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

Cool thread name!

Can't understand the subject of this thread as the early entries have been 'Yikesed', but can only assume from the title it's about my ex-husband !!

Hmmm. My posting has been removed.

B******s.

I'm still trying to work out what this thread is about, seeing as hows the f***ing c**ting tw*ts have removed the first two posts.

I'm proud to say that *I* had a post removed the other day. I was testing the limits of free speech with a venerable but scurrilous (and filthy!) limerick about the Bishop of Birmingham. I think that I at least deserved some credit, not only for having rhymed something with 'Birmingham' (twice!), but also including the word 'episcopal'.

It's an old limerick...but in case you don't know it, details on request.



Just taking Ben's tagline seriously for a minute...it is still possible, of course, to say 'I respect your freedom of speech, but you're a f***ing c***ing tw*t for saying that.' Although Voltaire said it better.

Well post 1 said what it says in the subject line, and post 2 said the same as post 23 but with a couple of 'l's included

Are the mods trawling or is there someone with a trigger happy yikes finger?

This post has been removed.

Well, I've replied to the email about the first post, pointing out that it doesn't break the house rules, though I guess it could be seen as reinforcing a stereotype about Tourettes. As well as the existing headline the post, in its entirety said:

"No-one in particular, just having a T*******s moment. But I do feel better for it.

"

Let's see what the Italics say when they pick up their emails tomorrow.

B

Oh, and my name wasn't modded. Consistency R not us.

Go figure.

B

Interesting to see what the outcome is?

I take it the words are meant to be:-

"Funking chating barstands" some sort of Public house tool one would presume?

At some point I must do something about having my journal that criticised the use of cocaine as a recreational drug restored.

I'm wondering...had the 'Religious Hatred' clause been passed the other week, would the Mods have suddenly got all cautious about some of the more invective Scepticist threads?

Ok... so I get back from a long weekend...(very long) and while reading my backlog I find not one, but two friends' journal entries yikesed... and a mention in a thread of a third journal entry yikesed.


WTF?



Oddly enough, this convo shows as "No subject" in My convos thingy...

I didn't know the subject until I just looked above and saw "You are replying to: F**king c**ting b**st**ds"

Brilliant.

Seems mine was not loged in to the notified email account to see why my post was removed along with my name, how can a corespondence from the bbc be considerated as in breach of the rules of of bad taste, while i'll agree the representative could have phrased his response slightly better.
World Wide Wonderland

*stomps

Looks like I missed a f***ing good swearie word sesh.
Bu**ery-bo**ocks.

So the "title" is removed on most but not all of the posts? hmmmm....

Ours is not to reason why....

Actually, the reasoning is that the BBC will remove thread titles if they are likely to cause offense to innocent people who have subscribed to the page concerned.

I guess the reply to that is - "well they needn't ***** ********* ********* subscribe to my ********* page then - what do they ********* expect?" - but to be honest, I respect the reason for removing the title. So long as we can carry on swearing here if we need to. In the interests of stress relief, natch.

B

I really don't know what's going on around here anymore.
Dannywallace fans taking over the site - last night I yikesed someone online calling themselves "David Blunkett" (which I was told ages ago was definitely against the rules) and I've had an email this morning telling me it's not.



*mutters* (wish I could swear but I'm in the presence of a 12 y.o.)

Interesting, post 2 is back, but I hadn't got around to replying to the email

Annie, I wouldn't bother with the Blunkett character. I've taken a look at their space and they are a Danny Wallace site person. I'm presuming that that site has a different interpretation of what impersonation means.

If you're still concerned. Then I suggest that you reply to the moderation e-mail and say that you believe their decision is wrong. That's the way to get things done around here.

As for their putative 'invasion'. Ah sod it! It's hardly big and hardly important - I had to dig *really hard* to find any evidence of them posting. However if you feel that any of them do break specific h2g2 house rules, then complain. But don't complain just because they're posting here.

Surreal...

Lets see if the mods know simple code.


Gvdljmh dvmsjmh cbtubset.

There, that feels better.