* imply is that the questions Atled asked you here are questions he already knew the answers to, and was merely trying to have you restate them. I got the feeling you and he were waiting for someone to ask the question "why did you get removed, SEF?" Since no one did, I'll ask it now. Would you care to share with us the reason for your removal from the CAs? If not, that's fine with me. It is, of course, a personal matter to you, and I don't want to cause you any undue embarrassment or ill feeling.

The "everyone" I was talking about was, in fact, literally *everyone* subscribed to the conversation. It tends to pull the rug out from people who are being dogmatic when they no longer have an audience.

I have never been deliberately dishonest with anyone on this site, ever. In fact, I have on more than one occasion been accused of being overly honest to the point of hurting other people's feelings. If I have hurt your feelings in any way, I apologize, and assure you that it was in no way intentional.

What "truth" are you implying we are ignoring? That you were asked to leave the CAs? That Tango deliberately misrepresented himself? That this site isn't perfect? That we care enough to try to ferret out your concerns? Please, enlighten us.

And please avoid words like persecution. If I was persecuting you, you'd know it. I am not persecuting anyone. I am trying to get answers to relatively simple and straightforward questions, and being told that I'm too stupid to be worthy of answers. That reeks of avoidance to me.

> "when people call attention to your actions"

I thought you were talking about Tango.

> "I did not imply that you posted as Atled"

Lil said "Some of those posts don't sound like Tango at all, do they?" and elsewhere it was claimed that Atled or Tango was merely a front for other people. I didn't suggest or tell Tango to post any such things any more than I suggested he start such an account. If anything I think he was somewhat foolish to do so (in both cases). I replied as seemed appropriate though.

> "The "everyone" I was talking about was, in fact, literally *everyone* subscribed to the conversation."

You still haven't said which and you did specifically exclude some equally unnamed "he" from this proposed conspiracy of yours.

> "I have never been deliberately dishonest with anyone on this site"

I'll have to reserve judgement on that without rechecking the backlog. I think you were one of those dishonestly misrepresenting things which Tango said though.

> "What truth"

In this case that Tango posted as Atled on his own behalf as he kept saying despite people making assertions and insinuations to the contrary.

> "That Tango deliberately misrepresented himself"

So Amy is an ant is she and everyone is also saying exactly who they are and not misrepresenting themselves (or others) - despite the BBC having the appropriate warnings about this. Hardly anyone is using their own name for various reasons - including the staff! I don't even know if you are a redhead from Montana. Neither do I care. Many people have multiple accounts - including the staff. Some people are even apparently multiple in themselves. Others operate accounts multiply - including the staff. Some of these accounts have been used to qualify for different groups - again including staff and researchers.

> "If I was persecuting you, you'd know it."

I was still talking about Tango.

So you are clearly still making unwarranted assumptions based on what unreliable and dishonest people have told you - possibly because you didn't want to do your own research.

Who are these dishonest and unreliable people you keep talking about, SEF? I talk to the people I've always talked to, and none of them has ever shown themselves to be dishonest in the way you are describing.

I never misrepresented anything Tango said...he did that quite well on his own. When someone does something deliberately to mislead others, and will not allow that others were harmed by that action, it gets me a little miffed. I have been told time and time again by Tango that I am too stupid to understand...what, exactly, am I too stupid to understand? That is the question I keep repeating, and I have yet to get an answer.

Nor have I gotten an answer from you as to what this "truth" is.

I am a redhead, and I consider myself from Montana, although I currently reside in California, due to the residency requirements of my PhD program.

And why isn't Tango defending himself here? You are trying to make a clear delineation between the two of you, and I'm willing to accept that (in fact, I don't think I ever actually conflated the two of you). I find it odd, however, that you are more up in arms than he is. I am sure that he is perfectly capable of defending himself.

This post has been removed.

"why isn't Tango defending himself here?"

He's probably gone to bed.

"none of them has ever shown themselves to be dishonest in the way you are describing."

If you are not a dishonest person yourself, then go back and read the backlog threads and see who is saying what about whom on no evidence or when the evidence actually says something quite different.

Note that the reason Tango previously gave up replying (as well as on the article) was that no-one was demonstrating the willingness or ability to actually read what he had said. I'm not sure why he came back in on Spook's SOG thread. Perhaps he has more to do with the SOG than I know since I am probably very peripheral to most of their projects (together or separately).

Wow, that really doesn't sound like the guide I know...although since I know bupkis about computer graphics, I wouldn't personally be able to make heads or tails of most of the CA requirements, anyway.

It sounds like you feel like you got the short end of the stick, and I am sorry you had to go through that. I know sometimes when I am blunt, and I call things the way I see them, there are people on the guide who get all up in arms and freak out. I think it has something to do with not being able to read body language. And sometimes those of us who are painfully honest have to learn the hard way that being that honest can sometimes bite us in the butt despite our best intentions.

SEF, you sound a lot like me. You're one of those people who want to right wrongs, fix things, and you're enough of a control freak to know that (naturally) you know the best way to fix it. I learned the really hard way (lost a very good friend) that sometimes people don't want to be fixed, and that they see things that are important to them are sometimes in very unclear ways. Not being able to see the forest for the trees, as it were. I understand a lot more of where you are coming from, and thank you for that. I appreciate you being open and honest with me about your position.

I can't say truthfully that your version is any more or any less of the truth than other versions. I firmly believe that there are many ways of looking at the truth, all of which are colored by who the person describing that truth is, and where they are coming from. But I can certainly see why, from Tango's point of view, there need to be some changes. It's nice that he is defending you, and the integrity of hootoo as he sees it. I just wish he was a little less free with the "stupid" comments. Insulting people is no way to make your voice heard.

Being right isn't always enough. If you can't find a way to express yourself diplomatically to the people you are working with, you'll only damage your cause.

It astounds me to this moment that you can announce to a group of volunteers, strangers, that you have arrived to improve their miserable performance and then be aghast when your reception is less than adulatory.

That is hyperbolic. I trust to your intelligence to perceive that and not cut the sentence to shreds with sophistry.

Wherever you have used the word "help" just now, my experience suggests the word "supplant" would be better. That's my experience, subjective though it may be. And I'm willing to believe that you perceive yourself as having the most altruistic of intentions, but you have often made me very angry.


I am not au courant with things any more, but I go way way back in computer graphics, and I know that there is more than one way to skin an image. I don't think you ~are~ right in every respect. I think it is extremely regrettable behavior for you to have publicly denigrated artists who have worked very hard to serve the Guide, whether you are right or not. And in a world of volunteers, your methodology will not work, no matter how right you passionately believe it to be. And I use the word 'passionate' advisedly, because science doesn't use words like 'despicable.'

This is a place for consensus, not rigidity.