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

Tonight, as I lazily backstroked across the tepid pool
the half moon followed me
brilliantly suspended in the twilit sky, all alone,
framed from afar by the rosy fire-edged thunder clouds
which glowed with the same light
that illuminated the moon.

I turned and swam toward it.
It drifted away.
It's playing with me.

I thought about the other half...
the side we can't see.
It's there.
It has weight, an equal weight to the bright side of the moon.
But it's more subtle
and mysterious.

Sometimes we forget that without the hidden mass
the moon would lose its momentum, falter in its path
and there'd be nothing to reflect the light,
to make us believe we can reach
for the stars.

And the twilight sky would be empty
except for the distant glimmerings
in the heavens.

That is wonderful; I can feel the water, I can see the moon. I wish I could write like that.

Love

B

That half moon symbolizes a couple of different things, to me.

One of them that was very clear in my mind as I wrote it was LeKZ and the people participating in the FoLKZ group. I'd call them activists or revolutionaries, and myself and others who prefer more subtle means of action evolutionaries. I was thinking of them as the bright side of the moon, and people like me as the hidden side. Oddly enough, we all seem to have very similar goals which we would like to achieve, though our approach is very different.

The other picture that was in my head at the time was of h2g2. The ideal I had of it when I discovered this place...the potential to help build something that could be so diverse and far reaching and human it boggles my mind. I treasure that ideal. And I was thinking about h2g2 as it is now that it's been purchased by the BBC. We only see the parts that we look at... we don't know about the rest of it. We don't know exactly what it's for, and can only hope that it continues to fulfill the dreams that all of us who feel compelled to build it have of it.

How right you are. The other thing which it does not mean, but could, is the thoughts and emotions which go on in our subconscious. Without all that processing going on we would be entirely surface, and just noise.

I feel very shallow in relation to h2g2, I just found it a fun place to be, with interesting conversations going on, and some very cool people. I missed the vision thing entirely.

Would you post something about your understanding of that vision in 'what is the bbc's interest in h2g2'?

And never underestimate your ability to turn a neat phrase.

You are so right about the goals. I think that the italics probably care more about h2g2 than the rest of us. For us it's a hobby, for them it is their job, and one they did unpaid for a couple of months in the hiatus. It bugs me that they make it hard for people to trust them.

As I said, a lovely poem.


an evolutionary called Ben
(if I may be so bold)

hehehe Thank you.

Isn't it cool how everyone can bring their own meaning to words that are written? You're right about the subconscious... though it never occurred to me while I was making that poem. I've always wondered, when someone writes a story for example, and the critics and grad students get ahold of it and analyze it till it's about EVERYTHING in a nutshell, are the authors surprised at what other people see? Guess that's the power of words.

I wrote a little bit about *my* vision of h2g2 on your page, and I'll go back and duplicate it here. And then I'm gonna transcribe what I've been writing on my lunch breaks the last couple of days. And THEN I'll look at "What is the BBC's interest in h2g2?' and if I have anything to say that hasn't been said, I'll do so.

Say it even if it hasn't been said. The more the weightier.

B

>>I don't think I've ever been compelled to write a poem in my life before, (other than those inane attempts when I HAD to for a class assignment) But there's something about.... what this h2g2 COULD be, and what it already is, and the way it affects people's lives.... it's like a picture being painted from millions of words, a group of people working together with whatever skills they have, even if they never know of each others existence. As long as it is allowed to exist it'll be there. And maybe 20 or 50 or 200 years down the road people can look at it and get a picture of what our lives are like today. And maybe it'll help people to realize that in some ways, whatever it means to be human doesn't change, even though the circumstances do.

To me that matters. A lot.<<

I've been thinking recently about the different methods people use to reach similar ends. Recent events on h2g2--the moderation issues since the BBC purchased the site, and most currently the lifetime ban of one of the researchers got me to wondering what sort of approach really IS most effective in achieving one's ideals. I see it in terms of activism vs. action. (see.... how human of me to need to make it an adversarial discussion in my *own* head! Oy vey... is there no hope for us all?)

When I use the term activism I'm talking about people with a vision of a better world. They tend to use a direct, no-nonsense, 'I-don't-care-who-doesn't-like-it, it-needs-to-be-said-and fixed NOW!' approach. People who do this get attention...LOTS of it. They raise controversial issues, force others to take a stance. They cause people to think about things that might otherwise never occur to them. They believe they're right. The successful ones are very convincing. It's noble, in it's own way, that they put themselves in the line of fire because they believe strongly enough in the integrity of their vision to place themselves at risk. They are leaders and attract followers. Sometimes they get the results they are striving for.

Problem is, they often tend to alienate a lot of people who are sympathetic to the cause because of their forceful approach and rigouous demand for the loyalty of those associated with them. Sometimes they attack those who differ in opinion about the more subtle nuances of the situation or who prefer to proceed in other ways.

That seems to be the case in a number of situations where people band together to promote their ideals--be it politics, religion, or art movements. These alliances often start with a strong, intelligent, vocal leader who attracts like-minded people to pursue a cause. Then, after time and the initial furore dies down, smaller differences between people create conflict withiin the group which tends to lead to segments splitting off and taking their own direction. It's not uncommon to see bitter infighting between the segments which were once part of a united front. Sometimes they become so involved with battling amongst themselves they end up actually spending very little energy on promoting the ideals which brought them together in the first place.

*whew* time for a glass of wine... my fingers are tired.

Another method of achieving one's ideals is much subtler, and *I* think, more effective than activism. It's the more evolutionary process of politely working within the system and quietly setting the precedents which will eventually become the standards one is hoping for through implementing a thought-out plan of action.

To work efffectively, this type of action requires the cooperation of those with the power to determine policy. It means you have to make it a point to play within the rules as you understand them, and ask for clear guidelines before taking action which might possibly be seen as overextending the rules, if the guidelines haven't been clearly stated. It's important to be nonconfrontational and to recognize that those in a position to determine policy have accepted the responsibility to direct growth, and that their idea of healthy growth might differ from yours. Therefore, they have to be cautious and occasionally take actions which they might personally prefer not to, if they find it to be the best way to manage their responsibility overall.

To impact a system through action requires patience. It's not for people who want all the answers RIGHT NOW!. The problem with demanding immediate reform is that those in power can't always justify implementing far-reaching policy changes at the moment, for one reason or another. And often they can't divulge all of the information that they are working with for ethical reasons. When pressed, the only options left available to them are to refrain from involvement or to practice restrictive management and create still more rules as a reaction to those who insist on pushing the limits.

Personally, I'm concerned that some of those participating in the 'Lifetime Suspension' thread are going to force a reaction which will end up further restricting the freedoms that researchers on h2g2 currently take for granted. That would be a shame, since it doesn't look to me as if that's what anyone--not me, not those questioning the decisions of the PTB, or the PTB themselves want to see happen.

People in general seem to respond more favorably to requests made with the attitude that we're all working together toward a common goal with benefits for everyone. Aggressive demands elicit prickly responses, make otherwise humane individuals retreat to self-protect mode. I wish we'd all (self included) keep that in mind.

Those of us in the USA and the UK might want to give a moments thought to all the bandying about of 'right to free speech' priveleges we think we own. Sure, we have 'em. It's the law, right? And they're some of the most precious things we need to keep, in my opinion.

There's one little detail, though... the worst that can happen to any of US if we abuse them here is that our text will be moderated or...ultimate punishment... a lifetime ban from h2g2.

I don't claim to know the legality of the situation, but I've been wondering lately if the BBC would be held legally liable for any misinformation published through the Edited Guide. Think about it for a minute. If someone were to get a guide entry passed through the process, and there were a mistake which nobody caught... for example, if something happened like this:

HOW TO COLOR YOUR HAIR
...add 1 part lye to 1 part developer and apply to hair for 25 minutes...

and somebody actually DID it, using lye(typo) instead of dye, I suspect that, at least here in the US, it would result in legal action on the part of the person who followed those instructions and got hurt. Couldn't speculate on what the results of such a lawsuit would be, but... if this place IS expected to publish true and factual information, and IF they're liable for what's being published as the edited guide.... ummmmmm... I'd not be at all surprised to see the Edited Guide, which is an integral component of what the ideal of h2g2 is, for me and other researchers, **POOF** out of existence. And that's a silly example I gave, but a lot of things ARE published here in which the author is the only 'expert' on the subject.

*sigh*

Just some ramblings here... hopefully I'm being absurd. I'm allowed, it's my JOURNAL, after all.

I decided to put this here because I believe your intentions in reinterpreting the 'lifetime suspension' thread are noble, and honorable, and that you hope to have something good come from what you are planning to undertake there. I fear that those will not be the overall results of your efforts. I tacked this onto this particular thread because what I've written here in the past tells why I have that fear. I don't have the impression of you as an aggressive type, rather that the high emotion in many of your posts is what will bring about unforseen repercussions. I understand that approach very well.... it's my nature, too. It's also been my experience that that sort of approach backfires as often as it works. So, whether or not you agree with what I have to say here, and whatever you decide to do, I really hope you understand this: I truly hope you manage to make it work for you. And I hope you do no harm.

I rarely chose to make huge posts, though I am often very careful with the words I use. As best I remember, every post I made in the 'lifetime suspension' was carefully considered. And often I mean a whole lot with what I'm saying, even when it is short. I figure anyone who's curious can ask me for further explanation, if they want to. My style does allow for misinterpretation, though.

I'll show you what I mean.

> for Mark and Peta. Your job isn't an easy one. I'm saddened beyond words that this happened.

MoG<

for Mark and Peta : That was because *I* prefer to believe that they did not enjoy banning LeKZ, and that they don't take pleasure in the 'policing' aspect of their job. It's a part of their job, perhaps more so since the BBC took posession of h2g2. It's been a part of their job for some time, and I guess they have to do it the best they can. My reason for thinking that is that last October a sizeable chunk of a page I had started was censored. That was preRupert. Peta gave what I accepted as a reasonable explanation for that. It took me a while to get it, since I'd lost access to the email account. Someone else got involved on my behalf, and she posted the email on my page. At that time I really had no idea how h2g2 worked, so didn't have the sense to email her myself. When I saw the great gaping holes on my page I actually figured that I might have been completely deleted (banned). I expected it all to *poof* when I pushed the post button after typing my Censorship journal entry. I'll go on a bit more about what that page/persona is for, but later. I've never posted the bottomline reason I wanted to make it here on h2g2.

Support for Mark and Peta? You could say that.... I think it's an important job. I prefer to believe they're idealists, of a sort. I believe that they do the job better than some sort of lawer, or bureaucrat, or politician would. I don't think they should be expected to be perfect. They're human. Humans make mistakes sometimes, do the best they can with what they have. I think Mark and Peta do that.

Do I agree with their decision to ban LeKZ over the xxxx post? Nope. I'm very uncomfortable with the banning of someone based on a translation. But I don't claim to have all the information. I'm NOT in their position. It's resoundingly NOT my decision. I wish, if LeKZ HAD to be banned, that it would have been done under circumstances less open to interpretation, that the reason would have been more clear cut.

The whole situation saddened me. I was saddened by what *I* perceived as an editorial decision based on emotions ignited by a translation. In my opinion, IF the translation had been what LeKZ posted, that would be fair grounds for banning. Period. *I* don't really think it makes that big a difference whether the translation was correct or not. *I* don't think it was a good decision for LeKZ to post that xxxx thing. I was saddened that LekZ won't be contributing to the edited guide. My gut tells me that LeKZ would not have been able to control her posting style enough to stay on h2g2, but it sure would have been nice to have that feeling proved wrong. It saddens me that she didn't have that chance to give it a shot.

This is from October 2000. http://www.bbc.co.uk/h2g2/guide/F55644?thread=81602

More than a year after my last post to this journal entry and now it's time to celebrate! I just read this http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F77636?thread=220525 O happy day! Truly it's a wonderful thing to see how things have unfolded since the time I started this entry. I'm so glad the Italics managed to get h2g2 back to a system of reactive moderation. I knew my faith in them wasn't misplaced. It just takes time to make a dent in something like the BBC, and they did it! I'm sure too that the persistence of the SBVM and the Zaphodistas influenced this decision, though at the time it sometimes felt as if we were banging our heads against a brick wall, achieving nothing but bumps and bruises to our own aching noggins. Well done, everyone! This is something that gives me hope on a larger scale, too. With the world in its current unstable state and the president of my country apparently chomping at the bit to start a war AND being supported in this lunacy by a large number of my countrymen I sometimes wonder how effective those of us can truly be who believe in dialogue and diplomacy and working together towards world peace. Violence and force are so difficult to negotiate with sometimes, unless you resort to the same methods. I'm still an idealist (though often a cynical and skeptical flavored idealist) and in that deep-faith part of me I sincerely believe there must be some way for the people of the world to get along together to the benefit of everyone. So this change in the censorship policy of the BBC reminds me, personally, "Keep doing what you believe is right, Britta. Even if you are only doing little things that don't seem to make much difference in the grand scale. Hold onto your certainty that there are people in the world with the power to set policy and that they can be persuaded to have a bit of faith in the good that is in most people. Words matter. Ideals matter. And actions matter most of all." O happy day!

Hello my Dear,

I have taken the liberty of stealing some of your words and putting them here: http://groups.msn.com/theh2g2underguide/_whatsnew.msnw

There is a discussion going on at the moment about the best way to extend the Guide so that it includes entries which are not suitable for the Edited Guide. I remembered your vision from when I first posted it 18 months ago, and I thought others might be inspired by them too.

(By the way - my tickets are booked!)

Ben

*BITE*

I lurked around in there, tickled the underbelly.

Looks like a great plan to me, what y'all are working on. Let me know if I can be of any help. I'm in the middle of a bunch of projects that need my attention at the moment or I'll wind up with a whole mess of good intentions and too little action to make any of them matter. That means I'll not have the time for a lot of random lurking in the underguide, so please point me at whatever I need to know about.

You didn't 'steal' my words, btw. You turned 'em into an amoeba. I'm extremely flattered that you thought they were worth duplicating.

Life is ahappening, and happening FAST! During the holidays I met the man I've been waiting for all these years, just a minor detail that he lives in the northern part of the US right now til he arranges everything so he's here in Paradise full time. He offered me a miracle on New Years Day and I chose world peace... gonna have to figure out how to help him make that happen now, and it's gonna take a lot of work given the situation the world is in at the moment. *sigh* I'll let you know when I come up with a definite plan and maybe you can take on your chunk of the universe. I'm only half kidding... my mojo has been pretty strong lately. Might as well apply it to something that really matters, see what happens.

Got sucked into planning a day camp to teach critical thinking for adolescents this summer. My best friend and I are the Buddhist contingent of the planning committee, the others involved are from the Atheist Foundation and the Humanists Association. This ought to be fun, though I have noooo idea how it happened. I don't even particularily *like* most kids. Hi ho.

And then there's a bunch of half-finished portraits in my puter that I NEED to get done, and a painting I started recently hanging on the wall reminding me of its incomplete status, and a proper freelance job... woooohooooo! that'll be a top priority real soon. And things have changed drastically at work....oy vey. I need a clone. I need more time. No, I need to use the time I have VERY efficiently. Discipline rears its ugly head.

When will you be here? What's the agenda? Keep me informed... the way things are moving these days you'll be here before I know it. And I want to make sure I've at LEAST cleaned out the litterbox.

An Agenda?

We are imagining a road and rail tour of the US and Canada. Up the East Coast, across Canada by rail, and down the West Coast, starting and stopping in Dallas Texas.

GTB has a White Ford Van, and the vague idea is to load it onto a train and cross Canada that way.

I have booked flights to arrive in the US on Saturday July 26th and leaving again on Monday 8th September.

We will be visting Florida, (You, My Dear), Atlanta (2Bit), Nova Scotia (~jwf~) and California (Ste). All else is subject to negotiation and persuasion.

B

As you bop your way from Dallas to here you MUST stop in New Orleans for a bite of spice. Should you decide that you want to do that, and if things work out the way I want them to (myoho willing *snort*) I'd loooove to meet y'all there and do an h2g2 version of Fear and Loathing in N'awlins. Of course, that's just me and my warped mind. Do what fits, let me know when you know.

Ask GT to contact me sometime when he sees me online, please. I saw that he's added me to his contact list a while ago. Haven't figured out this damned Trillian enough to contact other people at will unless I see them online.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F77636?thread=299215 I love the way some things change and some things remain the same. To me this is a very positive event, though at first glance that's not how I perceived it. Censorship on site, this time instigated through Editorial Policy, which oversees all of the BBC. Woooohooooo! (and no, I'm not being facetious) *Our* editors proved that they learned a lot, and are proving that they're *using* what they learned as they do their best to manage the situation. Now they'll get the chance to share that with the rest of the BBC, which is a huge thing, as BBC has such a great influence on worldwide communications. How cool it'll be if our editors can influence the bigger picture to bring about a less draconian policy overall, and show the advantages of dialogue between those responsible for policy and those who use BBC services. I'm quite confident that that'll be the outcome, though it might be a while before we can actually see it in action. At first I was concerned because the majority of researchers find this to be a negative step, and they're bristling against it and resisting to varying degrees, rather than seeing the lack of input on the part of Ed Pol as a sign that they might be thinking rather than just reacting. But it occurs to me now that since there are a few of us who have *some* kinda faith that those Ed Pol people just might not be power-hungry , well, it doesn't take all that many high expectations for people to want to meet them to the best of their ability. If those ED Pol people are anything like most people I've run across, they might just decide to get their own cussedness up and prove the doom-cryers wrong by being just as sane and reasonable as it's in their power to be. I certainly *hope* that's the way it plays out, rather than Ed Pol taking the low road and saying if that's the way they see us, that's the way we'll be. I'm really curious now. What a great experiment to be able to watch and evaluate, in the broader sense of learning more about how people in power respond to various types of stimuli. The underlying principles apply to far bigger things than censorship or the BBC.

*feeling more hopeful*

B