Rules are there for a reason!

[John]

  ... and they do not include either parent ...

Pedro do Carmo, deputy director of the Judiciary Police: "Maddie's parents are not suspects. Period."

Can that be compatible with what the SC stated three months earlier ie, is the statement by a SC Judge that, "Madeleine McCann's parents have not been ruled innocent" compatible with "Maddie's parents are not suspects. Period"?

I assume both are referring to Madeleine's disappearance rather than what occurred later?

[G-Unit]

Can that be compatible with what the SC stated three months earlier ie, is the statement by a SC Judge that, "Madeleine McCann's parents have not been ruled innocent" compatible with "Maddie's parents are not suspects. Period"?

I assume both are referring to Madeleine's disappearance rather than what occurred later?

Whatever the PJ are thinking now, the fact remains that the McCanns were not cleared by the archiving dispatch, which is what their lawyer claimed in her Supreme Court appeal.

[John]

Whatever the PJ are thinking now, the fact remains that the McCanns were not cleared by the archiving dispatch, which is what their lawyer claimed in her Supreme Court appeal.

If I recall correctly, the blame for that was placed squarely with those members of the tapas group who ultimately refused to assist the enquiry when asked to take part in a reconstruction.

[G-Unit]

Are we any nearer to knowing whether some forum members pretty much committed forum suicide or were hounded out by unfair and biased moderating?

I'm not privy to all the deleted posts but the ones I did read before they went appeared to me to be against the rules.

[John]

Are we any nearer to knowing whether some forum members pretty much committed forum suicide or were hounded out by unfair and biased moderating?

I'm not privy to all the deleted posts but the ones I did read before they went appeared to me to be against the rules.

Hounded out is just an excuse.  Recently two members have been expelled for blatant rule breach and for using bad language, more recently one left voluntarily for his own reasons. People move on regularly for all sorts of reasons, some return, others don't.

[Eleanor]

Are we any nearer to knowing whether some forum members pretty much committed forum suicide or were hounded out by unfair and biased moderating?

I'm not privy to all the deleted posts but the ones I did read before they went appeared to me to be against the rules.

Ah, well.  This depends on what anyone might choose to think.  Me?  I have no idea.

[John]

Ah, well.  This depends on what anyone might choose to think.  Me?  I have no idea.

You can guarantee it. When there is something in the mainstream news the posters come scuttling back but while it's quiet they take a well earned rest.  One can nearly predict what the next MSM news will be.

[sadie]

Re:  Rules are there for a reason
 
 

I disagree, take fm for example, his continued libel of a certain dog handler was beyond a joke.  He brought it upon himself in the end.  Same with Alf, his posts towards the end were outrageous despite being given upteen opportunities to conform.  They were disrespectful imo so surely you don't condone such conduct Brietta?

I never saw anything but FACTS come from ferryman .... and Alfie too.  Both brilliant posters and researchers in their fields
 
But I constantly watched their "nasty" points mounting and saw to my horror, despite them being within the bounds of the rules that their scores, and davels too, (another brilliant researcher and fast poster of facts), were always teetering at the edge of being banned.  This constant threat must have limited their ability to speak freely.   When I was posting more effectively, the same happened to me all the time, huge "nasty" scores ...and TBH I thought "sod it all" and carried on as I wished.
 
I have spoken personally to one of the trio  and he was banned definitely ... and it was nothing to do with the forum per se but more of a personal argument with John.  John banned him.
 
I also have close information about the other two and know that they were effectively hounded out, by bullying mostly by mods and unnecessary deleting of posts and constantly huge nasty points limiting them.  They were being prevented from getting their views across.
 
 
 
I think this forum will die the death because of this bullying and unfairness by three of the mods.  Why can't we have a level playing field, with FREEDOM OF SPEECH on both sides .. and not just one as at present?
 
 
And how about cutting the silly rules that have been imposed which restrict the free speech of the Mccann supporters?   It is so one sided. 
 
 
AIMHO

[John]

Re:  Rules are there for a reason
 
 I never saw anything but FACTS come from ferryman .... and Alfie too.  Both brilliant posters and researchers in their fields
 
But I constantly watched their "nasty" points mounting and saw to my horror, despite them being within the bounds of the rules that their scores, and davels too, (another brilliant researcher and fast poster of facts), were always teetering at the edge of being banned.  This constant threat must have limited their ability to speak freely.   When I was posting more effectively, the same happened to me all the time, huge "nasty" scores ...and TBH I thought "sod it all" and carried on as I wished.
 
I have spoken personally to one of the trio  and he was banned definitely ... and it was nothing to do with the forum per se but more of a personal argument with John.  John banned him.
 
I also have close information about the other two and know that they were effectively hounded out, by bullying mostly by mods and unnecessary deleting of posts and constantly huge nasty points limiting them.  They were being prevented from getting their views across.
 
 
 
I think this forum will die the death because of this bullying and unfairness by three of the mods.  Why can't we have a level playing field, with FREEDOM OF SPEECH on both sides .. and not just one as at present?
 
 
And how about cutting the silly rules that have been imposed which restrict the free speech of the Mccann supporters?   It is so one sided. 
 
 
AIMHO

We have freedom of speech but defamatory and abusive posts will always be removed.  We have many posters who have never received warning points for breaking the rules so if they can get their points across without incurring the wrath of the moderators why can't you?

Nobody has ever been banned because they had an argument with me, I don't do personal arguments.  Alfie was banned for badmouthing the forum in his final posts.  Ferryman committed forum suicide by posting libellous material despite being given numerous second chances to reform.  Davel choose to retire, he can return any time he desires.

I think you should gather the true facts before you go accusing people Sadie.

[Eleanor]

We have freedom of speech but defamatory and abusive posts will always be removed.  We have many posters who have never received warning points for breaking the rules so if they can get their points across without incurring the wrath of the moderators why can't you?

Nobody has ever been banned because they had an argument with me, I don't do personal arguments.  Alfie was banned for badmouthing the forum in his final posts.  Ferryman committed forum suicide by posting libellous material despite being given numerous second chances to reform.  Davel choose to retire, he can return any time he desires.

I think you should gather the true facts before you go accusing people Sadie.

Oh Dear.

[G-Unit]

Re:  Rules are there for a reason
 
 I never saw anything but FACTS come from ferryman .... and Alfie too.  Both brilliant posters and researchers in their fields
 
But I constantly watched their "nasty" points mounting and saw to my horror, despite them being within the bounds of the rules that their scores, and davels too, (another brilliant researcher and fast poster of facts), were always teetering at the edge of being banned.  This constant threat must have limited their ability to speak freely.   When I was posting more effectively, the same happened to me all the time, huge "nasty" scores ...and TBH I thought "sod it all" and carried on as I wished.
 
I have spoken personally to one of the trio  and he was banned definitely ... and it was nothing to do with the forum per se but more of a personal argument with John.  John banned him.
 
I also have close information about the other two and know that they were effectively hounded out, by bullying mostly by mods and unnecessary deleting of posts and constantly huge nasty points limiting them.  They were being prevented from getting their views across.
 
 
 
I think this forum will die the death because of this bullying and unfairness by three of the mods.  Why can't we have a level playing field, with FREEDOM OF SPEECH on both sides .. and not just one as at present?
 
 
And how about cutting the silly rules that have been imposed which restrict the free speech of the Mccann supporters?   It is so one sided. 
 
 
AIMHO

Your are entitled to your opinion, but it can be so easily disproved. Ferryman argued that no tracker dogs were brought to Luz, but he was proved wrong. Alfie argued that there was evidence of abduction, but was unable to provide it.

All three broke the rules constantly and were treated very leniently in my opinion. Despite that, they regularly complained of being victimised which was clearly not true.

Anyone having a  theory other than abduction has always been hampered on the Forum because of the libel problem. Only those promoting the abduction theory were free of this restriction. As a result it was constantly promoted as a fact, even though there's no evidence which proves that. It is that 'freedom' which has been curtailed and in my opinion that is a change for the better.

[Angelo222]

Your are entitled to your opinion, but it can be so easily disproved. Ferryman argued that no tracker dogs were brought to Luz, but he was proved wrong. Alfie argued that there was evidence of abduction, but was unable to provide it.

All three broke the rules constantly and were treated very leniently in my opinion. Despite that, they regularly complained of being victimised which was clearly not true.

Anyone having a  theory other than abduction has always been hampered on the Forum because of the libel problem. Only those promoting the abduction theory were free of this restriction. As a result it was constantly promoted as a fact, even though there's no evidence which proves that. It is that 'freedom' which has been curtailed and in my opinion that is a change for the better.

I second that.  The abduction claim has been extremely convenient and lucrative for some despite there being not a shred of evidence to support it.  In fact there was no evidence of any intruder, no forced entry, no disturbed belongings, no scuff or scratch marks on the bedroom window, no boot marks on the wall or carpet, no screaming children.  All very odd imho. 😊

[Miss Taken Identity]

Thank you for your advice. I am sure it is well meant but I have tried those avenues of approach.
You will possibly disagree with me that the moderation is rather unfair against the supporters but posters who leave have not "spat out their dummies".
They are genuinely frustrated at the path the forum is going down.
I know I am.

Oh don't worry, the supporting MODS are getting revenge. snapping valid posts and threads.

[sadie]

Oh don't worry, the supporting MODS are getting revenge. snapping valid posts and threads.

Oh Really?

Strange that because neither of them is on duty and neither was on duty when I just signed in

Yet, at least one of YOUR sides (Gunits) posts has vanished.  The one I quote in my last post on here... just vanished

No MODS from our side present.  So just who deleted it?    And why?

[Miss Taken Identity]

Oh Really?

Strange that because neither of them is on duty and neither was on duty when I just signed in

Yet, at least one of YOUR sides (Gunits) posts has vanished.  The one I quote in my last post on here... just vanished

No MODS from our side present.  So just who deleted it?    And why?

I don't know and don't much care.

I just thought this was a Justice for Maddie  thread.. I was wrong.

I don't have a side, I am not a child I think independently.