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: Holly Goodhead on September 25, 2019, 11:16:48 AM
-
Although I have only joined in the debate here fairly recently I have been a member of the forum since early 2013 and a moderator for many years. In the main I've posted on the Jeremy Bamber board and more recently Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando and now here.
All these cases are contentious and those interested enough to join a forum and contribute usually have strong views either way. However this case more than others seems to generate a lot of animosity. Why?
-
Personally I would like to remove the 'like' facility. It seems to me this is used to goad and throw fuel on the fire rather than acknowledging the time and effort someone has put in on a post. Eg Myster obviously went to a lot of time and trouble over the following post which received only 1 'like' and it wasn't from me as I do not do the 'like' thing:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11027.msg556777#msg556777
And yet posts which are nothing more than spats can receive 3 or 4 likes which just reinforces what moderators are trying to reduce ie spats.
-
Although I have only joined in the debate here fairly recently I have been a member of the forum since early 2013 and a moderator for many years. In the main I've posted on the Jeremy Bamber board and more recently Rettendon Murders, Jill Dando and now here.
All these cases are contentious and those interested enough to join a forum and contribute usually have strong views either way. However this case more than others seems to generate a lot of animosity. Why?
Study where and why much of the animosity originates and you will have your answer.
-
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849
You do not know what my personal views were on the image posted up by a moderator but it is not for one moderator to override another moderator. You took the appropriate action and the matter was dealt with to your satisfaction.
I do not know how anyone could regard the post I made about Anthro as anything other than complimentary?
The fact some posters have been posting here a long time is irrelevant. The fact remains many of the posts made here by long term contributors are of poor quality and in many instances are nothing more than childish spats.
-
Anthro made reference to the level of animosity on the forum several weeks ago:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10854.msg547028#msg547028
He/she's right and guess what its going to change!
-
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849
You do not know what my personal views were on the image posted up by a moderator but it is not for one moderator to override another moderator. You took the appropriate action and the matter was dealt with to your satisfaction.
I do not know how anyone could regard the post I made about Anthro as anything other than complimentary?
The fact some posters have been posting here a long time is irrelevant. The fact remains many of the posts made here by long term contributors are of poor quality and in many instances are nothing more than childish spats.
I think you are wrong again. Some are of poor quality I think it's unfair to say many. The point Re my posts shows that in this case it was, a mod who was making a poor quality post , and encouraging spats. So that has to be part of the problem
-
I think you are wrong again. Some are of poor quality I think it's unfair to say many. The point Re my posts shows that in this case it was, a mod who was making a poor quality post , and encouraging spats. So that has to be part of the problem
You say I'm wrong again but what are you comparing it with? I have not seen you on other boards here dedicated to discussing single cases? The Bamber case is highly contentious and yet when this board was active it only required 'light touch' moderation as posters in the main were respectful to the views of others and in the main stuck to the facts of the case.
If you wish to discuss the appropriateness of any particular moderator then you will need to discuss this with John.
-
You say I'm wrong again but what are you comparing it with? I have not seen you on other boards here dedicated to discussing single cases? The Bamber case is highly contentious and yet when this board was active it only required 'light touch' moderation as posters in the main were respectful to the views of others and in the main stuck to the facts of the case.
If you wish to discuss the appropriateness of any particular moderator then you will need to discuss this with John.
First thing us that when you say many... You are, stating opinion... Not fact.
I find your posts claiming to have solved the case to be if very poor quality...in fact absurd. That's my opinion
-
First thing us that when you say many... You are, stating opinion... Not fact.
I find your posts claiming to have solved the case to be if very poor quality...in fact absurd. That's my opinion
Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other.
You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.
-
Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other.
You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.
As it's been some time since you informed OG of your findings it looks like, I am factually correct.
-
Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other.
You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.
It's obvious why this board has so much contention compared to others. There is so much nadtiness directed at the McCanns both here... On other forums... And elsewhere.
That's, what fuels the cintentuon
-
As it's been some time since you informed OG of your findings it looks like, I am factually correct.
This thread has been set up to discuss:
'Moderation And Feedback For Any Improvement Of The Madeleine McCann Forum'
Your posts re my suspect(s)/theory sent to OG are not really relevant. A thread was set up to discuss such here:
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10983.msg553079#msg553079
Or if you prefer I can start up a new thread 'Holly's claim she has cracked the case'?
-
Remove goading emoticons, remove likes, remove members, and you will be left with nothing, just a deeply boring series of threads about door mechanisms, fingerprint analysis techniques and creche logs. Whatever you do decide to do however it needs to be CONSISTENT and applied by ALL moderators, not some, and only when it suits them, otherwise it just gets people really pissed off and is far more goading than any number of likes or emoticons.
-
Remove goading emoticons, remove likes, remove members, and you will be left with nothing, just a deeply boring series of threads about door mechanisms, fingerprint analysis techniques and creche logs. Whatever you do decide to do however it needs to be CONSISTENT and applied by ALL moderators, not some, and only when it suits them, otherwise it just gets people really pissed off and is far more goading than any number of likes or emoticons.
Word, sister.
-
To my knowledge, Holly has never insulted me.
-
It's obvious why this board has so much contention compared to others. There is so much nadtiness directed at the McCanns both here... On other forums... And elsewhere.
That's, what fuels the cintentuon
People act differently on social media than they would face-to-face. I do wonder if some are jealous of the McCanns, perhaps KM in particular who is slim, attractive and a professional woman.
I don't believe any member of T9 was involved in MM's disappearance but I can in some way see how others see it differently and for those who do then I can understand why they feel the way they do about the McCanns.
I might feel personally upset about the nasty comments directed at the McCanns if I was emotionally involved with them on some level but I'm not.
-
To my knowledge, Holly has never insulted me.
I never said she did... Holly seems to be mistaken
-
People act differently on social media than they would face-to-face. I do wonder if some are jealous of the McCanns, perhaps KM in particular who is slim, attractive and a professional woman.
I don't believe any member of T9 was involved in MM's disappearance but I can in some way see how others see it differently and for those who do then I can understand why they feel the way they do about the McCanns.
I might feel personally upset about the nasty comments directed at the McCanns if I was emotionally involved with them on some level but I'm not.
I'm certainly not emotionally involved with the mccanns although some mistakenly think I am. I'm not personally upset by insults directed at them... I just think it's, a rather unpleasant way to behave
-
People act differently on social media than they would face-to-face. I do wonder if some are jealous of the McCanns, perhaps KM in particular who is slim, attractive and a professional woman.
I don't believe any member of T9 was involved in MM's disappearance but I can in some way see how others see it differently and for those who do then I can understand why they feel the way they do about the McCanns.
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/Smileys/custom/c008.gif
I might feel personally upset about the nasty comments directed at the McCanns if I was emotionally involved with them on some level but I'm not.
@)(++(* In the immortal words of John McEnroe, 'You cannot be serious'
-
Its a fact this board requires more input from Admin/John and moderators than any other.
You are more than entitled to express your opinion that my posts claiming to have solved the case are of poor quality and absurd but it doesn't make you factually correct.
The million dollar question is why this board is so troublesome. In my opinion laying the blame solely on those who post here isn't acceptable. People post what they think they can get away with. At one point in time every thread ended up discussing Grime and his dogs. That has stopped, so can 'spats' be stopped using the same method?
-
@)(++(* In the immortal words of John McEnroe, 'You cannot be serious'
Yeah silly Holly. Kate McCann makes Karen Matthews look like Raquel Welch doesn’t she?
-
People act differently on social media than they would face-to-face. I do wonder if some are jealous of the McCanns, perhaps KM in particular who is slim, attractive and a professional woman.
I don't believe any member of T9 was involved in MM's disappearance but I can in some way see how others see it differently and for those who do then I can understand why they feel the way they do about the McCanns.
I might feel personally upset about the nasty comments directed at the McCanns if I was emotionally involved with them on some level but I'm not.
I think it is the way the McCann's have managed to keep Madeleine in the spotlight. They were lucky enough to have the fund to help broadcast that she was missing to other countries, this was called 'behaving like a celebrity' They had guest appearances on shows 'celebrities' Famous people came to help them [the McCann's didn't ask them too] this was mingling with the stars and showing off. I wonder though if any of the posters who have labelled the McCann's as such could try and imagine what it would be like to have your child taken? Try and imagine it and then think, would I have done the same as the McCann's? Who would turn down the offer of appearing on a show which attracted millions? To go to other countries which were near to Portugal where Madeleine could have been taken? To meet the Pope, millions would watch that.
Then there is the court cases against Amaral. It makes me laugh when I hear posters going on about taking Amaral to court, then some silly spat on twitter or wherever, and they are up in arms saying they are going to take who ever to court for what they said etc etc. Imagine if you were accused of what Amaral accused them of. You are desperate to find your missing child and the actual Police Officer who was coordinator of the case wrote a book accusing you of hiding your child's body, that DNA proved she was dead. Wouldn't you sue? People would think she was dead, why would anyone bother to look for a child thought to be dead?
-
Yeah silly Holly. Kate McCann makes Karen Matthews look like Raquel Welch doesn’t she?
Nobody looks like Raquel 8(*(
-
The million dollar question is why this board is so troublesome. In my opinion laying the blame solely on those who post here isn't acceptable. People post what they think they can get away with. At one point in time every thread ended up discussing Grime and his dogs. That has stopped, so can 'spats' be stopped using the same method?
What method was used to stop Dog talk? Was it Pavlov’s?
-
Nobody looks like Raquel 8(*(
I do (on a bad day).
-
It makes you wonder if these people have mental problems if they can be jealous of a woman who has lot her child.
-
It only seems to be those of a supporter nature who suggest that people do. I wonder why that would be ?
-
It makes you wonder if these people have mental problems if they can be jealous of a woman who has lot her child.
But that's not how they see it. They don't see a woman who has lost her child through abduction but a woman who was party to the disappearance of her child.
I do find a lot of commentary on social media very odd and maybe some do have mental health issues or issues of some description. I recall some months ago reading The Mail online and an article about Princess Charlotte, I think it may have been a birthday or something like that, and I couldn't believe the comments referring to her as 'ugly' and criticising her clothes. Imo she's cute looking but who would make such comments about an innocent toddler? Then there are some who encourage others to self-harm or take their own lives online. I guess it puts our childish spats here into perspective!
-
I think it is the way the McCann's have managed to keep Madeleine in the spotlight. They were lucky enough to have the fund to help broadcast that she was missing to other countries, this was called 'behaving like a celebrity' They had guest appearances on shows 'celebrities' Famous people came to help them [the McCann's didn't ask them too] this was mingling with the stars and showing off. I wonder though if any of the posters who have labelled the McCann's as such could try and imagine what it would be like to have your child taken? Try and imagine it and then think, would I have done the same as the McCann's? Who would turn down the offer of appearing on a show which attracted millions? To go to other countries which were near to Portugal where Madeleine could have been taken? To meet the Pope, millions would watch that.
Then there is the court cases against Amaral. It makes me laugh when I hear posters going on about taking Amaral to court, then some silly spat on twitter or wherever, and they are up in arms saying they are going to take who ever to court for what they said etc etc. Imagine if you were accused of what Amaral accused them of. You are desperate to find your missing child and the actual Police Officer who was coordinator of the case wrote a book accusing you of hiding your child's body, that DNA proved she was dead. Wouldn't you sue? People would think she was dead, why would anyone bother to look for a child thought to be dead?
I'm afraid anyone who uses social media has to accept some backlash. No matter how compelling someone believes a cause to be there will be others who disagree.
Is there anyone or anything that is universally accepted and liked?
-
But that's not how they see it. They don't see a woman who has lost her child through abduction but a woman who was party to the disappearance of her child.
I do find a lot of commentary on social media very odd and maybe some do have mental health issues or issues of some description. I recall some months ago reading The Mail online and an article about Princess Charlotte, I think it may have been a birthday or something like that, and I couldn't believe the comments referring to her as 'ugly' and criticising her clothes. Imo she's cute looking but who would make such comments about an innocent toddler? Then there are some who encourage others to self-harm or take their own lives online. I guess it puts our childish spats here into perspective!
These people are called trolls. We have one operating on this forum who earlier today advocated the killing of all children who took part in the recent Extinction Rebellion marches as a population cull. The best thing for these idiots is to ignore them or play them at their own game, IMO.
-
It makes you wonder if these people have mental problems if they can be jealous of a woman who has lot her child.
What do you mean 'these people'? [Sgt Lincoln Osiris]
-
I know there's some strange people in the world, but why would anyone be jealous of Kate McCann? Whatever happened on May 3rd 2007 her life fell apart. She may be slim and attractive, but she never worked in her profession again.
-
I think you are wrong again. Some are of poor quality I think it's unfair to say many. The point Re my posts shows that in this case it was, a mod who was making a poor quality post , and encouraging spats. So that has to be part of the problem
Did you report the post from the General who described you in a Gollum like picture in the first place? Was his post removed also?
-
Did you report the post from the General who described you in a Gollum like picture in the first place? Was his post removed also?
It was you who posted the gollum picture which John removed.... Not very good behaviour
-
I know the
re's some strange people in the world, but why would anyone be jealous of Kate McCann? Whatever happened on May 3rd 2007 her life fell apart. She may be slim and attractive, but she never worked in her profession again.
Sorry G, I have to disagree, I'm a bloke & I don't find her attractive in the slightest.
Quite the opposite.
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/05/04/01/13067666-6990849-Kate_McCann_attended_a_service_to_mark_the_anniversary_of_her_da-a-26_1556930201199.jpg)
-
It was you who posted the gollum picture which John removed.... Not very good behaviour
So does the post by General remain in that thread? Well what did you think when you read that post? It was overnight for me and I was sure Holly would have read it long before me, but none of the other mods had removed it. I was surprised that a post that described you in such a disgusting light was allowed to stay.
-
Sorry G, I have to disagree, I'm a bloke & I don't find her attractive in the slightest.
Quite the opposite.
(https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2019/05/04/01/13067666-6990849-Kate_McCann_attended_a_service_to_mark_the_anniversary_of_her_da-a-26_1556930201199.jpg)
Who do you find more attractive Kate or Gollum?
-
So does the post by General remain in that thread? Well what did you think when you read that post? It was overnight for me and I was sure Holly would have read it long before me, but none of the other mods had removed it. I was surprised that a post that described you in such a disgusting light was allowed to stay.
You posted the reference and picture.... Holly said she doesn't interfere with another mod... John removed your post.. Have you forgotten
-
You posted the reference and picture.... Holly said she doesn't interfere with another mod... John removed your post.. Have you forgotten
It has never entered my head again to go and check. But as usual you aren't answering the questions I'm asking.
Did you feel hurt by the way The General described you? Didn't he describe you as a Gollum like creature?
Did you report General's post?
-
It has never entered my head again to go and check. But as usual you aren't answering the questions I'm asking.
Did you feel hurt by the way The General described you? Didn't he described you as a Gollum like creature?
The, general didn't mention gollum... You did... And no I didn't feel hurt... I just think you are both pathetic
-
I want to share this, please. I do understand that it is a contentious issue: Our closest overseas break is Mauritius, Madagascar and Reunion. We have been to Mauritius a couple of times. The setup is the same as at the OC. Room overlooking the pool and dining area, kids going off to kids’ club during the day, kids having an early dinner at the restaurant, putting them to bed and we having our evening meal. We too went to check on them to make sure they are fine. Never, ever did it cross our minds that someone will enter our room, taking one of our children.
-
The, general didn't mention gollum... You did... And no I didn't feel hurt... I just think you are both pathetic
So you report my comment on his post, but you don't take action on the original post by The General.
You are intent on victimising me aren't you? If we are both pathetic and General's post came first why didn't you report that one too?
-
So you report my comment on his post, but you don't take action on the original post by The General.
You are intent on victimising me aren't you? If we are both pathetic and General's post came first why didn't you report that one too?
Quite simply mods are, expected to behave to a, higher standard.... Your post went further than the generals..
About time to give it a rest
-
I want to share this, please. I do understand that it is a contentious issue: Our closest overseas break is Mauritius, Madagascar and Reunion. We have been to Mauritius a couple of times. The setup is the same as at the OC. Room overlooking the pool and dining area, kids going off to kids’ club during the day, kids having an early dinner at the restaurant, putting them to bed and we having our evening meal. We too went to check on them to make sure they are fine. Never, ever did it cross our minds that someone will enter our room, taking one of our children.
Thanks, for sharing... So the, mccanns, behaviour is not as unusual as, some try to make out
-
Quite simply mods are, expected to behave to a, higher standard.... Your post went further than the generals..
About time to give it a rest
OK were all your posts to a high standard as well?
-
OK were all your posts to a high standard as well?
They were until your insults... And until my report to a mod was ignored.. It's, about time you let it go now
-
I want to share this, please. I do understand that it is a contentious issue: Our closest overseas break is Mauritius, Madagascar and Reunion. We have been to Mauritius a couple of times. The setup is the same as at the OC. Room overlooking the pool and dining area, kids going off to kids’ club during the day, kids having an early dinner at the restaurant, putting them to bed and we having our evening meal. We too went to check on them to make sure they are fine. Never, ever did it cross our minds that someone will enter our room, taking one of our children.
Would you have left the doors unlocked for easy access during the follow-up checks?
-
They were until your insults... And until my report to a mod was ignored.. It's, about time you let it go now
What about calling me mentally ill, do you think that was fair, and that I should just let that go?
-
What about calling me mentally ill, do you think that was fair, and that I should just let that go?
You can do what you like.. I dont care... Just remember if you insult people they may answer you back
-
You can do what you like.. I dont care... Just remember if you insult people they may answer you back
Gollum!
-
Gollum!
As, I said... Pathetic... You really are, making a, fool of yourself
-
As, I said... Pathetic... You really are, making a, fool of yourself
Was Gollum foolish or scheming? From memory he was a scheming little brat.
-
Was Gollum foolish or scheming? From memory he was a scheming little brat.
Have a look at the title if the thread... It's about moderation
-
Have a look at the title if the thread... It's about moderation
And somewhere in the mix our conversation was brought up.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556852#msg556852
-
Hi Davel and Rob, to me it is about context. Where I’m from, space is abundant. We were always on the first floor, with a balcony overlooking the swimming pool and restaurant. And yes, the door onto the balcony was left unlocked so that our children could call us from there if need be.
-
Hi Davel and Rob, to me it is about context. Where I’m from, space is abundant. We were always on the first floor, with a balcony overlooking the swimming pool and restaurant. And yes, the door onto the balcony was left unlocked so that our children could call us from there if need be.
I thought you'd be more security conscious coming from SA.
-
i think the problem is some make others feel unwelcome to post here i dont post very much anymore because of it
-
i think the problem is some make others feel unwelcome to post here i dont post very much anymore because of it
OK well should we be looking out for each other?
-
OK well should we be looking out for each other?
I do believe I got a slapped wrist for doing just that today.
Some moderator needs to get stuck into offensive language used to denigrate another poster's point of view,
-
I do believe I got a slapped wrist for doing just that today.
Some moderator needs to get stuck into offensive language used to denigrate another poster's point of view,
agree there is a mod that does this all the time on here
-
agree there is a mod that does this all the time on here she knows who she is
I don't think it would be unfair to say that posts in the past have been removed because it's content does not reflect the opinion of others.
-
i think the problem is some make others feel unwelcome to post here i dont post very much anymore because of it
I'm sorry you feel this way. Someone said yesterday words to the effect if we nip all of this childish spat stuff in the bud we will have no posts/posters; it could be argued we would bring back inactive posters and/or new posters will join in. There are only about a dozen regular posters here but around 100 plus guests viewing most of the time. Who are all the guests? What is preventing them from joining in? Maybe they prefer to sit on the sidelines or maybe they are deterred from joining in because like yourself they find the forum an unwelcoming place.
-
I don't think it would be unfair to say that posts in the past have been removed because it's content does not reflect the opinion of others.
Its not for me to comment on the decisions of other moderators but I don't believe I've removed/edited any posts on the basis they don't align with my own case related views. All posts I've removed/edited here have been done on the basis the removals/edits amounted to spat material.
-
i think the problem is some make others feel unwelcome to post here i dont post very much anymore because of it
I seem to remeber when you did post a large proportion of your posts were removed as they were ad hom attacks on a certain member
-
deleted
Exactly, well said. I’m still waiting for clarity regarding what is and isn’t now considered libellous, as Holly’s recent contributions have muddied the water somewhat.
-
I'm sorry you feel this way. Someone said yesterday words to the effect if we nip all of this childish spat stuff in the bud we will have no posts/posters; it could be argued we would bring back inactive posters and/or new posters will join in. There are only about a dozen regular posters here but around 100 plus guests viewing most of the time. Who are all the guests? What is preventing them from joining in? Maybe they prefer to sit on the sidelines or maybe they are deterred from joining in because like yourself they find the forum an unwelcoming place.
Carly needs to look at the content of her own Comments.
-
Carly needs to look at the content of her own Comments.
But holly being recent here doesnt understand that
-
i think the problem is some make others feel unwelcome to post here i dont post very much anymore because of it
Who makes you feel unwelcome Carly? Can you give us some examples?
-
I do believe I got a slapped wrist for doing just that today.
Some moderator needs to get stuck into offensive language used to denigrate another poster's point of view,
The forum is open 24/7. Moderators have dual roles: moderating and posting. If you're unhappy about a particular post then I would encourage you to use the report function or pm if you prefer.
I have this morning removed a post directed at yourself.
-
there are not 100 guests raeding this forum....Ive raised the point before...most are bots. There are two guests raeding this thread...that gives a more accurate reflection.
deleted
The post you refer to has now been dealt with to your satisfaction and a line needs to be drawn under this now please.
If you have grievances about any particular moderator then you will need to raise this with John via pm.
-
But holly being recent here doesnt understand that
Understand what exactly?
What I'm seeing is intolerance of the views of others. It makes no odds to me whether someone believes the McCanns are involved or not.
It seems to me the mod team is made up by and large of 'supporters' other than slartibartfast who rarely posts. Maybe we need a more balanced mod team?
-
Understand what exactly?
What I'm seeing is intolerance of the views of others. It makes no odds to me whether someone believes the McCanns are involved or not.
It seems to me the mod team is made up by and large of 'supporters' other than slartibartfast who rarely posts. Maybe we need a more balanced mod team?
i agree holly thats the whole issue the mods who are supporters of the mcanns can be nasty to us who dont support them and they make personal remarks or emotional remarks ie the parents of a missing child etc shouldnt be talked about online so basically shutting other peoples opinions down by being biased for the mcanns know what i mean? like it or not the mcanns actions led to whatever did happen to maddie and some ignore that
-
Exactly, well said. I’m still waiting for clarity regarding what is and isn’t now considered libellous, as Holly’s recent contributions have muddied the water somewhat.
What have I posted that you and/or others consider libelous?
-
Understand what exactly?
What I'm seeing is intolerance of the views of others. It makes no odds to me whether someone believes the McCanns are involved or not.
It seems to me the mod team is made up by and large of 'supporters' other than slartibartfast who rarely posts. Maybe we need a more balanced mod team?
Two Supporter Mods. Two Sceptic Mods. And One Middle of The Road. And yourself of course. What more do you want?
The fact that neither Slarti or Angelo post very often is their business.
Me personally? I do object to being insulted. And no Mod here has had more of that to deal with than I have.
-
I don't think it would be unfair to say that posts in the past have been removed because it's content does not reflect the opinion of others.
I agree. I have had posts deleted for no other reason than that.
-
Two Supporter Mods. Two Sceptic Mods. And One Middle of The Road. And yourself of course. What more do you want?
The fact that neither Slarti or Angelo post very often is their business.
Me personally? I do object to being insulted. And no Mod here has had more of that to deal with than I have.
Ok but if the 'sceptic' mods are inactive most of the time then there's an imbalance?
-
I agree. I have had posts deleted for no other reason than that.
not uncommon
-
I agree. I have had posts deleted for no other reason than that.
Yet you "liked" Robs clearly abusive post towards me....I find that a little pathetic from someone who constantly harps on about forum rules
-
I agree. I have had posts deleted for no other reason than that.
If this is so then surely it defeats the object of a discussion forum?
-
Yet you "liked" Robs clearly abusive post towards me....I find that a little pathetic from someone who constantly harps on about forum rules
Davel I have asked you politely to draw a line under this. Please do not refer to it again and I would urge others to refrain from responding. It has been dealt with to your satisfaction.
Any further posts re this will be removed on sight.
-
Ok but if the 'sceptic' mods are inactive most of the time then there's an imbalance?
Its an imbalance because two sceptic mods...stephen and sil...were removed by john becasue of their poor moderation
It shouldnt matter what a mods personal views are they should moderate fairly...if they cant they should not be mods
-
Davel I have asked you politely to draw a line under this. Please do not refer to it again and I would urge others to refrain from responding. It has been dealt with to your satisfaction.
Any further posts re this will be removed on sight.
It has not been dealt with to my satisfaction.......the thread is re moderation amd my post is on topic...it is relevant that a poster who complains about unfair moderation likes a post thats a prime example
-
It has not been dealt with to my satisfaction.......the thread is re moderation amd my post is on topic...it is relevant that a poster who complains about unfair moderation likes a post thats a prime example
What is it you remain unhappy about?
-
If this is so then surely it defeats the object of a discussion forum?
It is so and has always made discussion very difficult when posts which are not supportive of the McCanns are censored.
-
It is so and has always made discussion very difficult when posts which are not supportive of the McCanns are censored.
exactly it causes friction on the forum too theres no need for any censorship
-
Its an imbalance because two sceptic mods...stephen and sil...were removed by john becasue of their poor moderation
Then maybe some re-balancing is required?
It shouldnt matter what a mods personal views are they should moderate fairly...if they cant they should not be mods
I agree.
-
It is so and has always made discussion very difficult when posts which are not supportive of the McCanns are censored.
IMO that has been apparent for both sides.
-
It is so and has always made discussion very difficult when posts which are not supportive of the McCanns are censored.
Well I certainly will not be censoring posts on the basis they are not supportive of the McCanns.
Everyone is entitled to view their opinions here so long as they do so respectfully and abide by the forum rules.
-
It has not been dealt with to my satisfaction.......the thread is re moderation amd my post is on topic...it is relevant that a poster who complains about unfair moderation likes a post thats a prime example
I think you mean me. It isn't against forum rules to 'like' another members post. That has nothing to do with moderation.
-
Can someone explain for me please how the 'bot' thing works?
-
i agree holly thats the whole issue the mods who are supporters of the mcanns can be nasty to us who dont support them and they make personal remarks or emotional remarks ie the parents of a missing child etc shouldnt be talked about online so basically shutting other peoples opinions down by being biased for the mcanns know what i mean? like it or not the mcanns actions led to whatever did happen to maddie and some ignore that
I'd like an example of that carly. You can be very blunt sometimes with your opinion that the McCann's are to blame for leaving the children alone. You more or less bring that up in almost every post.
-
Ok but if the 'sceptic' mods are inactive most of the time then there's an imbalance?
You will have to take that up with John.
I rarely Delete anything, as you will know if you follow Deleted and Modified Comments, and I don't Comment all that much either.
Brietta has recently been involved with moving house and has had intermittent Internet. She will be back.
Both of us have been Moderating this Forum for a lot longer than you have and do have a better understanding of the dynamics, to which we both pay attention.
I have never Deleted a Comment simply because of an opinion that is averse to mine. You may believe that or not, as you wish. It happens to be a point of honour to me.
This the only McCann Forum which allows both opinions, and it is of importance to me that it should survive.
-
I think you mean me. It isn't against forum rules to 'like' another members post. That has nothing to do with moderation.
Well as I said yesterday I would like to remove the 'like' facility as I feel it is misused. I'm certainly not pointing the finger at you G-Unit or anyone in particular but I gave examples yesterday of how imo it is misused.
-
You will have to take that up with John.
I rarely Delete anything, as you will know if you follow Deleted and Modified Comments, and I don't Comment all that much either.
Brietta has recently been involved with moving house and has had intermittent Internet. She will be back.
Both of us have been Moderating this Forum for a lot longer than you have and do have a better understanding of the dynamics, to which we both pay attention.
I have never Deleted a Comment simply because of an opinion that is averse to mine. You may believe that or not, as you wish. It happens to be a point of honour to me.
This the only McCann Forum which allows both opinions, and it is of importance to me that it should survive.
You have always been a very fair moderator Eleanor, you have your views but when it comes to deleting you delete according to the forum rules. I've had posts deleted by you and I am Pro McCann. I agree why they've been deleted and applaud you on your moderating duties.
-
IMO that has been apparent for both sides.
I can only speak about my own experiences. It doesn't happen much now, because I took steps to stop it.
-
You will have to take that up with John.
I rarely Delete anything, as you will know if you follow Deleted and Modified Comments, and I don't Comment all that much either.
Brietta has recently been involved with moving house and has had intermittent Internet. She will be back.
Both of us have been Moderating this Forum for a lot longer than you have and do have a better understanding of the dynamics, to which we both pay attention.
I have never Deleted a Comment simply because of an opinion that is averse to mine. You may believe that or not, as you wish. It happens to be a point of honour to me.
This the only McCann Forum which allows both opinions, and it is of importance to me that it should survive.
But the dynamics of the forum are changeable and in any event somewhat subjective and down to perception. Maybe it is a good thing to have a newcomer such as myself to this board, but not the forum, who is not weighed down by baggage of the past. I can only deal with posters as I find.
I have probably been a member of this forum for longer than any of the regulars here.
-
What is it you remain unhappy about?
I think robs posting of a picture comparing me to gollum is gross abuse...the fact that this comes from a mod makes ot even worse. I think Rob should have been awarded points to demonstrate the level of his abuse. You can disagree with me but you cannot say...as youve done twice...the incident has been dealt with to my satisfaction
-
You have always been a very fair moderator Eleanor, you have your views but when it comes to deleting you delete according to the forum rules. I've had posts deleted by you and I am Pro McCann. I agree why they've been deleted and applaud you on your moderating duties.
Thank You.
-
I think robs posting of a picture comparing me to gollum is gross abuse...the fact that this comes from a mod makes ot even worse. I think Rob should have been awarded points to demonstrate the level of his abuse. You can disagree with me but you cannot say...as youve done twice...the incident has been dealt with to my satisfaction
Davel the image was removed by John. What further action are you expecting anyone to take with regard to this matter?
-
I think you mean me. It isn't against forum rules to 'like' another members post. That has nothing to do with moderation.
I didnt say it was against forum rules I said it was relevant
-
Davel the image was removed by John. What further action are you expecting anyone to take with regard to this matter?
ive told you in the post...I think rob should have received a warning....so the matter has not been dealt with to my satisfaction. This is one of many posts that rob has made towards me that have been removed.....not a very good example for a moderator to set. If mods dont abide by the rules why should mods expect posters too
-
Can someone explain for me please how the 'bot' thing works?
you can google it..
there are supposedly 137 guests viewing the forum...but only 7 guests reading the top five threads...so these 100 guests who you think are here...never read any posts
-
But the dynamics of the forum are changeable and in any event somewhat subjective and down to perception. Maybe it is a good thing to have a newcomer such as myself to this board, but not the forum, who is not weighed down by baggage of the past. I can only deal with posters as I find.
I have probably been a member of this forum for longer than any of the regulars here.
No, the dynamics don't change. Only the Commenting Members change, some of whom take a minute or ten to adjust to Forum Rules.
It's either For or Against, but there wouldn't be much point if everyone agreed.
I have absolutely no problem with your Moderating, and I am pleased that you are here.
What some Posters don't realise is that John goes though this Forum in the middle of the night like a dose of salts. My goodness me, he even Deletes some of my Posts. And he has been know to Reinstate some Deleted Posts. I don't have a problem with this. But some people prefer to blame a Mod that has different opinions.
But it is his Forum and he always has the last word.
-
Its an imbalance because two sceptic mods...stephen and sil...were removed by john becasue of their poor moderation
It shouldnt matter what a mods personal views are they should moderate fairly...if they cant they should not be mods
Firstly I wouldn't agree that Sil was a 'sceptic' mod and secondly what makes you think he and Stephen were removed by John?
-
ive told you in the post...I think rob should have received a warning....so the matter has not been dealt with to my satisfaction. This is one of many posts that rob has made towards me that have been removed.....not a very good example for a moderator to set. If mods dont abide by the rules why should mods expect posters too
You won't know what John said to Rob about this incident. I've been told off on occasions. But if I ever get a warning then I am gone.
-
Firstly I wouldn't agree that Sil was a 'sceptic' mod and secondly what makes you think he and Stephen were removed by John?
Sil is quite anti mccann...have you not noticed....we wont agree on why they are no longer mods.
Stephen whilst still a mod here was insulting other posters here from his own blog...I dread to think how bad it would have got if events hadnt stopped him
-
Yet you "liked" Robs clearly abusive post towards me....I find that a little pathetic from someone who constantly harps on about forum rules
Wasn't I commenting on the General's post?
-
You won't know what John said to Rob about this incident. I've been told off on occasions. But if I ever get a warning then I am gone.
Ive had plenty of warnings...and insults..but Ive stood my ground
-
Firstly I wouldn't agree that Sil was a 'sceptic' mod and secondly what makes you think he and Stephen were removed by John?
I don't know about SIL, but Stephen most certainly was.
-
Davel I have asked you politely to draw a line under this. Please do not refer to it again and I would urge others to refrain from responding. It has been dealt with to your satisfaction.
Any further posts re this will be removed on sight.
Sorry already posted a reply to Davel. - I'm finished.
-
Wasn't I commenting on the General's post?
for the tenth time rob....the general didnt mention gollum or post a picture of him...you did
-
Its an imbalance because two sceptic mods...stephen and sil...were removed by john becasue of their poor moderation
It shouldnt matter what a mods personal views are they should moderate fairly...if they cant they should not be mods
Exactly, and this is what I try to achieved.
-
Exactly, and this is what I try to achieved.
so how does your post re gollum fit in with that
-
I think robs posting of a picture comparing me to gollum is gross abuse...the fact that this comes from a mod makes ot even worse. I think Rob should have been awarded points to demonstrate the level of his abuse. You can disagree with me but you cannot say...as youve done twice...the incident has been dealt with to my satisfaction
Stop it now.
-
Well as I said yesterday I would like to remove the 'like' facility as I feel it is misused. I'm certainly not pointing the finger at you G-Unit or anyone in particular but I gave examples yesterday of how imo it is misused.
If you feel any facility of the forum is misused, e.g. like button or emoticons, then the way forward is simple.
Put up a poll to gather posters' opinion on a single forum feature e.g. the like button. Permit one of 3 votes - keep it, scrap it or don't know.
I utilise the like function in two main situations. First, when someone does a lot of digging to unearth the truth of the matter. G-Unit is the clearest example of such an approach, and has had many a like from me.
Second, when a 'debate' is in progress, and someone cuts through the detritus to give an accurate summary of the point in question.
Should such a poll occur, I would vote to retain the like feature.
Obviously, if a clear majority favoured scrapping the like button, the poll result should go to John, with a mandate to remove it.
Are we going to see such a poll?
-
Ive had plenty of warnings...and insults..but Ive stood my ground
You have indeed, and I admire you for that.
Sadly, I am no longer that interested in The Subject itself. I stick around because Moderating has taught me a lot, often about myself. And still more to go I suspect.
And of course, I am a trifle worried about what I might have to say if I was no longer a Moderator. Given a Warning for all to see, I would have to resign from Moderating.
-
for the tenth time rob....the general didnt mention gollum or post a picture of him...you did
I have never denied that.
-
Sil is quite anti mccann...have you not noticed....we wont agree on why they are no longer mods.
Stephen whilst still a mod here was insulting other posters here from his own blog...I dread to think how bad it would have got if events hadnt stopped him
Opinions are subjective, and in my opinion Sil isn't anti-McCann. I haven't given my opinion as to why he and Stephen ceased to be moderators, I asked where you got your opinion from. I didn't expect a reply, so I got that right.
-
If you feel any facility of the forum is misused, e.g. like button or emoticons, then the way forward is simple.
Put up a poll to gather posters' opinion on a single forum feature e.g. the like button. Permit one of 3 votes - keep it, scrap it or don't know.
I utilise the like function in two main situations. First, when someone does a lot of digging to unearth the truth of the matter. G-Unit is the clearest example of such an approach, and has had many a like from me.
Second, when a 'debate' is in progress, and someone cuts through the detritus to give an accurate summary of the point in question.
Should such a poll occur, I would vote to retain the like feature.
Obviously, if a clear majority favoured scrapping the like button, the poll result should go to John, with a mandate to remove it.
Are we going to see such a poll?
It is such an innocuous thing so why bother. For me it acknowledges effort.
-
Opinions are subjective, and in my opinion Sil isn't anti-McCann. I haven't given my opinion as to why he and Stephen ceased to be moderators, I asked where you got your opinion from. I didn't expect a reply, so I got that right.
i think the issue is some posters think they are martyers for the mccans and have to defend them and i will never understand that
-
so how does your post re gollum fit in with that
That has nothing to do with the mcCanns and your view of them, but your attitude to the other members of this forum. I think the General was making the same point.
-
i think the issue is some posters think they are martyers for the mccans and have to defend them and i will never understand that
There you go again, you see. This Post is insulting.
-
Ive had plenty of warnings...and insults..but Ive stood my ground
For the sake of balance I have to point out that you have a habit of insulting others.
-
There you go again, you see. This Post is insulting.
Not really. It is just Carli's opinion.
-
i think its simple if i dont like someone on this forum i put them on ignore that includes mods i think if someone doesnt like someone else or what someone else posts they should do the mature thing and put them on ignore
-
For the sake of balance I have to point out that you have a habit of insulting others.
i agree
-
You will have to take that up with John.
I rarely Delete anything, as you will know if you follow Deleted and Modified Comments, and I don't Comment all that much either.
Brietta has recently been involved with moving house and has had intermittent Internet. She will be back.
Both of us have been Moderating this Forum for a lot longer than you have and do have a better understanding of the dynamics, to which we both pay attention.
I have never Deleted a Comment simply because of an opinion that is averse to mine. You may believe that or not, as you wish. It happens to be a point of honour to me.
This the only McCann Forum which allows both opinions, and it is of importance to me that it should survive.
I'm around quite a bit, Eleanor, as is Slarti, although I am still very busy with 'real life'.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the importance of this forum. I think it is unique in allowing non-sceptic posters to have an opinion and to express it in public.
I think in the main it is exactly that that causes the opprobrium.
Whereas sceptic posters are somewhat spoiled for choice whatever social media one cares to visit.
Long may the ethos of this forum continue and John is to be congratulated in his vision in starting it and keeping it going.
-
For the sake of balance I have to point out that you have a habit of insulting others.
in your opinion....the same applies to mny other posters here including you..perhaps it would be best to accept how wrong rob was then we can move on
-
Not really. It is just Carli's opinion.
That I'm a Martyr, do you mean? A Religious Zealot who would die for The McCanns?
However, mayhap Carly doesn't understand what the term means.
-
I'm around quite a bit, Eleanor, as is Slarti, although I am still very busy with 'real life'.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the importance of this forum. I think it is unique in allowing non-sceptic posters to have an opinion and to express it in public.
I think in the main it is exactly that that causes the opprobrium.
Whereas sceptic posters are somewhat spoiled for choice whatever social media one cares to visit.
Long may the ethos of this forum continue and John is to be congratulated in his vision in starting it and keeping it going.
I think you might be right about what causes the opprobrium. How dare I support two child neglecting parents when I did much the same myself.
One does not get that opportunity elsewhere.
-
Not really. It is just Carli's opinion.
Opinions can be insulting.
-
i think its simple if i dont like someone on this forum i put them on ignore that includes mods i think if someone doesnt like someone else or what someone else posts they should do the mature thing and put them on ignore
Do you have any supporters not on ignore?
-
I'm around quite a bit, Eleanor, as is Slarti, although I am still very busy with 'real life'.
I agree with you wholeheartedly about the importance of this forum. I think it is unique in allowing non-sceptic posters to have an opinion and to express it in public.
I think in the main it is exactly that that causes the opprobrium.
Whereas sceptic posters are somewhat spoiled for choice whatever social media one cares to visit.
Long may the ethos of this forum continue and John is to be congratulated in his vision in starting it and keeping it going.
Indeed.
-
I think you might be right about what causes the opprobrium. How dare I support two child neglecting parents when I did much the same myself.
One does not get that opportunity elsewhere.
On the other hand those who don't support the McCanns have also suffered opprobrium.
-
On the other hand those who don't support the McCanns have also suffered opprobrium.
by some even on this forum and if not on the forum elsewhere some havea past from other forums where they said the most horrible things and then act like they are perfect on here
-
i think the issue is some posters think they are martyers for the mccans and have to defend them and i will never understand that
I for one do not think I am a martyr for the McCann, I have made my views clear on the subject of leaving the children. You can't seem to understand there are some who think the opposite to you carly and come onto this forum to debate the case, not just to throw accusations such as 'they didn't search' 'they left the children' etc which is what you do.
-
On the other hand those who don't support the McCanns have also suffered opprobrium.
But they do have options elsewhere.
-
But they do have options elsewhere.
What do you mean? That those who don't support the McCanns shouldn't post here?
-
What do you mean? That those who don't support the McCanns shouldn't post here?
Hardly. This Forum is open to both. So please don't try to play word games with me.
-
Hardly. This Forum is open to both. So please don't try to play word games with me.
So why mention 'options elsewhere'?
-
But they do have options elsewhere.
And weary moderators can leave!
Your claims about not moderating or deleting much is not quite true is it? you deleted my posts because I put in 'Hmmm' because you didn't like it. Nothing to do with moderation but pure dislike of me. Sad and petty but true.
You also hide behind your moderator badge to be sacrastic to members
Although I do not agree with Holly's theory ,of some which she has shared,. She is respectful of other peoples thoughts and debates well. AND is not biased!
thread title... Moderation And Feedback For Any Improvement Of The Madeleine McCann Forum.
-
I for one do not think I am a martyr for the McCann, I have made my views clear on the subject of leaving the children. You can't seem to understand there are some who think the opposite to you carly and come onto this forum to debate the case, not just to throw accusations such as 'they didn't search' 'they left the children' etc which is what you do.
Is it an accusation to say the McCanns left their children? I thought it was an indisputable fact.
-
Is it an accusation to say the McCanns left their children? I thought it was an indisputable fact.
It is an indisputable fact, but you have to factor in that we all leave our children alone while we dine out so we are not in a position to point the finger- if you will.
Shame on you G, for not knowing this.
The main issue is for supporters,IMO, they just hate the idea of any challenges to the abduction theory. Whether this is helpful for Maddie I do not know. it certainly helps the parents, and by not talking about it without Kate and Gerrys approval is strange indeed.
-
Is it an accusation to say the McCanns left their children? I thought it was an indisputable fact.
Apologies I should have worded it better, the accusation would be that they are responsible for Madeleine's abduction.
-
It is an indisputable fact, but you have to factor in that we all leave our children alone while we dine out so we are not in a position to point the finger- if you will.
Shame on you G, for not knowing this.
The main issue is for supporters,IMO, they just hate the idea of any challenges to the abduction theory. Whether this is helpful for Maddie I do not know. it certainly helps the parents, and by not talking about it without Kate and Gerrys approval is strange indeed.
So what challenges have you put forward? Whooshing curtains, whether Madeleine was on top or underneath the quilt on her bed? The McCann's acting like celebrities? The McCann's thinking a Paedophile took Madeleine?
Such fierce challenges, not.
-
So what challenges have you put forward? Whooshing curtains, whether Madeleine was on top or underneath the quilt on her bed? The McCann's acting like celebrities? The McCann's thinking a Paedophile took Madeleine?
Such fierce challenges, not.
Actually, I do not believe any of my challenges are fierce or unresonable; that is the opinion of supporters-which is ignored at all costs.
The fact remains there has been no confirmation of the actual crime which has taken place with regards to Maddie.
The parents may or may not be involved in her disappearance- what is undesputable is their account of what they say happened does not ring true IMO. And that is all I offer is my opinion of which you can ignore or disagree either way I am unrepentant.
casting aspersion to my charachter says more about supporters - that me.
-
It is an indisputable fact, but you have to factor in that we all leave our children alone while we dine out so we are not in a position to point the finger- if you will.
Shame on you G, for not knowing this.
The main issue is for supporters,IMO, they just hate the idea of any challenges to the abduction theory. Whether this is helpful for Maddie I do not know. it certainly helps the parents, and by not talking about it without Kate and Gerrys approval is strange indeed.
I don't hate any challenges... I don't think much of them... What I see here is lots if celestial teapot claims. If no importance. I go with the evidence and and it's clear to me... And many others... The mccanns are not involved
-
Apologies I should have worded it better, the accusation would be that they are responsible for Madeleine's abduction.
So if someone mentions the fact that the McCanns left their children home alone you assume they are accusing them of being responsible for Madeleine's abduction?
-
So if someone mentions the fact that the McCanns left their children home alone you assume they are accusing them of being responsible for Madeleine's abduction?
Yes, all that and more! you be a troll .
I find it hilarious that supporters push the whole innocent McCanns. We skeptics know the McCanns did not abduct their own daughter- we do not believe she was abducted from the apartment By anyone. Full stop.
We believe there is another explanation. Some have a theory- some dont. Some theories are well presented and believable, and some are hairbrained to be laughed off.
-
So if someone mentions the fact that the McCanns left their children home alone you assume they are accusing them of being responsible for Madeleine's abduction?
Not everyone but it's regularly said that the mccanns are responsible even if Maddie was abducted
-
Yes, all that and more! you be a troll .
I find it hilarious that supporters push the whole innocent McCanns. We skeptics know the McCanns did not abduct their own daughter- we do not believe she was abducted from the apartment By anyone. Full stop.
We believe there is another explanation. Some have a theory- some dont. Some theories are well presented and believable, and some are hairbrained to be laughed off.
With respect most of your posts deserve to be laughed off imo
-
Not everyone but it's regularly said that the mccanns are responsible even if Maddie was abducted
Then why not tell that to those who say it- and not just openly accuse all non believers of 'thinking' the same thing!
You have been getting away with that for too long. Painting skeptics with the same brush. Should we do the same and think of you supporters as child neglectors and Nesslings Protégés ?
-
So if someone mentions the fact that the McCanns left their children home alone you assume they are accusing them of being responsible for Madeleine's abduction?
No, the posts I am referring to are the ones where a poster says 'If the McCann's hadn't left Madeleine alone she wouldn't be missing' or 'It's the McCann's fault Madeleine is missing they shouldn't have left the children alone' or 'Why should we have to pay for the search for Madeleine they left her alone' etc etc
-
Not everyone but it's regularly said that the mccanns are responsible even if Maddie was abducted
I think it can be said that no-one could have abducted Madeleine McCann if her parents or a babysitter had been in 5A between 8:30 and 10pm.
-
I think it can be said that no-one could have abducted Madeleine McCann if her parents or a babysitter had been in 5A between 8:30 and 10pm.
What if someone opened the front door with a key and crept into the bedroom?
-
I think it can be said that no-one could have abducted Madeleine McCann if her parents or a babysitter had been in 5A between 8:30 and 10pm.
Remember the girl abducted from her bath while mom was in the room next door
-
Actually, I do not believe any of my challenges are fierce or unresonable; that is the opinion of supporters-which is ignored at all costs.
The fact remains there has been no confirmation of the actual crime which has taken place with regards to Maddie.
The parents may or may not be involved in her disappearance- what is undesputable is their account of what they say happened does not ring true IMO. And that is all I offer is my opinion of which you can ignore or disagree either way I am unrepentant.
casting aspersion to my charachter says more about supporters - that me.
What doesn't ring true? That Kate saw the curtains blown by a blast of wind? That Madeleine may have got herself out from under the covers? You turn everything they say into something sinister.
-
No, the posts I am referring to are the ones where a poster says 'If the McCann's hadn't left Madeleine alone she wouldn't be missing' or 'It's the McCann's fault Madeleine is missing they shouldn't have left the children alone' or 'Why should we have to pay for the search for Madeleine they left her alone' etc etc
Cause and effect - it's technically true. The immediate cause is 'parents left children unattended'.
There are further underlying / root causes that you can discern by asking why until you exhaust all avenues.
Why were they left alone? Because the parents wanted a child free evening.....why?
Because they would have a better time not having to supervise children. Why?
Because the presence of toddlers is not conducive during a convivial evening of drinking and eating... Why?
etc......
Then you can do the same exercise on the decision making process for leaving the door open (allegedly).
Why did they leave the door open? Because they wanted to come and go silently (allegedly). Why?
So the children didn't wake up. Why?
So they could enjoy a convivial evening of drinking and eating with their friends. Why?
Because they're all friends and the wanted to spend quality time together....etc.
-
Remember the girl abducted from her bath while mom was in the room next door
Yes I do.
-
Cause and effect - it's technically true. The immediate cause is 'parents left children unattended'.
There are further underlying / root causes that you can discern by asking why until you exhaust all avenues.
Why were they left alone? Because the parents wanted a child free evening.....why?
Because they would have a better time not having to supervise children. Why?
Because the presence of toddlers is not conducive during a convivial evening of drinking and eating... Why?
etc......
Then you can do the same exercise on the decision making process for leaving the door open (allegedly).
Why did they leave the door open? Because they wanted to come and go silently (allegedly). Why?
So the children didn't wake up. Why?
So they could enjoy a convivial evening of drinking and eating with their friends. Why?
Because they're all friends and the wanted to spend quality time together....etc.
The explanation the McCann's give for leaving the children alone was that they didn't want to upset the routine they were in. They decided to do the listening service which the OC did at other holiday destinations.
I wouldn't leave my children alone I would have eaten at the apartment, a take away or something cooked in the kitchen. They decided to do what they did they ALL decided on it not just the McCann's.
-
The explanation the McCann's give for leaving the children alone was that they didn't want to upset the routine they were in. They decided to do the listening service which the OC did at other holiday destinations.
I wouldn't leave my children alone I would have eaten at the apartment, a take away or something cooked in the kitchen. They decided to do what they did they ALL decided on it not just the McCann's.
But you see that it's technically true that they are at fault? So a sceptic pointing this out, whilst not news, is factual and not really something contestable or a point you should get upset about.
-
Cause and effect - it's technically true. The immediate cause is 'parents left children unattended'.
There are further underlying / root causes that you can discern by asking why until you exhaust all avenues.
Why were they left alone? Because the parents wanted a child free evening.....why?
Because they would have a better time not having to supervise children. Why?
Because the presence of toddlers is not conducive during a convivial evening of drinking and eating... Why?
etc......
Then you can do the same exercise on the decision making process for leaving the door open (allegedly).
Why did they leave the door open? Because they wanted to come and go silently (allegedly). Why?
So the children didn't wake up. Why?
So they could enjoy a convivial evening of drinking and eating with their friends. Why?
Because they're all friends and the wanted to spend quality time together....etc.
The fact is Maddies missing and I don't see the point in going over such on every thread every day.. It's a bit idd to me that some posters, want to do that
-
But you see that it's technically true that they are at fault? So a sceptic pointing this out, whilst not news, is factual and not really something contestable or a point you should get upset about.
It does annoy me if I've been a victim if some nasty evil crime by some nast evil person that some people want to put some blame on me
-
The fact is Maddies missing and I don't see the point in going over such on every thread every day.. It's a bit idd to me that some posters, want to do that
That's not the point. Lace takes exception to the fact being mentioned at all. Well it's fact and it's pivotal.
Besides, that's a gross exaggeration, it's not 'gone over on every thread every day', far from it.
-
That's not the point. Lace takes exception to the fact being mentioned at all. Well it's fact and it's pivotal.
Besides, that's a gross exaggeration, it's not 'gone over on every thread every day', far from it.
I think it's mentioned far more than you think... But as nothing said here... In general... Is if any importance it doesn't really matter
-
It does annoy me if I've been a victim if some nasty evil crime by some nast evil person that some people want to put some blame on me
But Davros, that nasty, evil crime (if it happened in that manner) would not have happened if they hadn't left the kids alone. The blame will be apportioned by people - it's a human response. Culpability is slightly more nuanced, whereas blame is visceral.
-
It does annoy me if I've been a victim if some nasty evil crime by some nast evil person that some people want to put some blame on me
So you're annoyed on behalf of the McCanns?
-
But Davros, that nasty, evil crime (if it happened in that manner) would not have happened if they hadn't left the kids alone. The blame will be apportioned by people - it's a human response. Culpability is slightly more nuanced, whereas blame is visceral.
Is there a reason for your addressing Davel as " Davros" ?
-
So you're annoyed on behalf of the McCanns?
No.. And that isn't what I said... It's what posters like you mistakenly think....
It saddens me sometimes that people can be so nasty... But that's, always been a problem in the world
-
Is there a reason for your addressing Davel as " Davros" ?
Just a bit of craic.
I don't think he minds. I hope not.
-
No.. And that isn't what I said... It's what posters like you mistakenly think....
It saddens me sometimes that people can be so nasty... But that's, always been a problem in the world
There's a lot of absolute ****s in the world, I'm afraid. Whether it's worse now, or just polarised because of technological advances, I don't know. Maybe we're all ****s, just in varying degrees. Even Mother Theresa of Calcutta turned out to be a total ****.
I think we should all just get along.
-
No.. And that isn't what I said... It's what posters like you mistakenly think....
It saddens me sometimes that people can be so nasty... But that's, always been a problem in the world
What were you saying then?
-
What were you saying then?
What I posted
-
Just a bit of craic.
I don't think he minds. I hope not.
It could become quite an amusing feature of the forum.
I may continue the fun with a few alterations to some user names.
-
Just a bit of craic.
I don't think he minds. I hope not.
I don't.. I'm think of changing to Davros
-
It could become quite an amusing feature of the forum.
I may continue the fun with a few alterations to some user names.
The opportunities are endless with mine.....go for it!
-
The opportunities are endless with mine.....go for it!
The Gineral
-
There's a lot of absolute ****s in the world, I'm afraid. Whether it's worse now, or just polarised because of technological advances, I don't know. Maybe we're all ****s, just in varying degrees. Even Mother Theresa of Calcutta turned out to be a total ****.
I think we should all just get along.
I've suggested several times that all the abuse should stop.. I'm happy to lead by example ...so who is, willing to agree to stop all abuse
-
There is a Community going on here, whether you all like it or not, complaints notwithstanding. But complaints are part of the whole.
-
The Gineral
Don't tempt me.
-
Don't tempt me.
Do it, Eleanator!
-
It could become quite an amusing feature of the forum.
I may continue the fun with a few alterations to some user names.
Well why not. User names are usually of no significance anyway.
-
What have I posted that you and/or others consider libelous?
That’s not what I said, I said there needs to be some clarification now about what can and cannot be said as some of what you have written or allowed to be written was previously removed and sanctions given because they were considered libellous.
-
It seems to me that the insurmountable problem lies in what people see as valid topics for discussion. Those who believe in stranger abduction see no point in discussing parental involvement. Those who don't believe in abduction see no point in discussing how, when or why the 'abductor' did it.
-
It seems to me that the insurmountable problem lies in what people see as valid topics for discussion. Those who believe in stranger abduction see no point in discussing parental involvement. Those who don't believe in abduction see no point in discussing how, when or why the 'abductor' did it.
There s nothing more to discuss on these topics.. It's all been done
-
There s nothing more to discuss on these topics.. It's all been done
So why are you here?
-
So why are you here?
Why do you feel I should have to explain to you... Im not here to try and change anyones mind through discussion... Why are, you here
-
I can only speak about my own experiences. It doesn't happen much now, because I took steps to stop it.
What steps were they, out of interest?
-
Why do you feel I should have to explain to you... Im not here to try and change anyones mind through discussion... Why are, you here
I don't, I just wondered why you bother if it's all been said.
-
I don't, I just wondered why you bother if it's all been said.
Read my post, again and you will see what I said...
-
Actually, I do not believe any of my challenges are fierce or unresonable; that is the opinion of supporters-which is ignored at all costs.
The fact remains there has been no confirmation of the actual crime which has taken place with regards to Maddie.
The parents may or may not be involved in her disappearance- what is undesputable is their account of what they say happened does not ring true IMO. And that is all I offer is my opinion of which you can ignore or disagree either way I am unrepentant.
casting aspersion to my charachter says more about supporters - that me.
I think you are wrong in stating that there has been no confirmation of the actual crime perpetrated against Madeleine Mccann.
Why do you think Scotland Yard are supporting the Judicial Police in their investigation involving Madeleine's abduction if they had failed to find evidence to justify taking that approach?
-
I think it can be said that no-one could have abducted Madeleine McCann if her parents or a babysitter had been in 5A between 8:30 and 10pm.
In what manner did the parents of the little girls who were abused by an intruder while they slept under the same roof contribute to those crimes?
-
Cause and effect - it's technically true. The immediate cause is 'parents left children unattended'.
There are further underlying / root causes that you can discern by asking why until you exhaust all avenues.
Why were they left alone? Because the parents wanted a child free evening.....why?
Because they would have a better time not having to supervise children. Why?
Because the presence of toddlers is not conducive during a convivial evening of drinking and eating... Why?
etc......
Then you can do the same exercise on the decision making process for leaving the door open (allegedly).
Why did they leave the door open? Because they wanted to come and go silently (allegedly). Why?
So the children didn't wake up. Why?
So they could enjoy a convivial evening of drinking and eating with their friends. Why?
Because they're all friends and the wanted to spend quality time together....etc.
The police are currently involved in looking for an abductor. What role do you think s/he might have played in the scenario as outlined by you above?
-
In what manner did the parents of the little girls who were abused by an intruder while they slept under the same roof contribute to those crimes?
I have no details of those alleged offences so I can't comment.
-
I have no details of those alleged offences so I can't comment.
You really should stand for parliament, you’d fit in perfectly!
-
You really should stand for parliament, you’d fit in perfectly!
I think not. Democrats are like fish out of water there at the moment.
-
i think one of the rules of this forum that will make things more friendly is that mods shouldnt be able to make personal remarks about what a poster posts it happens all the time and it causes alot of tension on here this is of course my opinion but im sure others would agree
-
The police are currently involved in looking for an abductor. What role do you think s/he might have played in the scenario as outlined by you above?
That maybe just maybe why the brits have spent circa £12 million and have no suspect,whilst the Pj won't be drawn on what they are doing,save to say they have to be prepared for different scenarios.
-
That maybe just maybe why the brits have spent circa £12 million and have no suspect,whilst the Pj won't be drawn on what they are doing,save to say they have to be prepared for different scenarios.
Or it may be that all the evidence points to abduction....which is my opinion
-
I think not. Democrats are like fish out of water there at the moment.
I was referring to your mastery of the fudged answer.
-
That maybe just maybe why the brits have spent circa £12 million and have no suspect,whilst the Pj won't be drawn on what they are doing,save to say they have to be prepared for different scenarios.
Good on the Policia Judiciaria who will not be drawn on their active, live investigation into Madeleine McCann's disappearance.
Is there any chance you could fill me in on the bits where Scotland Yard have not also exercised the appropriate professional approach in conjunction with their fellow investigators into Madeleine's disappearance of also refusing to be drawn on their active, live investigation over the same timescale you quote for the PJ.
However ... back to the future and the thread topic in which Holly has opened the discussion on moderating on this McCann board.
On the whole I think moderating here is generally not too bad at all. As already pointed out by Eleanor moderators do not have the free hand to run riot some imagine. We are bound by forum rules. Admin and the editors take no hostages. When John can he keeps a very close eye on what is happening on the threads and any who are dissatisfied with moderation have a direct line to him.
As also mentioned previously ... all of us had a real eye opener when Stephen opened his forum when those from here who joined en masse for 'freedom' to express their opinion had a field day in the freedom to express not only their contempt for this forum but for those of us who post here.
What was said behind the scenes I have no idea, but in the heady days of 'freedom' before that discretion was exercised it was quite entertaining.
In my opinion there are those who know exactly how to play the system and they do it expertly. There are those whose integral honesty doesn't allow them to even contemplate that there is a system and they can get into hot water as a result. We also have the occasional visit from wind up merchants (WUMs).
The freedom of speech which some allegedly believed not to exist on this forum is a fabrication. It was always here and it was always exercised.
What is under constant attack is the ethos of this forum which allows mods such as myself and Eleanor which was outlined in the breakaway forum in the stick we, the form owner and even Sil took there.
-
That maybe just maybe why the brits have spent circa £12 million and have no suspect,whilst the Pj won't be drawn on what they are doing,save to say they have to be prepared for different scenarios.
Are they able to contract out any work eg the sifting of mobile phone call data? Either way I think they may well have spent a lot of resource on this. They may well have carried out a lot of background checks on all those in/around PDL at the time by looking at those who were staying at OC/PDL, hiring cars and using electronic payment methods etc. All of this would be time painstaking work.
-
Are they able to contract out any work eg the sifting of mobile phone call data? Either way I think they may well have spent a lot of resource on this. They may well have carried out a lot of background checks on all those in/around PDL at the time by looking at those who were staying at OC/PDL, hiring cars and using electronic payment methods etc. All of this would be time painstaking work.
All 40000 documents had to be translated and read and assessed... That's, what took a large amount of the money
-
All 40000 documents had to be translated and read and assessed... That's, what took a large amount of the money
I thought this was done before the MET's involvement and funded by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund?
-
I thought this was done before the MET's involvement and funded by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund?
I think they would have wanted the documents translated by their 'own' people, rather than relying on the accuracy of that done for a third party.
-
(&^&
I thought this was done before the MET's involvement and funded by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund?
No that isn't what happened
Then they had to be read and assessed by detectives... Probably at contracted out rate.. 40 to 50 pounds per hour
-
I thought this was done before the MET's involvement and funded by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund?
1 min 20 secs in Hogan howe explains.
https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8
-
But Davros, that nasty, evil crime (if it happened in that manner) would not have happened if they hadn't left the kids alone. The blame will be apportioned by people - it's a human response. Culpability is slightly more nuanced, whereas blame is visceral.
How do you know it wouldn't have happened if the McCann's had been asleep in the apartment? There was a man entering apartments, how did he get in? He assaulted children, all with the parents asleep in the apartments. He could easily have taken one of those children.
I thought we were here to debate how Madeleine disappeared, whether she was abducted, had an accident etc. what does repeating that the McCann's left the children alone bring to the debate? Nothing as far as I'm concerned.
-
I agree with Sil on whether the like button should be abolished. Other than that I am happy with the moderation on this forum. The silly spats always arise but the posts can just all be deleted.
-
How do you know it wouldn't have happened if the McCann's had been asleep in the apartment? There was a man entering apartments, how did he get in? He assaulted children, all with the parents asleep in the apartments. He could easily have taken one of those children.
I thought we were here to debate how Madeleine disappeared, whether she was abducted, had an accident etc. what does repeating that the McCann's left the children alone bring to the debate? Nothing as far as I'm concerned.
I think it is down to probabilities.
They would not have left the door unlocked while they slept and Kate may have been sleeping in the same room as she did on a previous evening.
-
(&^&
No that isn't what happened
Then they had to be read and assessed by detectives... Probably at contracted out rate.. 40 to 50 pounds per hour
What's with the ROFL emoticon Davel?
I'm not saying all the wit stats generated didn't have to be reviewed by the MET but I can't see any evidence the MET funded the translation costs?
-
1 min 20 secs in Hogan howe explains.
https://youtu.be/n9vJm03dlI8
Thanks barrier. My interpretation of BHH's explanation is that the case generated a huge volume of paperwork in that everything was duplicated due to translation from Portuguese to English but I can't see where the MET actually funded the cost of this exercise?
-
Thanks barrier. My interpretation of BHH's explanation is that the case generated a huge volume of paperwork in that everything was duplicated due to translation from Portuguese to English but I can't see where the MET actually funded the cost of this exercise?
Who else would you suppose would,one presumes the MET are involved in aiding the PJ to ultimately bring a prosecution if possible,to do so it would have to be water tight and then some imo, not having translations done by themselves would leave them open to question,once again imo.
-
How do you know it wouldn't have happened if the McCann's had been asleep in the apartment? There was a man entering apartments, how did he get in? He assaulted children, all with the parents asleep in the apartments. He could easily have taken one of those children.
I thought we were here to debate how Madeleine disappeared, whether she was abducted, had an accident etc. what does repeating that the McCann's left the children alone bring to the debate? Nothing as far as I'm concerned.
Snip
Journ : As well as that line of inquiry, and the sighting by the Irish family of a man carrying a child, the police are also looking at a third important strand of their investigation.
AR : We have noticed that there was, between January and the time Madeleine went missing, a four-fold increase in the number of burglaries that were taking place in the vicinity.
(clip)
Journ : In the three weeks prior to her disappearance, two incidents took place in the very block when Madeleine slept. In both, windows were used to gain access.
AR : Possibly, there is a scenario where Madeleine could have possibly disturbed somebody trying to commit a burglary.
Journ : To date, nobody has been caught for these crimes.
https://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Crimewatch.htm
-
Who else would you suppose would,one presumes the MET are involved in aiding the PJ to ultimately bring a prosecution if possible,to do so it would have to be water tight and then some imo, not having translations done by themselves would leave them open to question,once again imo.
KM's book refers to having all the docs translated at some vast expense funded from the the 'Find Madeleine' fund. Is there any reason to believe the firm who carried out the translations was not a professional outfit? The MET may simply have carried out due diligence checks on the firm and its senior members. Maybe asked them to sign some sort of affidavit that the translations had been carried out without interference from others.
-
KM's book refers to having all the docs translated at some vast expense funded from the the 'Find Madeleine' fund. Is there any reason to believe the firm who carried out the translations was not a professional outfit? The MET may simply have carried out due diligence checks on the firm and its senior members. Maybe asked them to sign some sort of affidavit that the translations had been carried out without interference from others.
I'd think it would be beholden on the MET as a police force to translate the files rather than question the credibility of a third party.
-
I'd think it would be beholden on the MET as a police force to translate the files rather than question the credibility of a third party.
According to KM's book (page 396) the cost of translating the entire file amounted to some 100k borne by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund. I've no idea whether or not the MET repeated the exercise.
-
I think it is down to probabilities.
They would not have left the door unlocked while they slept and Kate may have been sleeping in the same room as she did on a previous evening.
So what?
-
According to KM's book (page 396) the cost of translating the entire file amounted to some 100k borne by the 'Find Madeleiene' fund. I've no idea whether or not the MET repeated the exercise.
It isn't the cost of translation it's the cost of detectives trawling through every piece of evidence
-
It isn't the cost of translation it's the cost of detectives trawling through every piece of evidence
Additional cost's as well.
Former police officers employed by G4S have been used by Scotland Yard in the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
Up to 81 former officers have been on the Met Police payroll to search for the missing girl over a five-year period.
Revelations of the global company’s input into the failed £12.1 million hunt for Maddie only emerged in documents obtained from the London force under freedom of information laws.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotland-yard-used-ex-police-7112764
-
Additional cost's as well.
Former police officers employed by G4S have been used by Scotland Yard in the hunt for Madeleine McCann.
Up to 81 former officers have been on the Met Police payroll to search for the missing girl over a five-year period.
Revelations of the global company’s input into the failed £12.1 million hunt for Maddie only emerged in documents obtained from the London force under freedom of information laws.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/scotland-yard-used-ex-police-7112764
I wonder how much these detectives cost if they were employed on a consultancy basis..similar to doctors employed as locums
-
The Mirror piece it has to be said was from Jan 2016,soon after the team was cut to just 4.
Still the bulk of the £12 million had obviously been spent then.
-
The Mirror piece it has to be said was from Jan 2016,soon after the team was cut to just 4.
Still the bulk of the £12 million had obviously been spent then.
the piece may have been from jan 16 but we dont know when these detectives were employed
-
Back On Topic if you please. This is not a request.
-
What's with the ROFL emoticon Davel?
I'm not saying all the wit stats generated didn't have to be reviewed by the MET but I can't see any evidence the MET funded the translation costs?
I think I need a new keyboad...I dont really do emoticons
-
Back On Topic if you please. This is not a request.
Other topics have been moved away from the thread. we always hear about off topic posts being removed but only some are... have a look around.
-
Other topics have been t moved away from the thread. we always here about off topic posts being removed but only some are... have a look around.
What?
-
What?
it's ok never mind.
But if any other mods are interested.. check out VS absolute determination to take this thread off piste and turn it into a a goading fest.
Topic: A Good, Bad or Average Theory What's The Difference? (Read 323 times)
-
I thought you'd be more security conscious coming from SA.
Hi Rob, we are overly security conscious here, therefore taking decisions for the safety of our family. To be honest, I feel much safer when traveling abroad. Still, I am a citizen of the most beautiful, diverse country in the world. But, we have had our share of crime: being held at gunpoint twice. Carjacked in my driveway and tied up by 5 men wearing balaclavas when my children were 4 and 2 years old. Putting a gun to my son’s head and him innocently asking “who are you? Why are you doing this?”, being told to shut the * up or I will shoot you. My Mum’s engagement ring was bitten off her finger. Deep scars, endless visits to our psychologist and psychiatrist.
-
I thought you'd be more security conscious coming from SA.
Hi Rob, we are overly security conscious here, therefore taking decisions for the safety of our family. To be honest, I feel much safer when traveling abroad. Still, I am a citizen of the most beautiful, diverse country in the world. But, we have had our share of crime: being held at gunpoint twice. Carjacked in my driveway and tied up by 5 men wearing balaclavas when my children were 4 and 2 years old. Putting a gun to my son’s head and him innocently asking “who are you? Why are you doing this?”, being told to shut the * up or I will shoot you. My Mum’s engagement ring was bitten off her finger. Deep scars, endless visits to our psychologist and psychiatrist.
Good grief, how horrifying, sadly all the people I know who are from SA have similar tales to tell, either first hand or about neighbours, family or friends.
-
There have been two recent incidents where posters have had cause to complain.
The first involved a gif leveled at a poster. The second involved the use of a word spelled in such a way it represented a regional accent. On both occasions John intervened and the posters' complaints were upheld ie the gif was removed and the misspelled word added to the library of banned words.
Where complaints are upheld and concluded such as above a line needs to be drawn under the complaint and everyone moves on.
-
There have been two recent incidents where posters have had cause to complain.
The first involved a gif leveled at a poster. The second involved the use of a word spelled in such a way it represented a regional accent. On both occasions John intervened and the posters' complaints were upheld ie the gif was removed and the misspelled word added to the library of banned words.
Where complaints are upheld and concluded such as above a line needs to be drawn under the complaint and everyone moves on.
But you didn't move on... You spelt the, word slightly differently... And then got involved in a lengthy spat trying to justify your actions
-
But you didn't move on... You spelt the, word slightly differently... And then got involved in a lengthy spat trying to justify your actions
Ok fair enough but I'm moving on now so that's the matter concluded.
-
Well I do hope so. Its got mighty boring of late.
-
Now you are going too far, Imo, Holly.
The Generals witty comment was a gem, which we all enjoyed. Why did you remove it?
-
Well I do hope so. Its got mighty boring of late.
What would you find interesting to read about and discuss?
-
Anything that isn't about dogs and snowflakes dislikes will do.
-
Anything that isn't about dogs and snowflakes dislikes will do.
Go on then, start an interesting discussion.
-
Anything that isn't about dogs and snowflakes dislikes will do.
But they are difficult to avoid to be fair Jassi. They both end up on almost every thread. The snowflake have this as their therapy. it isn't working it would seem. *giggles*
-
But they are difficult to avoid to be fair Jassi. They both end up on almost every thread. The snowflake have this as their therapy. it isn't working it would seem. *giggles*
Ah, let’s just slag off the mentally ill snow flakes, clearly there’s nothing else to discuss these days.
-
But they are difficult to avoid to be fair Jassi. They both end up on almost every thread. The snowflake have this as their therapy. it isn't working it would seem. *giggles*
“they goad and seek a reply to goad again” - Miss Taken Identity.
-
Ah, let’s just slag off the mentally ill snow flakes, clearly there’s nothing else to discuss these days.
Oh I am sure you will agree I never mentioned the mentally ill. However, Kate is far better at slagging them off than me, with her eloquent manner. And you are defending her right to do so.
-
Oh I am sure you will agree I never mentioned the mentally ill. However, Kate is far better at slagging them off than me, with her eloquent manner. And you are defending her right to do so- how quaint.
Why do you perceive snowflakes need therapy?
-
Now you are going too far, Imo, Holly.
The Generals witty comment was a gem, which we all enjoyed. Why did you remove it?
Which comment? When? I've only removed one post in the last few days and it wasn't from The General.
-
Just to clarify anyone who wishes to criticise any non-member constructively is entitled to do so without fear of censure whether it be McCanns, PJ, GA or anyone else.
In terms of responding to posts please argue the content and don't personalise it.
-
It seems to me that people who get upset about a particular spelling of a word are over-sensitive. Why they then go on and on and on about it for days afterwards, despite having managed to outlaw that particular spelling is beyond me. It's probably being used as an excuse to moan, imo.
-
Could we all please keep to the subject under discussion and cease the sniping. TY
PS. Comments in relation to moderation should be posted on the appropriate board.
-
Could we all please keep to the subject under discussion and cease the sniping. TY
PS. Comments in relation to moderation should be posted on the appropriate board.
This thread is about moderation of the forum so how do we both stay on topic and not post about moderation?
-
This thread is about moderation of the forum so how do we both stay on topic and not post about moderation?
This thread is about animosity, which some have chosen to argue is due to moderators.
-
This thread is about animosity, which some have chosen to argue is due to moderators.
”Feedback for any improvements of the Madeleine McCann board”. What exactly are we meant to be discussing?
-
I would say that the main reason for the animosity on this forum is the level of animosity towards the mccanns. i havent posted on other boards here but suspect that they are more related to the facts than personal opinions of those involved
-
It’s kind of ironic IMO that this thread was started by the moderator (citing their concern about animosity) who subsequently went out of her way to deliberately wind up members of the forum. if you want to avoid animosity don’t deliberately wind people up would be a good rule for moderators to adopt IMO
-
I think there have been some viciously nasty posts of late concerning events which happened more than twelve years ago and about which nothing can be changed by any member of this forum either individually or collectively.
I think the forum could be immeasurably improved if those members, who appear to be inimically hostile about the McCann family to the point of obsession, were to refrain from taking every opportunity to be as negative as possible when discussing Madeleine's case.
-
I think there have been some viciously nasty posts of late concerning events which happened more than twelve years ago and about which nothing can be changed by any member of this forum either individually or collectively.
I think the forum could be immeasurably improved if those members, who appear to be inimically hostile about the McCann family to the point of obsession, were to refrain from taking every opportunity to be as negative as possible when discussing Madeleine's case.
You been appointed Chief Censor ?
-
I think there have been some viciously nasty posts of late concerning events which happened more than twelve years ago and about which nothing can be changed by any member of this forum either individually or collectively.
I think the forum could be immeasurably improved if those members, who appear to be inimically hostile about the McCann family to the point of obsession, were to refrain from taking every opportunity to be as negative as possible when discussing Madeleine's case.
Is there anything positive that can be said about the case?
Or about the McCanns for that matter?
Answers on a postage stamp.
-
Is there anything positive that can be said about the case?
Or about the McCanns for that matter?
Answers on a postage stamp.
It and they have given you alot of enjoyment over the years.
-
You been appointed Chief Censor ?
Where does Brietta say she plans to practice censorship?
-
Where does Brietta say she plans to practice censorship?
Ah, my mistake - I didn't realise it was just sanctimonious wishful thinking.
-
Ah, my mistake - I didn't realise it was just sanctimonious wishful thinking.
You need to learn to read and comprehend posts before unleashing your acerbic barbs, otherwise you tend to look a little foolish. IMO.
-
Is there anything positive that can be said about the case?
Or about the McCanns for that matter?
Answers on a postage stamp.
Thank you.
That is precisely the nature of the type of post to which I referred. Just so unnecessary and a prime example of negativity which in my opinion, merely detracts from the reputation of the forum.
-
I think there have been some viciously nasty posts of late concerning events which happened more than twelve years ago and about which nothing can be changed by any member of this forum either individually or collectively.
I think the forum could be immeasurably improved if those members, who appear to be inimically hostile about the McCann family to the point of obsession, were to refrain from taking every opportunity to be as negative as possible when discussing Madeleine's case.
And of course this is the best way to sow unity on the forum, bearing in mind there's only a handful of posters, and maybe half of them 'sceptic'. So I wonder who you are referring to as posting 'viciously nasty' posts and what do you expect as a response, a meek agreement?
Great moderation. Way to go. Your bias clouds your judgement.
-
And of course this is the best way to sow unity on the forum, bearing in mind there's only a handful of posters, and maybe half of them 'sceptic'. So I wonder who you are referring to as posting 'viciously nasty' posts and what do you expect as a response, a meek agreement?
Great moderation. Way to go. Your bias clouds your judgement.
There have been some viciously nasty posts on this forum...the McCanns referred to as shit parents...i dont see Brietta as being biased.....I dont see myself as biased. Bias suggests some measure of prejudice which I just dont see. Based on the evidence I dont see the mccans as being involved...no bias...just simple logic and a clear understanding of the evidence
-
And of course this is the best way to sow unity on the forum, bearing in mind there's only a handful of posters, and maybe half of them 'sceptic'. So I wonder who you are referring to as posting 'viciously nasty' posts and what do you expect as a response, a meek agreement?
Great moderation. Way to go. Your bias clouds your judgement.
There are plenty of fora and other social media platforms where like minded posters can feel free to spew out their anonymous bile to their hearts content.
I believe this forum to be unique in allowing members of all opinions and none to express themselves. Can you name half a dozen fora where I or anyone else sharing my views would be welcome to post? I doubt it. Whereas I could indicate hundreds where any sceptic member of this forum would be welcomed with open arms.
Therefore for me and perhaps others like me this forum is particularly precious and I really dislike witnessing it being trashed whether deliberately or not.
-
There have been some viciously nasty posts on this forum...the McCanns referred to as shit parents...i dont see Brietta as being biased.....I dont see myself as biased. Bias suggests some measure of prejudice which I just dont see. Based on the evidence I dont see the mccans as being involved...no bias...just simple logic and a clear understanding of the evidence
Davros in 'I'm Better Than Everyone Else' shocker.
'Shit parents'? Christ on a bike. Is that it? I'm sure Kate's sister has reported back forthwith and further compounded their despair.
-
There are plenty of fora and other social media platforms where like minded posters can feel free to spew out their anonymous bile to their hearts content.
I believe this forum to be unique in allowing members of all opinions and none to express themselves. Can you name half a dozen fora where I or anyone else sharing my views would be welcome to post? I doubt it. Whereas I could indicate hundreds where any sceptic member of this forum would be welcomed with open arms.
Therefore for me and perhaps others like me this forum is particularly precious and I really dislike witnessing it being trashed whether deliberately or not.
I'm filling up over here. Giveth and taketh away, some are beautiful humans espousing logic, reason and empathy, the rest are 'spewing anonymous bile'.
-
Davros in 'I'm Better Than Everyone Else' shocker.
'Shit parents'? Christ on a bike. Is that it? I'm sure Kate's sister has reported back forthwith and further compounded their despair.
you might think not but if I was to refer to amaral as a shit copper ...the pj as a shit police force...and portugal having a shit justice system..id feel id be letting myself down as a well educated ,intelligent person ..and thats why I wouldnt do it
-
Wouldn't make much difference if you did. Few pay attention to anything on this forum.
-
you might think not but if I was to refer to amaral as a shit copper ...the pj as a shit police force...and portugal having a shit justice system..id feel id be letting myself down as a well educated ,intelligent person ..and thats why I wouldnt do it
You simply ooze intelligence and nobility. It's emanating through the ether, imbuing all who are fortunate with carnal wisdom and cosmic clarity. It's like waking up and finding you've gained 4th sense.
-
Wouldn't make much difference if you did. Few pay attention to anything on this forum.
thats something I would agree with
-
You been appointed Chief Censor ?
That's an unnecessary comment if ever I saw one.
-
You simply ooze intelligence and nobility. It's emanating through the ether, imbuing all who are fortunate with carnal wisdom and cosmic clarity. It's like waking up and finding you've gained 4th sense.
I do try to help those who have no sense...its adifficult job but I find it rewarding
-
thats something I would agree with
Nobody is watching. Not even Doris Healy. Few people care any more. Yeh, we're still ruminating over Mrs Fenn's drinking habits, but we're pretty isolated; we're niche.
Despite my laissez-faire posting style, I like it here though, so.....
-
I do try to help those who have no sense...its a difficult job but I find it rewarding
Please provide a cite for that.
-
I do try to help those who have no sense...its adifficult job but I find it rewarding
You should be proud. Your sterling work in bringing the written English word in to disrepute is of particular note.
-
Please provide a cite for that.
Ive just checked...and I do try to help those who have no sense ...im a sort of Bodisattva
-
You should be proud. Your sterling work in bringing the written English word in to disrepute is of particular note.
What do you think would improve the McCann board? So far your posts on this thread have contributed plenty of criticism but little in the way of constructive suggestions.
-
You should be proud. Your sterling work in bringing the written English word in to disrepute is of particular note.
I am proud thanks.... but Im more of a proponent of the spoken word than the written worm
-
What do you think would improve the McCann board? So far your posts on this thread have contributed plenty of criticism but little in the way of constructive suggestions.
Ditto.
I've already stated previously that I think the moderation favours 'supporters', so some equity would be useful. But because you won't see a problem, unsurprisingly, you won't bother doing anything about it - so why should I bother?
Besides, it was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? You don't actually want my opinion. It was a barb - a veiled goad. You don't even know you're doing it.
-
I am proud thanks.... but Im more of a proponent of the spoken word than the written worm
No editing required.
-
Ditto.
I've already stated previously that I think the moderation favours 'supporters', so some equity would be useful. But because you won't see a problem, unsurprisingly, you won't bother doing anything about it - so why should I bother?
Besides, it was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? You don't actually want my opinion. It was a barb - a veiled goad. You don't even know you're doing it.
I have suggested an end to moderation....I think we should ask john to try it for a couple of days....i dont think its at all necessary....well not to the extent its used..
-
I have suggested an end to moderation....I think we should ask john to try it for a couple of days....i dont think its at all necessary....well not to the extent its used..
I do think this forum is mature enough for self-moderation; moderation is the antagonist. It's a good suggestion.
-
I have suggested an end to moderation....I think we should ask john to try it for a couple of days....i dont think its at all necessary....well not to the extent its used..
But ... but... how would the obergruppenfuhers fill their days if not exercising their Senior Moderator skills ?
-
But ... but... how would the obergruppenfuhers fill their days if not exercising their Senior Moderator skills ?
you see how we already have some common ground
-
Who are you all going to blame if there is only John moderating? That could get a bit awkward.
-
But ... but... how would the obergruppenfuhers fill their days if not exercising their Senior Moderator skills ?
Shouting at shop assistants or licking windows. Or both at the same time.
-
Who are you all going to blame if there is only John moderating? That could get a bit awkward.
Jesus.
-
What would there be to complain about if there were no moderators ?
-
What would there be to complain about if there were no moderators ?
What would you call John when he wipes out all of the rubbish, which he frequently does.
-
What would you call John when he wipes out all of the rubbish, which he frequently does.
John.
-
What would you call John when he wipes out all of the rubbish, which he frequently does.
Good man comes to mind.
-
Good man comes to mind.
This lot will all be gone tomorrow. You wait and see.
-
This lot will all be gone tomorrow. You wait and see.
I'm used to it.
-
As its all on topic, I don't see why it should.
Its all relevant feedback - IMO
-
I'm used to it.
So you don't mind if John does it.
-
So you don't mind if John does it.
Not really. I feign indignation for effect. As we've established, none of this matters. All of human endeavour is futile.
-
No editing required.
"I am proud thanks.... but Im more of a proponent of the spoken word than the written worm"
That is the funniest post ever. The worm has turned into a a blockbuster.
-
Not really. I feign indignation for effect. As we've established, none of this matters. All of human endeavour is futile.
So why all the criticism of Moderators who are simply trying to cut down John's workload?
John also reinstates comments if he doesn't agree. Is that okay as well?
-
I think john would have little to delete...in the last few days its moderators who have caused discord,,...imo...and many moderator posts have been removed by John
-
They wouldn't need reinstating if they weren't unjustly removed in the first place.
-
That is the funniest post ever. The worm has turned into a a blockbuster.
my use of the word worm...instead of word...is from a Two Ronnies sketch......the General may or may not realise that
-
They wouldn't need reinstating if they weren't unjustly removed in the first place.
agreed...you see we have harmony rather than discord already
-
They wouldn't need reinstating if they weren't unjustly removed in the first place.
Even those from Davel and Vertigo Swirl?
-
So why all the criticism of Moderators who are simply trying to cut down John's workload?
John also reinstates comments if he doesn't agree. Is that okay as well?
I don't criticise, it's an observation. I do think mods delete and modify with a biased impunity - but I only see it happening to 'sceptics'. Bob seems to be the most even handed.
I don't see much of John's input as I'm only here sporadically and my posts are pretty useless in getting to the nub of the issues - I like to be ephemeral. But I don't see John's ego taking hold.
Having said all that, it may be that my own bias also clouds my judgement of the 'problem'.
Is it a problem? I don't know. Is there an endemic abuse problem? I don't see that either.
-
Even those from Davel and Vertigo Swirl?
I've no desire to have them, or anyone else censored.
For the record, I have never complained about anything another poster has written.
My complains have been about editing/removal of my posts.
-
So why all the criticism of Moderators who are simply trying to cut down John's workload?
John also reinstates comments if he doesn't agree. Is that okay as well?
If John has to delete shedloads of rubbish which his moderators have ignored and reinstate comments which they shouldn't have deleted it seems to me like these unselfish helpful moderators are adding to his workload, not lessening it.
-
I've no desire to have them, or anyone else censored.
For the record, I have never complained about anything another poster has written.
My complains have been about editing/removal of my posts.
I don't complain when my comments are removed.
-
I don't criticise, it's an observation. I do think mods delete and modify with a biased impunity - but I only see it happening to 'sceptics'. Bob seems to be the most even handed.
I don't see much of John's input as I'm only here sporadically and my posts are pretty useless in getting to the nub of the issues - I like to be ephemeral. But I don't see John's ego taking hold.
Having said all that, it may be that my own bias also clouds my judgement of the 'problem'.
Is it a problem? I don't know. Is there an endemic abuse problem? I don't see that either.
Unfortunately i think your bias does cloud your judgement....Rob...imo...and its been noted by others...mounted a campaign of harrassment against me...that fortunately has been stopped
-
If John has to delete shedloads of rubbish which his moderators have ignored and reinstate comments which they shouldn't have deleted it seems to me like these unselfish helpful moderators are adding to his workload, not lessening it.
Ooh, snap!
-
If John has to delete shedloads of rubbish which his moderators have ignored and reinstate comments which they shouldn't have deleted it seems to me like these unselfish helpful moderators are adding to his workload, not lessening it.
again I agree...harmony from discord
-
If John has to delete shedloads of rubbish which his moderators have ignored and reinstate comments which they shouldn't have deleted it seems to me like these unselfish helpful moderators are adding to his workload, not lessening it.
Seems to you, but you don't really know. Do you want to have a go at it?
-
Unfortunately i think your bias does cloud your judgement....Rob...imo...and its been noted by others...mounted a campaign of harrassment against me...that fortunately has been stopped
I think you and Bob love each other actually. Like John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell in Step Brothers.
If either one of you was abducted by aliens, apart from being awesome in itself, you would both miss the other.
-
I think you and Bob love each other actually. Like John C. Reilly and Will Ferrell in Step Brothers.
If either one of you was abducted by aliens, apart from being awesome in itself, you would both miss the other.
Ok...for the sake of harmony Im open to that suggestion
-
Ok...for the sake of harmony Im open to that suggestion
It's working already!
-
Seems to you, but you don't really know. Do you want to have a go at it?
Have a go at what? Adding to John's workload?
-
why would John wish to delete any of this...its constructive...no sniping...quite a lot of common ground found
-
Have a go at what? Adding to John's workload?
from waht I can see is a major part of johns workload is posters complaining...obviously sometimes with justification....about unfair moderation
-
from waht I can see is a major part of johns workload is posters complaining...obviously sometimes with justification....about unfair moderation
You got that right.
I haven't been around for several weeks. I wonder how many people complained about me while I wasn't here.
I've been back for just a few days. One Deleted Comment and I am the Biased Devil Incarnate.
-
You got that right.
I haven't been around for several weeks. I wonder how many people complained about me while I wasn't here.
I've been back for just a few days. One Deleted Comment and I am the Biased Devil Incarnate.
If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?
-
Ditto.
I've already stated previously that I think the moderation favours 'supporters', so some equity would be useful. But because you won't see a problem, unsurprisingly, you won't bother doing anything about it - so why should I bother?
Besides, it was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? You don't actually want my opinion. It was a barb - a veiled goad. You don't even know you're doing it.
You are a member of this forum who seems to have an opinion about what you deem to be wrong with it. I have presented you with the opportunity ~ as per the thread title ~ to suggest how things can be improved as unlike you I do not presume to know the inner workings of another member's brain.
Up to you how you respond but I must say ... so far I'm less than impressed.
-
Ditto.
I've already stated previously that I think the moderation favours 'supporters', so some equity would be useful. But because you won't see a problem, unsurprisingly, you won't bother doing anything about it - so why should I bother?
Besides, it was a rhetorical question, wasn't it? You don't actually want my opinion. It was a barb - a veiled goad. You don't even know you're doing it.
I think one thing which would improve the quality of posting on this and any other board would be for members to read previous posts and to take them on board.
With reference to http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg559136#msg559136 which clearly states ... "Comments in relation to moderation should be posted on the appropriate board."
Please note ... you are not only posting off topic, you are deliberately posting entirely on the wrong thread despite a very reasonable request not to do so.
-
I think one thing which would improve the quality of posting on this and any other board would be for members to read previous posts and to take them on board.
With reference to http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg559136#msg559136 which clearly states ... "Comments in relation to moderation should be posted on the appropriate board."
Please note ... you are not only posting off topic, you are deliberately posting entirely on the wrong thread despite a very reasonable request not to do so.
So which is it to be, prompting me to continue to respond 'off topic', as per your previous post, or stop responding 'off topic'?
-
So which is it to be, prompting me to continue to respond 'off topic', as per your previous post, or stop responding 'off topic'?
Entirely up to you what you intend to say and do with your posts. I would be perfectly content if on this thread you constructed your posts around ..."Feedback for any improvements of the Madeleine McCann board." ... then it isn't up to me what you choose to do.
-
If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?
Very profound and very true. There is no black and white, just many shades of grey.
-
Entirely up to you what you intend to say and do with your posts. I would be perfectly content if on this thread you constructed your posts around ..."Feedback for any improvements of the Madeleine McCann board." ... then it isn't up to me what you choose to do.
But you just told me to stay on topic IN THIS THREAD.
Read back, kimosabi, I was on topic until you gegged in.
The irony of you attempting to moderate my posts suggesting improvements to the board in a thread entitled 'Feedback for any improvements of the Madeleine McCann board' is stark.
-
Very profound and very true. There is no black and white, just many shades of grey.
It's not mine, alas, I'm no Solzhenitsyn.
-
Unfortunately i think your bias does cloud your judgement....Rob...imo...and its been noted by others...mounted a campaign of harassment against me...that fortunately has been stopped
I categorically deny that.
-
Ok...for the sake of harmony Im open to that suggestion
Get abducted then.
-
There should be no issue with moderating when done properly it is good. Blatant bias and censorship from mods with an agenda is bad.
The very idea we have banned words in an adult forum is pathetic and it only adds to the snowflake loud,noisy hysteria,. Being offended on someones behalf is hilarious. I hope they get offended more often. Just to they can take part in any discussion.
Name calling- Kate loves a good snipe.
Fking W@nkers, tweedle dee -tweedle dum 'her plummy voice' (PF). to the very people who only wanted to help find her daughter. shameful.
-
There should be no issue with moderating when done properly it is good. Blatant bias and censorship from mods with an agenda is bad.
The very idea we have banned words in an adult forum is pathetic and it only adds to the snowflake loud,noisy hysteria,. Being offended on someones behalf is hilarious. I hope they get offended more often. Just to they can take part in any discussion.
Name calling- Kate loves a good snipe.
Fking W@nkers, tweedle dee -tweedle dum 'her plummy voice' (PF). to the very people who only wanted to help find her daughter. shameful.
You’re wasted on this forum. Again.
-
Good to see the forum running with practically no moderation
-
Good to see the forum running with practically no moderation
With only a couple of posters, its not hard.
-
I have observed an increasing tendency by some posters recently to flaunt the forum rules. There is no place for cheap remarks, sniping or goading on these boards. Do not assume that your comments go unnoticed by the admin team.
The forum rules are there to protect all users from unnecssary abuse, they should be adhered to strictly.
Admin
-
With only a couple of posters, its not hard.
But then it depends who those posters are...IMO
-
In my opinion one huge improvement to the board would be if members showed a little self discipline by posting only on the thread topic under discussion.
-
In my opinion one huge improvement to the board would be if members showed a little self discipline by posting only on the thread topic under discussion.
Will you be showing a little self discipline? is it do as you say, and not as you do?
-
Will you be showing a little self discipline? is it do as you say, and not as you do?
Moderators have to make requests at times. These requests will appear to be off topic. It is the nature of the role.
-
Moderators have to make requests at times. These requests will appear to be off topic. It is the nature of the role.
If you say so... However, many threads get taken off topic and threats are made, all the while the mods can continue with the off topic.
So we do not want ambiguity. we want off topic posts and name calling, goading, and inventing scurrilous personas attributed to posters to be removed instantly! no if's no buts.
If this doesn't happen- MODs lose their integrity and respect. and there is no point in them just adding the obligatory 'keep on topic' post.
-
Will you be showing a little self discipline? is it do as you say, and not as you do?
The rules apply to every member and rightly so.
-
Feedback... oh the title has changed. I thought this was about moderation issues.
Anyway, feedback to improve the board. Since we have a ' list of not nice words that cause offence. Such as the typing a different spelling of the word book.
I suggest posts which contain slurs, and in particular 'mccann bashing. mccann slag fest and other implied nasty posts from sceptics (whose crime is being an independant thinker)-as this brings the board into disrepute in my most humble opinion. These words are passive aggresive and are being used by supporters and (not allowed to say who else) to goad and shout down people when the supporters cannot face the argument or can offer no real debate. only excuses such as:
Maybe Kate didnt hear properly,
it was a typing error by PJ
lost in translation
mis interpertated
mis understood
they were stressed
they were upset
the list is long and meanigless to the many questions being asked.
point me to the moderation platfom so that I may vent my anger and display outrage lol ^*&&
-
Feedback... oh the title has changed. I thought this was about moderation issues.
Anyway, feedback to improve the board. Since we have a ' list of not nice words that cause offence. Such as the typing a different spelling of the word book.
I suggest posts which contain slurs, and in particular 'mccann bashing. mccann slag fest and other implied nasty posts from sceptics (whose crime is being an independant thinker)-as this brings the board into disrepute in my most humble opinion. These words are passive aggresive and are being used by supporters and (not allowed to say who else) to goad and shout down people when the supporters cannot face the argument or can offer no real debate. only excuses such as:
Maybe Kate didnt hear properly,
it was a typing error by PJ
lost in translation
mis interpertated
mis understood
they were stressed
they were upset
the list is long and meanigless to the many questions being asked.
point me to the moderation platfom so that I may vent my anger and display outrage lol ^*&&
Actually, wouldn't it be easier for you if Admin insisted that all members sing from exactly the same hymnbook and banned all dissent and all dissenters on sight. I believe that is the system on some other fora.
-
Feedback... oh the title has changed. I thought this was about moderation issues.
Anyway, feedback to improve the board. Since we have a ' list of not nice words that cause offence. Such as the typing a different spelling of the word book.
I suggest posts which contain slurs, and in particular 'mccann bashing. mccann slag fest and other implied nasty posts from sceptics (whose crime is being an independant thinker)-as this brings the board into disrepute in my most humble opinion. These words are passive aggresive and are being used by supporters and (not allowed to say who else) to goad and shout down people when the supporters cannot face the argument or can offer no real debate. only excuses such as:
Maybe Kate didnt hear properly,
it was a typing error by PJ
lost in translation
mis interpertated
mis understood
they were stressed
they were upset
the list is long and meanigless to the many questions being asked.
point me to the moderation platfom so that I may vent my anger and display outrage lol ^*&&
Of course they were stressed of course they were upset, they are facts, so do you want factual words banned?
-
Could we stay on topic please guys. TY
-
The irony of deleting my post feeding back in the feedback thread is not lost on me.
-
The irony of deleting my post feeding back in the feedback thread is not lost on me.
Me too. How did we offend? Were we off topic, attacking others or what? Imo we're not alone, so why us?
First two pages of this thread.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849
(personal attack)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556889#msg556889
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=post;quote=556888;topic=11040.15
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556890#msg556890
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556895#msg556895
(off topic, making assumptions and being insulting)
-
Me too. How did we offend? Were we off topic, attacking others or what? Imo we're not alone, so why us?
First two pages of this thread.
https://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11029.msg556849#msg556849
(personal attack)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556889#msg556889
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?action=post;quote=556888;topic=11040.15
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556890#msg556890
(off topic)
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11040.msg556895#msg556895
(off topic, making assumptions and being insulting)
It's pathetic. Man to man marking is killing the joint. 1 mooderator for 2 active posters - not an exaggeration.
-
It's pathetic. Man to man marking is killing the joint. 1 mooderator for 2 active posters - not an exaggeration.
That's why they like to drive posters away,cheeky monkey,sunny,snowgirl,the most recent,all imo of course.
-
That's why they like to drive posters away,cheeky monkey,sunny,snowgirl,the most recent,all imo of course.
Holly started this thread with the intention of generating a discussion to drive improvement on the board. I tried to get the ball rolling by suggesting one great improvement might be for members to post On Topic whichever thread they might be on. A positive suggestion and open for discussion I thought, but there you go.
I've done my bit so have you any positive suggestions to make about how to improve the board ... or are you content with it as is?
-
It’s the 2nd November, time to ditch the Happy Halloween message now thanks.
-
It’s the 2nd November, time to ditch the Happy Halloween message now thanks.
I would never have guessed that John was American. 8(8-))
-
Holly started this thread with the intention of generating a discussion to drive improvement on the board. I tried to get the ball rolling by suggesting one great improvement might be for members to post On Topic whichever thread they might be on. A positive suggestion and open for discussion I thought, but there you go.
I've done my bit so have you any positive suggestions to make about how to improve the board ... or are you content with it as is?
I think you're on a wind up mission kid. You're deleting the suggestions!
-
the problem we have is modertors continue to let other moderators post off topic...and continually break forum rules
-
the problem we have is modertors continue to let other moderators post off topic...and continually break forum rules
Some mods on this particular board are above the rules as has been evidenced. Not banned fpr name calling. McCann bashing as a slur on free indepemdanyt thinkers is pathetic and should be put on that long list of banned words.
-
If members wish to comment re the above please do so on this thread.
-
If members wish to comment re the above please do so on this thread.
The problem with that is that the suggestions being posted here were being deleted - which is the quintessence of irony.
-
The problem with that is that the suggestions being posted here were being deleted - which is the quintessence of irony.
Posts are only normally removed if they are abusive or off topic.
-
Posts are only normally removed if they are abusive or off topic.
pffft.
We'll never know will we, as they're now vaporised with no notice or explanation.
But I can confirm they were simply unpalatable to one or two.
The problem with 'power', such as it is, is that it needs to be legitimate and seen to be used legitimately; otherwise you organically and naturally foster dissent.
-
Posts are only normally removed if they are abusive or off topic.
as you are online cold you clarify the opinion posted as fact rule...admin posted yesterday it should be obseved but some posters seem to be ignoring it
-
pffft.
We'll never know will we, as they're now vaporised with no notice or explanation.
But I can confirm they were simply unpalatable to one or two.
The problem with 'power', such as it is, is that it needs to be legitimate and seen to be used legitimately; otherwise you organically and naturally foster dissent.
Excellent post Herr General! :) I do wish John would take this on board.
8**8:/:
As my gran would say "more to be pitied than scolded"
(&^& @ Brietta removing most of my very emotional support for my elders.
AND to think Brietta made a claim to Holly that she never does this. OMG tooooooo funny.
-
Excellent post Herr General! :) I do wish John would take this on board.
8**8:/:
As my gran would say "more to be pitied than scolded"
Noted my dear.
-
as you are online cold you clarify the opinion posted as fact rule...admin posted yesterday it should be obseved but some posters seem to be ignoring it
Its very simple, anything offered as an opinion should be accompanied by an "IMO" at some stage so as to distinguish it from an accepted fact.
-
Its very simple, anything offered as an opinion should be accompanied by an "IMO" at some stage so as to distinguish it from an accepted fact.
Why is Angelo exempt from this rule?
-
Its very simple, anything offered as an opinion should be accompanied by an "IMO" at some stage so as to distinguish it from an accepted fact.
Except for those who don't know the difference.
-
Except for those who don't know the difference.
You need an imo in that post... So it seems your post applies to yourself ..
I find you to be a persistent offender. Let's see
-
Except for those who don't know the difference.
Like Angelo, certainly.
-
Like Angelo, certainly.
Then we ahve holly who refuses to accept the rule exists.....mods need to lead by example to earn respect
-
Then we ahve holly who refuses to accept the rule exists.....mods need to lead by example to earn respect
I’m still waiting for clarity on the libel rule. Holly has clearly stated the view that she believes Gerry McCann lied in his witness statement about doing a visual check on Madeleine. Was a time we could not express such a view, seems now we can.
-
I’m still waiting for clarity on the libel rule. Holly has clearly stated the view that she believes Gerry McCann lied in his witness statement about doing a visual check on Madeleine. Was a time we could not express such a view, seems now we can.
Could you provide a link to this libelous statement by Holly please?
-
Could you provide a link to this libelous statement by Holly please?
No.
-
No.
I think the board would be improved if people provided evidence to support their accusations. Without evidence they are merely offering opinions, not facts.
-
I think the board would be improved if people provided evidence to support their accusations. Without evidence they are merely offering opinions, not facts.
I for one provide evidence but you just don't accept
-
I think the board would be improved if people provided evidence to support their accusations. Without evidence they are merely offering opinions, not facts.
I think the board could be greatly improved if members sprinkled their posts with a little kindness before hitting the post button.
-
I think the board would be improved if people provided evidence to support their accusations. Without evidence they are merely offering opinions, not facts.
I know I'm right, Holly knows what she's written. I don't need to prove it to you.
-
No.
Is it libel when someone says 'I tend to think'?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562608#msg562608
-
I think the board could be greatly improved if members sprinkled their posts with a little kindness before hitting the post button.
Are you referring to me?
-
Is it libel when someone says 'I tend to think'?
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=11103.msg562608#msg562608
I would say it is... Do you disagree
-
This is what I wanted clarity on. Was a time you couldn't write anything libellous on this forum no matter how you couched it. Since Holly appeared on the scene apparently it's OK to write "I seem to think" before any libellous statement, thus removing its libellous status. CLARITY PLEASE!
-
This is what I wanted clarity on. Was a time you couldn't write anything libellous on this forum no matter how you couched it. Since Holly appeared on the scene apparently it's OK to write "I seem to think" before any libellous statement, thus removing its libellous status. CLARITY PLEASE!
Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion.
Quoted here by Ferryman;
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7248.msg337957#msg337957
-
"I seem to think the McCanns murdered their child in cold blood and tossed the body in the bin". Not libellous?
You see I think that passes the test of 'opinion', with the prefix of 'I seem to think', which, by default, the statement refers to the person's opinion. In my opinion.
-
You see I think that passes the test of 'opinion', with the prefix of 'I seem to think', which, by default, the statement refers to the person's opinion. In my opinion.
I don't think you can avoid a libel charge by simply claiming it's your opinion...
-
I don't think you can avoid a libel charge by simply claiming it's your opinion...
That's why I stated that it passes the 'opinion' test. The statement would come under scrutiny from other, more nuanced tests will also, such as damage to reputation, etc.
-
Publication need only be to one person, but it must be a statement which claims to be fact and is not clearly identified as an opinion.
Quoted here by Ferryman;
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=7248.msg337957#msg337957
That looks like American law
-
That's why I stated that it passes the 'opinion' test. The statement would come under scrutiny from other, more nuanced tests will also, such as damage to reputation, etc.
Then you should refer to what you mean by the opinion test... Stating that something is your opinion is not a defence against libel... It's more complex
-
Funny then how we have been repeatedly told that sceptics are not allowed to post their theories about how the McCanns did away with their child on this forum. Surely a theory is just an opinion? If this is the case, then let's here those theories right here, right now! In the past the response has always been an accusation that I was trying to get people into trouble with the libel rules of the forum. Good to know this is no longer an issue.
-
Then you should refer to what you mean by the opinion test... Stating that something is your opinion is not a defence against libel... It's more complex
That's what I said, dear old fruit.
-
That's what I said, dear old fruit.
It's the Honest Opinion test for starters and simply claiming a statement to be an opinion doesn't pass it
-
It's the Honest Opinion test for starters and simply claiming a statement to be an opinion doesn't pass it
That's what I said.
-
That's why I stated that it passes the 'opinion' test. The statement would come under scrutiny from other, more nuanced tests will also, such as damage to reputation, etc.
I think Gerry McCann might struggle to show that his reputation was damaged by someone on an internet forum.
-
I think Gerry McCann might struggle to show that his reputation was damaged by someone on an internet forum.
I agree, let's hope John agrees too and we can dispense with the ridiculous rule that sceptics cannot write their detailed opinions on how the McCanns committed such a perfidious crime.
-
I think Gerry McCann might struggle to show that his reputation was damaged by someone on an internet forum.
Not when you've got bellends making videos about the Podestas / Freud / lizard people being involved in some global paedo conspiracy. (Not my opinion, just in case, etc)
-
So, for clarity: You may write:
"I seem to think the McCanns are lying b........s who covered up the death of their child".
You may not write:
"The McCanns are lying b........s who covered up the death of their child"
Are we all agreed? John, please confirm.
-
So, for clarity: You may write:
"I seem to think the McCanns are lying b......s who covered up the death of their child".
You may not write:
"The McCanns are lying b......s who covered up the death of their child"
Are we all agreed? John, please confirm.
All I ask is a level playing field and rules being applied to everyone equally. IMO is ignored by some without consequences.
"And please don't worry. No one is going to sue anyone on this little part of The Internet.
Amaral is an arsehole. Will that do you."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2724.msg259876;topicseen#msg259876
-
All I ask is a level playing field and rules being applied to everyone equally. IMO is ignored by some without consequences.
"And please don't worry. No one is going to sue anyone on this little part of The Internet.
Amaral is an arsehole. Will that do you."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2724.msg259876;topicseen#msg259876
I seem to think Amaral is an arsehole, will that do you?
-
I think Gerry McCann might struggle to show that his reputation was damaged by someone on an internet forum saying in 2019 that they were inclined to think he didn't actually enter his children's bedroom at 9.05 (ish) on the evening of 3rd May 2007.
I agree... And similarly if I say I think amaral is an absolutely pathetic excuse for a detective the same applies. The unfairness is that it's been quite acceptable here to insult the mccanns.. And those who support them ...but criticism if amaral has, seen posts removed
-
All I ask is a level playing field and rules being applied to everyone equally. IMO is ignored by some without consequences.
"And please don't worry. No one is going to sue anyone on this little part of The Internet.
Amaral is an arsehole. Will that do you."
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=2724.msg259876;topicseen#msg259876
You are often guilty of stating opinion as fact
-
I seem to think Amaral is an arsehole, will that do you?
It's more acceptable than the post I quoted. My point is that such posts are allowed to stand. Just to illustrate further how long will this post be allowed to stand?
Gerry McCann is an arsehole.
-
You are often guilty of stating opinion as fact
....and you often state that nothing posted on here matters.
-
It's more acceptable than the post I quoted. My point is that such posts are allowed to stand. Just to illustrate further how long will this post be allowed to stand?
Gerry McCann is an arsehole.
It’s not libel though, it’s just an insult. Now, Gerry is a child-murdering arsehole is a different kettle of fish.
-
It’s not libel though, it’s just an insult. Now, Gerry is a child-murdering arsehole is a different kettle of fish.
That was cathartic, wasn't it? It's a turning point, getting it out like that.
'The lady doth protest too much, methinks'.
-
That was cathartic, wasn't it? It's a turning point, getting it out like that.
'The lady doth protest too much, methinks'.
Which lady is protesting too much? Kindly provide a cite.
-
Which lady is protesting too much? Kindly provide a cite.
You want me to go in to General Rant Mode, I can tell. Look how that ended last time, Donald.
-
You want me to go in to General Rant Mode, I can tell. Look how that ended last time, Donald.
You seem to have lost the plot already, ta ta.
-
You seem to have lost the plot already, ta ta.
and a 'ta ta' is also scouse slang, but you didn't know that.
-
and a 'ta ta' is also scouse slang, but you didn't know that.
My grandparents used to say it and they are from Birmingham. What was your point?
-
My grandparents used to say it and they are from Birmingham. What was your point?
A 'ta ta' is a derogatory term used to describe an imbecile. Just saying.
-
A 'ta ta' is a derogatory term used to describe and imbecile. Just saying.
That's news to me. Did you just make that up? Are you not familiar with the term "Ta Ta For Now" aka TTFN? I don't know what game you're playing but I want out.
-
It's more acceptable than the post I quoted. My point is that such posts are allowed to stand. Just to illustrate further how long will this post be allowed to stand?
Gerry McCann is an arsehole.
This sort of comment isn't worth the time of day. Let alone deleting.
-
A 'ta ta' is a derogatory term used to describe an imbecile. Just saying.
Nonsense.
-
Nonsense.
Tata | Définition français canadien | Je Parle Québécois
www.je-parle-quebecois.com
Tata : Désigne un imbécile, un idiot. Au Québec, "faire le tata" veut dire "faire l'idiot". C'est un terme péjoratif utilisé dans le langage courant québécois désignant ...
-
Tata | Définition français canadien | Je Parle Québécois
www.je-parle-quebecois.com
Tata : Désigne un imbécile, un idiot. Au Québec, "faire le tata" veut dire "faire l'idiot". C'est un terme péjoratif utilisé dans le langage courant québécois désignant ...
Hmm. Lots of Quebecois in Liverpool now are there?
-
My grandparents used to say it and they are from Birmingham. What was your point?
In Birmingham its te ra......or even te ra a bit..in the black country
cilla black used to use ta ra...so perhaps the generals wrong again
-
In Birmingham its te ra......or even te ra a bit
Yeah well my grandparents said it, it it was in widespread use across the UK in wartime, “ta ta for now”. Anyway, this is tiresome, I certainly have never heard of ta ta as an insult. I think the General has just made that up, for some mad reason.
-
Yeah well my grandparents said it, it it was in widespread use across the UK in wartime, “ta ta for now”. Anyway, this is tiresome, I certainly have never heard of ta ta as an insult. I think the General has just made that up, for some mad reason.
your grandparents may have been posh...in liverpool its ta ra too..
TA RA
Ta Ra is scouse for:
Goodbye
https://www.scousedictionary.co.uk/ta-ra/
-
A 'ta ta' is a derogatory term used to describe an imbecile. Just saying.
Barmpot where I grew up.
-
In Birmingham its te ra......or even te ra a bit..in the black country
cilla black used to use ta ra...so perhaps the generals wrong again
Tara means goodbye. Different.
-
Tara means goodbye. Different.
What do the T T in “TTFN” stand for?
-
TOPIC please. Or something which will pass for topic. TY
-
What do the T T in “TTFN” stand for?
Military term originally, old chap.
Further coined by Sir Kenneth Arthur Dodd, famous Liverpudlian.
Totally different phrase.
But military greetings would be a great addition to the forum.
-
Military term originally, old chap.
Further coined by Sir Kenneth Arthur Dodd, famous Liverpudlian.
Totally different phrase.
But military greetings would be a great addition to the forum.
Totally different phrase to what? What does the T T stand for?
-
Totally different phrase to what? What does the T T stand for?
Tourist Trophy. Which is somewhat ironic when you think about it.
But I reckon the introduction of obscure acronyms may be a useful addition to the forum.
-
Tourist Trophy. Which is somewhat ironic when you think about it.
But I reckon the introduction of obscure acronyms may be a useful addition to the forum.
You’re just being silly now, it seems to me.
-
Barmpot where I grew up.
My sister in law has used that term " he has gone ta ta" it means gone crazy or he is ta ta = mad ,stupid ,crazy.
Oh the play on words from snowflakes who get upset on behalf of others, but dish out vile snide remarks themselves. you gotta laff. LOUDLY!
@)(++(*
-
My sister in law has used that term " he has gone ta ta" it means gone crazy or he is ta ta = mad ,stupid ,crazy.
Oh the play on words from snowflakes who get upset on behalf of others, but dish out vile snide remarks themselves. you gotta laff. LOUDLY!
@)(++(*
Laugh yourself sick, I did not use the term ta ta to mean anything derogatory, and that is a fact. I have never heard the term used in a derogatory way, I am not from Liverpool where it allegedly is an insult and I challenge anyone to provide an independent cite demonstrating the use of this term in an offensive way.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ta_ta