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

Isn't "verbalising" also turning a noun into a verb?

Ach, stop griefing, Sho, or I'll start nouning verbs.

you had a comma in the wrong place there, Ben, I think... and HI had his irony-meter set to "too low"

*chases Ben and HI with the slapping hand working overtime*

Policing this thread now, are you, dearest Sho?

Being somewhat disconnected from Hootoo nowadays I've been spared much of the turmoil mentioned above. I don't mind debates, including heated ones, but debating must be done respectfully. Trolling is not fun, I've faced my share and don't wish to do that again.

One of the reasons for my joining this site - and remaining here - was the general friendliness. There were a few cliques but they could be avoided. Some of these "cliquers" turned out to nice people IRL. The Meets have been an important part of my life for a number of years. Many people have became friends of mine.

Lately - the last year or so - I think the spirit has changed here. I don't feel at home as I once did. I want Hootoo to survive, and since I'm not able to volunteer my support will be moral and financial.

I will continue to pop in every now and then, and try to keep in touch.

Ivan, I will miss you if you leave, but there are other ways to stay in touch.

isn't one of the reasons the Beeb cut the age limit down ? because some trolls looked like they were grooming of sorts ?

No, that wasn't the case in Hootoo. We have always looked after our youngsters very closely.

What you are saying is that *other* websites were found to have insidious people openly grooming and encouraging youngsters to give out personal information. This lead to some finding themselves in dangerous situations.

One such Court case was the cause of the BBC closing out all accounts of youngsters under the age of 16 years.

Our Trolls may be mean, but not in that way.

lil xx

thanks love

>>
Talking of ickkle flowers: if someone calls you "a dewicate ikkle fower" they are being agressive, rude, dismissive and mean. It might be bullying if it's part of a pattern of abuse by one person against another. It's not ok in all sorts of ways, but - and this is the important thing - I don't think the post should be pulled just because it does indeed upset the little flower.

I would hope that a Mod would drop into the conversation and say "less of the nasty, please" and if that didn't work that a quiet word was had by email with the Nasty Person explaining what was wrong and why. Maybe the post should be edited to say "This post contravenes the House Rules, we have left it here for the record, but we do not endorse posting in this way - (signed) the Mods)". There are lots of ways of dealing with things other than simply blasting holes in conversation threads.
>> Ben

I'm not sure what the best response is, but I disagree that calling someone a "a dewicate ikkle fower" isn't abusive. When I've seen it used, it is. It's a particular piece of bullshit that intentionally undermines the person it is addressed to (and Ben, I find the way you phrased "just because it does indeed upset the little flower" reinforces the stereotype). Worse, the ikkle flower taunt states that only people of certain emotional constitutions are allowed in this conversation, and if you don't have that robustness we are going to ridicule you.

I've seen people leave this site because of the poor tolerance of vulnerability. I don't like it, and while I can see that the hardcore debate threads are best steered clear of by people that aren't up to the rough and tumble, I don't think that should apply to say convos about h2g2.


What I have just said is of course hugely complicated by the fact that someone can be both vulnerable and aggressive at the same time.

This is a reply to Honest Iago, post 116.

>>
My posts didn't breach the house rules either but this person played up the 'delicate little flower' routine, going on and on about how 'vulnerable' they were (people who know me on facebook/email could tell you just how 'vulnerable' I was last week but I didn't mention it once on here) and running around the site slandering me to all and sundry. Result? I get modded and a strong warning, this person continues to disrupt the site without boo being said to them.
<<

I saw those posts and I know which ones were modded. I think they easily broke the HRs. They were nasty and demeaning, and the fact that you think they weren't really worries me.

btw, the person who they were directed at has been modded alot, including having multiple posts pulled the same week as you. They've also been on premod recently, so characterising them as disrupting the site without boo being said to them is highly inaccurate. If anyone is slandering you, then please use the yikes button and/or email the Eds. That's the thing to do, and there is no point in complaining about moderation if you aren't prepared to take part.

(you might also consider not upping the ante with that person all the time).

I'm sorry you were having a hard time last week There's quite alot of that going round at the moment

>>>We want to support people with mental health and other issues; in return we need people who have mental health or other issues to accept reponsibility for how their posts may come across. Mental health issues or other issues are NOT and never can be an excuse for trollish behaviour. Being mean is being mean.<<

at the risk of coming accross as really crass and insensitive - isn't that the elephant in the room?

The best recomendation I would give to anyone joining this site with a mental health issue is shut the up about it. Once you admit to it you are mincemeat.

We learn this in real life of course.

I only admitted to my problems after Ed encouraged it...and of course Stephen Fry has been very open...even talking about being in prison.

But anyone admitting to such stuff in the present cultural atmosphere on this site needs their head examining.

But that's the point, Effers, I hope we can shift the culture of the site to be somewhere that doesn't shred people with mental illness. It is a two way street though; one set of house rules for everyone.

HI, kea alludes to an interesting point, that confidentiality means the only person who knows how the eds and the mods have treated someone is the person themselves.

Kea, I didn't say it wasn't abusive, in fact I did say it could be part of a patten of abuse. I also suggested ways of tackling it that show everyone in the thread it's not ok. What I think, and think very strongly at the moment, is that one person shouldn't be able to veto a post on a whim and blast holes in a thread because they are upset. Being upset really isn't the worst thing that can happen, and for purely practical reasons we cannot make not upsetting anyone the base rule of the site. We cannot give people the right to silence another person by saying a magic formula. Yes, the post should be edited if it's defamatory. Yes, it should be edited or pulled if it is racist, homophobic or vicioiusly sexist. But not have the post pulled because it is mean; the mods have other ways of intervening in those circumstances, and I think they should use them. The problem is the lack of awareness and context in the modding we've had these past few years.

These are just my btw, not an kind of statement.


Ben

I've assumed a pattern of bullying and a pattern of abuse are - for all practical purposes - the same thing.

I think that many people who have come to this site and been very brave in being upfront about mental health issues have had a good experience.

Others not so much - because they have behaved in ways described by Ben above and then "hidden" behind "oh I have mental health issues, don'tcha know?" and this is the behaviour that people are really worried about, objecting to, and it is pushing them slowly away.

Everyone can behave like an idiot, and everyone should be welcome to call them on it - but there are ways and ways.

And as always: no names, no pack-drill because this is not about pointing fingers, it is about moving forwards in a way that h2g2 comes back to being the comfortable place it has been before and welcoming to everyone who wants to come here.

And yes, my slapping hand is no out and looking for trouble.

There is a third category (at least) - those open about mental health issues who've had a hard time and left.

> It is a two way street though; one set of house rules for everyone.<

100% agreement. But it is impossible to put the genie back in the bottle once you're viewed through that prism.

Instead of just being subject to rules..other people start putting all sorts of stuff on you like 'poor me' 'delicate flower' etc.

As i say best shut the up. I seriously think anyone admitting to a mental health problem in future would be insane.

"anyone admitting to a mental health problem in future would be insane."

yes, Kea, there are people who have left.

However, I'm always in two minds. I want us to be inclusive - heck her and in RL I do try so very very hard to be inclusive and non-judgemental. But sometimes it is better for someone to say: ok I'm not comfortable on h2g2 and to go. We can be as inclusive and welcoming as we like, but this place really isn't for everyone - although there are parts of it that are more suited to some than others.

What I really hate to see, and regret that it has happened in the past, is when someone is bullied for no other reason than they are an easy target. I've seen some of that here and due to way that h2g2 works (has worked) we haven't really had a mechanism to control that. What I'd like to see in future is that we have a visible moderation team and a visible moderation policy and are mostly open and transparent about what we are doing. It must be ok for someone to step into a thread and put everyone on the h2g2 equivalent of the naughty step or something. It works very very well in other places and we are about to take a step that might well mean that we could employ that kind of tactic here.

Most people here can cope with being told "look, you're out of order here, stop it now" and those who can't, if we had a moderation team that could discuss together away from prying eyes, can develop a strategy for people who can't handle that but still need to be told.

It's not actually rocket science, but everyone who joins here signs on knowing that spitting isn't allowed and all the rest.

>but everyone who joins here signs on knowing that spitting isn't allowed and all the rest.<

Absolutely.

I'd love you to get a florid schizophrenic to understand that.

The best thing is to front up and admit some people are going to be excluded.

I'd happily be excluded for a period of time if I got as seriously psychotic as I have in the past. I don't see a problem with excluding people if they can't function here. The main thing is to be honest about it.

>> ok I'm not comfortable on h2g2 and to go

Hmmm, that's true, but that's true of anyone really, not just people struggling mentally or emotionally. I guess I see a degree of not understanding (on the site in general) of how to be around people that are vulnerable at any given time. Not that that's a suprise, it just reflects RL. And you are right, there have been people here who have had a great deal of positive support and good experiences. We shouldn't forget that.

Of course, it's almost impossible to have that conversation currently, for obvious reasons. I also think that once a functional moderation system is in place, then it will be easier to identify the broader issues of h2g2 culture and safety and decide if anything needs to be done (or can be done).