UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Disappeared and Abducted Children and Young Adults => Madeleine McCann (3) disappeared from her parent's holiday apartment at Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007. No trace of her has ever been found. => Topic started by: LagosBen on October 25, 2013, 01:44:34 PM
-
I don't suppose this thread will last too long someone will "tell Teacher"...but can I just ask?
The recent pm warning received by, let's see I'm guessing most, if not all, McCann supporters ref snidey or provocative comments etc. Was the same pm issued to [ censored word] such as Stephen, faithfully, Luz, Anne, Redblossom, C. Edwards ?
I have to say this forum does seem rather biased in favour of anti McCanns.
I haven't been here long but I have noticed that pros back up their claims and usually provide links.
[ censored word] make posts etc and do not provide official or genuine sources for much of it but claim it is true.
And some on here have made rude, xenophobic comments or digs...and I never see them reprimanded.
If pros continued to be censored and [ censored word] allowed to post their idea of the "truth" - what's the point of this section?
Or maybe we should do what others do a report every post that annoys us 8-)(--)
-
I try to look at the facts and discrepancies with an open mind and come to my own conclusions. I suppose Eddie the cavader dog didn't like the McCann's and was bias? Ridiculous!
-
Are you posting on the correct thread?
-
Oh, you've noticed, have you. Join the club. But it s becoming a badge of honour so don't knock it. "I've been reported more than you have."
Personally, I can't be bothered to report any of them.
-
Everyone gets the same messages Ben 8(0(*
-
Good - now let's hope that EVERYONE gets censored in the same way. 8((()*/
-
Oh, you've noticed, have you. Join the club. But it s becoming a badge of honour so don't knock it. "I've been reported more than you have."
Personally, I can't be bothered to report any of them.
I had noticed but I really don't let things bother me too much. I have only reported one post I think because I was told to @)(++(*
I'd rather not hassle Admin and deal with any annoying person myself. But I really don't like unfairness in who can post what and it seems to me that [ censored word] can post whatever they like fact or not.
-
Good - now let's hope that EVERYONE gets censored in the same way. 8((()*/
I hope you all stay, I find you fascinating >@@(*&)
-
8)--)) Would love to, but have to scoot now.
-
8)--)) Would love to, but have to scoot now.
Me too. Got to go and watch some paint dry. There is only so much fibbing and obfuscation that I can cope with in one go.
-
Members are asked to abide by the forum rules and etiquette. Provocative posts and snide remarks will always be removed so there is little point in making them. Repeat offenders will be sanctioned.
Regards,
The UK Justice Forum Team.
That one? I got it.
-
[ censored word] don't post about the McCanns the way pros do about Amaral. No wonder they get reprimanded.
Do the [ censored word] make personal comments about what the McCanns wear, what they look like etc... People in glass houses comes to mind.
-
[ censored word] don't post about the McCanns the way pros do about Amaral. No wonder they get reprimanded.
Yep
-
I don't suppose this thread will last too long someone will "tell Teacher"...but can I just ask?
The recent pm warning received by, let's see I'm guessing most, if not all, McCann supporters ref snidey or provocative comments etc. Was the same pm issued to [ censored word] such as Stephen, faithfully, Luz, Anne, Redblossom, C. Edwards ?
I have to say this forum does seem rather biased in favour of anti McCanns.
I haven't been here long but I have noticed that pros back up their claims and usually provide links.
[ censored word] make posts etc and do not provide official or genuine sources for much of it but claim it is true.
And some on here have made rude, xenophobic comments or digs...and I never see them reprimanded.
If pros continued to be censored and [ censored word] allowed to post their idea of the "truth" - what's the point of this section?
Or maybe we should do what others do a report every post that annoys us 8-)(--)
For months, I never lowered myself to complaining until it became obvious that I was being extremely bullied by someone on here and that they were taking every opportunity to complain against me when, after much provacation I responded, altho in a watered down style.
I decided to start complaining. So I hit the button, and put in many reports, but nothing happened except it helped the mods to find the offensive (extremely offensive at times) post and remove it. The offenders nasty score rarely moved.and if it did, it moved in a miniscule manner. As long term posters on here will recognise I was severely bullied.
You can hit the "report to Moderator" button as often as you like and give sound reasons for your complaint, but all it usually does is help the Mods clear out anything that an anti shouldldn't have said. It saves them looking and enables them to give a good clean look to some nasty people.
The offender rarely gets punished and carries on telling lies or bullying. Pffft!
If the only way that arguments can be "won" is by telling lies and bullying, it doesn't say much for this forum.
A level playing field please Mods
-
Well when i joined there were far more supporters of the family on here than there were those who did not accept the McCann's version of events.
I do not recall the same level of incessant whining about bias from the small band of "[ censored word]", for want of a better term, who were here then and when those "[ censored word]" were in the minority.
Neither do i recall the "pros" having any issues with the moderation when they were in the majority on here.
I suggest people aren't as precious nor take the idea of posting on an internet forum so seriously.
Seems to me recently more people are solely interested in finding things to be offended about, displaying faux outrage and revulsion at other posters and reporting every little thing to the Mods, who must dread this forum with a passion, with all the work moderating it must entail.
How about everyone who posts on here simply engages in discussion rather than making life even more difficult for the mods.
Just a thought.
-
[ censored word] don't post about the McCanns the way pros do about Amaral. No wonder they get reprimanded.
Do the [ censored word] make personal comments about what the McCanns wear, what they look like etc... People in glass houses comes to mind.
Angelo..it was you who posted theMcCanns were shit parents
-
Angelo..it was you who posted theMcCanns were shit parents
I think Angelo feels that anyone who endangers their children must be shit parents. I must say I can't argue with that and would add irresponsible and negligent as well.
-
I think Angelo feels that anyone who endangers their children must be shit parents. I must say I can't argue with that and would add irresponsible and negligent as well.
Beat me to it John, they were shit parents on the night she dissapeared & probably most nights before.
-
I think Angelo feels that anyone who endangers their children must be shit parents. I must say I can't argue with that and would add irresponsible and negligent as well.
I personally would never use that word - but would certainly use the phrase "irresponsible and negligent". And much as there as people who argue against this, I really cannot see the actions of the McCanns in any other light
I reported someone for the first time the other day as they were writing general negative comments on a whole group (race, if you like) of people which I felt was quite wrong. These people were persecuted during WW2, and up to 220,000 were executed in various ways. I felt that to encourage feelings against them again now as a total group was quite wrong; and I myself was glad that there was a way of bringing this sort of posting to the attention of the mods
-
that's angelos opinion and that's fine but for him to suggest that the [ censored word] don't abuse the mccanns is not correct
Edted due to post removal
-
As no doubt was I and many others, a shit parent, in the opinion of some. But it is just an opinion. I have never purported to being perfect. And God preserve me from those who do. But I can't help wondering if their children had half as much fun as mine did while I was neglecting them.
Edioted due to post removal
-
Everyone gets the same messages Ben 8(0(*
Not always but in this case the clue for Ben should be in the header,
To ALL members!
-
well if you going to call the mccanns shit parents how about amaral ?
hes a shit parent drinking and driving with his child in the car that's neglect at the highest I would say endangering his daughters life.
1. Amaral didn't "lose" a daughter
2. Where's your evidence for this accusation?
-
Not always but in this case the clue for Ben should be in the header,
To ALL members!
they may get the same message but you have just supported a poster being abusive towards the McCanns. that's up to you but for angelo to say that the [ censored word] are abusive and the pros aren't is ridiculous
-
1. Amaral didn't "lose" a daughter
2. Where's your evidence for this accusation?
maybe luck was on his side but he very well could of ...wheres your evidence the mccanns lost a daughter ? they didn't lose her she was taken from her bed...why do you think SY got the case reopened "Abduction"
-
I personally would never use that word - but would certainly use the phrase "irresponsible and negligent". And much as there as people who argue against this, I really cannot see the actions of the McCanns in any other light
I reported someone for the first time the other day as they were writing general negative comments on a whole group (race, if you like) of people which I felt was quite wrong. These people were persecuted during WW2, and up to 220,000 were executed in various ways. I felt that to encourage feelings against them again now as a total group was quite wrong; and I myself was glad that there was a way of bringing this sort of posting to the attention of the mods
I find your post ridiculous...what has genocide got to do with any post I have made. Why did the original article refer to the family as roma..perhaps tahts where the prejudice started but you missed that. My opinion is that the gypsy fraternity(roma ..tinker ...traveller) have a well deserved reputation for dishonesty. They also, as agroup ride roughshod over planning law and pay very little income tax.
-
Oh my. It's another davel.
"could have" please. "Could of" is appalling English usage. The fact is, he didn't. The McCanns had three children, they currently have two accounted for. They have lost one. My statement is pure fact. How that daughter came to be lost is a matter of debate and such it is, ceaselessly.
I have no interest in, nor opinion of, your deflection question.
What has English usage got to do with the title of this thread ..not interested in my opinion then don't reply "simples" 8((()*/
-
As no doubt was I and many others, a shit parent, in the opinion of some. But it is just an opinion. I have never purported to being perfect. And God preserve me from those who do. But I can't help wondering if their children had half as much fun as mine did while I was neglecting them.
But what's to stop anyone saying you are a sh!t parent if that's their opinion? It may not bother you, it may not bother the McCanns and I totally fail to see why it bothers a whole bunch of people enough to start carting abuse at those that don't agree with their more favourable opinions of the McCanns. It's like that "leave Britney alone" weirdo all over again.
-
I find your post ridiculous...what has genocide got to do with any post I have made. Why did the original article refer to the family as roma..perhaps tahts where the prejudice started but you missed that. My opinion is that the gypsy fraternity(roma ..tinker ...traveller) have a well deserved reputation for dishonesty. They also. as agroup ride roughshod over planning law and also pay very little income tax.
I carefully did not name you and the thread has been deleted. I missed nothing by the way. But you have started the abuse again - and people suggest only the "[ censored word]" are abusive. Genocide starts when one group of people are treated as outside society by others, and all members of that group are treated as outsiders.
I shall not answer further and I hope admin will remove all these references as they did the previous thread.
A shame, as you at least had the decently to virtually apologise to me for some of what you said the other day
-
What has English usage got to do with the title of this thread ..not interested in my opinion then don't reply "simples" 8((()*/
I'm just trying to keep up the standards around here. As those who support the McCanns think it's ok to hurl abuse at anyone that disagrees with them and attack them for pretty much anything and everything, I thought it was fair game to attack your opinion based on your inability to use "Could have" instead of "Could of". No? Well maybe people in glass houses and all that...
Where have I said I'm not interested in your opinion? You stated things as facts, I asked for evidence to support those statements and you've been ducking and diving ever since. There's someone else around here that does that and no-one pays much attention to him any more because of it. Would be a shame for you to go the same way so early on.
-
But what's to stop anyone saying you are a sh!t parent if that's their opinion? It may not bother you, it may not bother the McCanns and I totally fail to see why it bothers a whole bunch of people enough to start carting abuse at those that don't agree with their more favourable opinions of the McCanns. It's like that "leave Britney alone" weirdo all over again.
You seem totally unable to understand a simple point..it is not the MCCanns being shit parents per se that is the subject of the discussion but the fact that angelo claims that the [ censored word] do not post abusive posts. You shoulf of(sic)
noticed that
-
I carefully did not name you and the thread has been deleted. I missed nothing by the way. But you have started the abuse again - and people suggest only the "[ censored word]" are abusive. Genocide starts when one group of people are treated as outside society by others, and all members of that group are treated as outsiders.
I shall not answer further and I hope admin will remove all these references as they did the previous thread.
A shame, as you at least had the decently to virtually apologise to me for some of what you said the other day
It isn't abuse its an opinion based on a lot of evidence. As you have brought up genocide.... I would also criticise the state of Israel for its appalling treatment of the Palestinians..is that racist too
-
they may get the same message but you have just supported a poster being abusive towards the McCanns. that's up to you but for angelo to say that the [ censored word] are abusive and the pros aren't is ridiculous
He wasn't abusive Davel, he was stating an opinion based on the observation that their stupidity resulted in the loss of a child.
-
I wonder if admin/mods have noticed the goading comments that are currently being posted on various threads.
-
He wasn't abusive Davel, he was stating an opinion based on the observation that their stupidity resulted in the loss of a child.
This is absolutely correct. If Angelo said, "it is a matter of fact that the McCanns are shit parents" then he would be stating a fact. As it is, he's saying something along the lines of (and apologies for paraphrasing Angelo) "despite the McCanns saying that what they did was well within the bounds of responsible parenting, I think they are shit parents as their actions have resulted in them losing a daughter." If anyone thinks that is abusive, they need a new dictionary.
-
I wonder if admin/mods have noticed the goading comments that are currently being posted on various threads.
I suspect that the likes of me are considered to be big enough and ugly enough to cope. This has to be a compliment.
And if I get censured for replying in kind, then so be it.
-
He wasn't abusive Davel, he was stating an opinion based on the observation that their stupidity resulted in the loss of a child.
he was abusive in the criticism of the posters grammar
-
This is absolutely correct. If Angelo said, "it is a matter of fact that the McCanns are shit parents" then he would be stating a fact. As it is, he's saying something along the lines of (and apologies for paraphrasing Angelo) "despite the McCanns saying that what they did was well within the bounds of responsible parenting, I think they are shit parents as their actions have resulted in them losing a daughter." If anyone thinks that is abusive, they need a new dictionary.
Freedom of thought under attack & freedom of speech on the other thread. Are the McCanns really that important?
-
You seem totally unable to understand a simple point..it is not the MCCanns being shit parents per se that is the subject of the discussion but the fact that angelo claims that the [ censored word] do not post abusive posts. You shoulf of(sic)
noticed that
I didn't say that Dave, try reading it again mate.
[ censored word] don't post about the McCanns the way pros do about Amaral. No wonder they get reprimanded.
Do the [ censored word] make personal comments about what the McCanns wear, what they look like etc... People in glass houses comes to mind.
-
I didn't say that Dave, try reading it again mate.
Actually Angelo I had a conversation with an "anti" on here recently, she took great delight in posting photographs of the "overjoyed" Mccanns days after their child's loss.
-
This is absolutely correct. If Angelo said, "it is a matter of fact that the McCanns are shit parents" then he would be stating a fact. As it is, he's saying something along the lines of (and apologies for paraphrasing Angelo) "despite the McCanns saying that what they did was well within the bounds of responsible parenting, I think they are shit parents as their actions have resulted in them losing a daughter." If anyone thinks that is abusive, they need a new dictionary.
he didn't say that