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

...but then thought here was more appropriate.

Yes. And as an *adult* I'm calling another adult about constantly berating others for not understanding that her poor behaviour is 'creativity' and they are incapable of understanding her. Do you see that this is an adult-to-adult exchange? (and even, parenthetically, the sort of honesty Effers claims to cherish).

If she reacts childishly to receiving the sort of honesty she constantly, if perhaps disingenuously, insists on this is unfortunate. I appreciate that you Volunteers are left to pick up the pieces and mollycoddle her along.

But looking into my soul, I really can't accept that I'm being childish here. Nor can I accept that I need dance to her tune.

I hope I'm not butting in out of place, but I saw the MrD / MrEd (sorry, couldn't resist) thing on that other thread and came over to ask MrD something and here's MrEd too.

So the thing is, MrD, I think that we (the researchers and particularly TPTB) are bending over backwards and further to accommodate some people on the site while simultaneously smacking down (even if gently and with humor) others.

Now, don't get me wrong: I like a robust debate and, if anything, tend to err on the side of letting posts stand if I'm in two minds about yikesing (or elsewhere, where I mod) modding it.

But I really would like to know if this is a definite policy to be inclusive, or if it's unwitting.

or if I'm just suffering from some kind of paranoid delusions

Are you bending over backwards not to mention mental health issues, Sho? If so - I have views on this.

not particularly - I was kind of bending over backwards to go with the "no names, no pack drill" thing though

I'm aware that there are many people here with mental health issues, some interact better, some worse, on the site and in general I don't worry too much about it. I think that anyone who signs up to the site has to keep to the T&C and while I realise that we need to be more sensitive (shall we say ) around some people - I do feel that it shouldn't be used either as a stick to beat people with or as a kind of force field of an excuse ("oh, go easy on X s/he can't help it, *whisper* mental health issues, you know" kind of thing)

It's difficult. I do want to be inclusive, but not at the risk of making it some kind of special place on the internet where researchers can't be researchers.

I can never know of course (although I do have mild what you might call mental health issues - I'm not sure if severe PMS counts as mental health but that's how it feels, totally not my usual self at those times) but I think that if I were under that nomclamenture (if I can say that) I'd want to be treated as a regular researcher and told (privately if possible) that I'd overstepped a mark.

I'm not meaning to be offensive, or tiptoe around, I just think that there are some things that should be clear.

>>I don't worry too much about it.

That pretty much sums up my attitude. It does nobody any favours to make allowances. Generally what the sufferer needs is to avoid the situation - but that's not easily enforced. At very least they need to be told clear guidelines as to what is and isn't acceptable. This offers a model of behaviour which can set them back on the road to normality.

I know many a sufferer who has been - for example - barred from certain pubs. They recognise that hard though it was for them, the pubs were right.

(although - as you also say - sensitivity is A Good Thing.)

it's a balancing act, isn't it?

I can only speak for myself but I think it's much better to have clear guidelines which apply to everyone and then if something happens you can look at each case individually, because 99% (99.9%) of people will keep to the guidelines. The 0.1% who don't will either be provocative, just having a bad day, "a mental" or whatever and at that time their behaviours need to be looked at, not just one post in isolation.

And I am really really happy that now the moderating is being done in house, that is exactly what will happen. So, hopefully, if I go off on a huge one somewhere I wouldn't be automatically banned - I'd have to suffer consequences of course - but my clean h2g2 licence would be taken into account.

Or such like.

Okay, look, maybe I spoke out of turn back in the other thread... but while you might genuinely be trying to have reasonable adult-to-adult exchanges with Effers, to me it just looked like you were winding her up because however adult or honest you're being you must be aware that she won't necessarily see it that way. Sorry if I've got that wrong but just as you're calling her behaviour on what you perceive (and I'm not saying I disagree with you) I was calling your behaviour on what I perceive.

I'm not suggesting we should all be nice to each other all the time (because that'd be just as ghastly as having a free-for-all where everyone is a special little snowflake who can do whatever they want), but if she really bothers you that much why don't you just ignore her? (Also, do as I say, not as I do. )

Oh, I'm not calling for any action to be taken, note. I started this thread because I thought it was quite reasonable to call someone on bad behaviour. I don't think this should be regarded as Fann(y)ing the flames. Even the mildest post - hell - the absence of a post - seems to do that.

>>you must be aware that she won't necessarily see it that way.

I'm aware - but I'm suggesting that that's not my problem, Mr D. If it's not me it'll be someone else - maybe even you. Or maybe everyone. Or maybe the whole world minus Frs. She could start a fight in a phone box.

At least she dislikes me already, so what's to lose?

Oh, it's certainly reasonable to call people on bad behaviour... but sometimes it's just as reasonable to step back, and ignore them, especially in situations where nobody is actually being hurt by the behaviour (apart from maybe the person who's behaviour it is).

One day I'll learn that myself.

I agree with you, Mr.D but the point I would make (and that I think Ed might also be making) is that why should the majority (because I'm sure it's not just one or two, judging from convos I have elsewhere) of researchers should step back out of threads? They are interesting and engaging topics and we should be allowed to discuss and call people (there is more than one person who gets called on their behaviour, Hoo being the obvious example) on their behaviours?

That's the thing that i am seeing, being built up around one researcher, a kind of "hands off" zone. And I came very near, in the last few months of BBCdom, to not caring where h2g2 went afterwards because I didn't want to be part of it.

But I do want to be part of it. Anyway, things have moved on so I'll see how it goes

>> but sometimes it's just as reasonable to step back

And fair enough. Your call.

But as a sincere and well meant piece of advice which I really hope doesn't come out wrong - you don't have to take personal responsibility for advising others on the best way to deal with their problems. Although equally - you're entitled to.

I think it's entirely possible that my involvement with the consortium pre-bid and now as a volunteer of various types has brought out my well-meaning-but-probably-actually-quite-annoying side.

I thought you were just being a WUM.

C'mere you!

MrD I think you were always well-meaning and kind, or do I have you confused with someone else?

my worry, and I think you might have seen me rant & rave about this elsewhere is that in our attmpts to be "inclusive" we may be all-embracing but at the same time push some people away.

I think there is a point where inclusivity simply stops working... there's no way (just to pluck a random example from thin air, honest. Guv.) that we could prohibit people from talking about bacon just to avoid potentially offending certain sections of society, because by doing so we exclude people who like to talk about bacon (2legs, mostly).

It'd be nice to please all the Researchers all the time, but we know that'll never happen. However, if we can please most of the Researchers some of the time and some of the Researchers most of the time we'll be doing a lot better than many online communities manage!