Gonçalo Amaral confirms he will appeal the damages decision to higher Court.

[Mr Gray]

Most odd that there is no announcement of the joyous news on the gofundme blog.

One contributor has made reference to it, but that's it ....

Ms Baulch, these days, seems to be writing blogs .....

Yes Ms Baulch seems to have turned her back on amaral
Wonder why

[stephen25000]

Yes Ms Baulch seems to have turned her back on amaral
Wonder why

and how did you come to that deduction ?

[ferryman]

and how did you come to that deduction ?

Her name is completely wiped from the gofundme site

[ferryman]

He obviously needs a PR person for quantity and timing of news and stories.

Does he also need reliable news to impart?

Who runs gofundme?

[stephen25000]

Her name is completely wiped from the gofundme site

So what.

The appeal has been granted.

Are you pleased ferryman, justice is being served ?

[Mr Gray]

So what.

The appeal has been granted.

Are you pleased ferryman, justice is being served ?

I'm pleased I have been proved right again
As I pointed out amarals right to appeal was not automatic when sceptics were claims he already had the right to appeal

[stephen25000]

I'm pleased I have been proved right again
As I pointed out amarals right to appeal was not automatic when sceptics were claims he already had the right to appeal

Irrelevant.

The word was 'accepted', not  'granted'.

[Benice]

Yes Ms Baulch seems to have turned her back on amaral
Wonder why

Maybe she is uncomfortable with the false claim - being made daily on that site  - regarding the number of people who have donated to his fund.     Every donation is added onto the total  as a 'new person' and ignores the fact that many are actually from the same people making repeat donations.

[stephen25000]

Maybe she is uncomfortable with the false claim - being made daily on that site  - regarding the number of people who have donated to his fund.     Every donation is added onto the total  as a 'new person' and ignores the fact that many are actually from the same people making repeat donations.

So what is the problem if people donate more than once.

That's up to them.

Have people donated to the mccanns more than once ?

Anyway, the key point, the appeal is accepted.

[Benice]

So what is the problem if people donate more than once.

That's up to them.

Have people donated to the mccanns more than once ?

Anyway, the key point, the appeal is accepted.

I have no problem with people donating more than once.  I do have a problem with disinformation deliberately being peddled to the public.

It's dishonest IMO.

[stephen25000]

I have no problem with people donating more than once.  I do have a problem with disinformation deliberately being peddled to the public.

It's dishonest IMO.

So people who donated to the mccanns fund not knowing what the money was being used for certainly have the right to say it was dishonest.

Would you not agree ?

[Benice]

So people who donated to the mccanns fund not knowing what the money was being used for certainly have the right to say it was dishonest.

Would you not agree ?

Still desperately trying to change the subject I see.   

The evidence of the lie being purported on that site is there for everyone to see.   

Why do you think it is being allowed to remain - when AFAIK it would be a simple task to correct it?

Any ideas?

[stephen25000]

Still desperately trying to change the subject I see.   

The evidence of the lie being purported on that site is there for everyone to see.   

Why do you think it is being allowed to remain - when AFAIK it would be a simple task to correct it?

Any ideas?

The real problem you have is with people donating to Amaral.

Everything else is a red herring.

[Benice]

The real problem you have is with people donating to Amaral.

Everything else is a red herring.

The real problem you have is that you can't deny the fact that the total number of people claimed to be individual donators - (when we all know many of them are  'repeat' donators)  - means the 'total' claimed is completely untrue.   The true total is considerably lower than that number IMO.

Hence your attempts to deflect and your refusal to make any comments on that fact.

[G-Unit]

It seems to be the way the site works, rather than a deliberate move by anyone using it. It keeps count of donations rather than donators. It assumes that each donation is made by a different person. You can hardly blame the users for the way the site works.