"Start by Asking Yourself What is a Supporter and Work on from There”

[Vertigo Swirl]

It has been well over a year Vertigo Swirl remember. I have read an awful lot on many forums both sceptic and supporter forums. I was trying to get a handle on why she would post what she did and why others would compile a dossier and hurt this poor woman so much. I have even looked at twitter and news paper articles and videos on youtube too.

I did get my eyes opened though of course.

Of course...
ETA Brenda Leyland died in 2015, did you only hear about her sad demise a year or so ago?

[Sunny]

Of course...
ETA Brenda Leyland died in 2015, did you only hear about her sad demise a year or so ago?

Wow It only seems like yesterday since I was doing the ironing whilst watching the rolling news on her and feeling sorry for that lady.   Then when she died I started looking into why it had happened.

I have moved house twice since then though so obviously my sense of time is somewhat awry.

No wonder I have had time to read up so much then.  Sometimes it seems life passes in a blur.

[G-Unit]

They, or those with similar views, worked very hard to find those they disagreed with;

snips/
After the death of a woman who targeted the McCann family with online abuse, Channel 4 News finds a website that has assembled 27 dossiers on people it claims post “McCann hate”.

They are hosted on a Wikipedia-style site called “Mccann Hate Exposed”. It was removed from the web sometime in the past week.

A dossier about Leyland’s account “Sweepyface” was hosted on the Wiki site, but it is unclear if this is the same dossier that was handed to the police or the same information that was used by Sky News.
https://www.channel4.com/news/mccann-internet-troll-hunting-site-deleted-after-death

I thought I'd have a look at this site. I have to admire their work ethic. Listing people (with real names added if known) and their tweets or other comments. What I can't work out is their motive. Information or action?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I thought I'd have a look at this site. I have to admire their work ethic. Listing people (with real names added if known) and their tweets or other comments. What I can't work out is their motive. Information or action?

Do you have a link?

[G-Unit]

Do you have a link?

I found it on Wayback. Just type the name in;

https://web.archive.org/web/20180301000000*/http://mccannhateexposed.pbworks.com/

I think it may still exist, but hidden. It was picked up earlier this year. There is a link here too, but it seems to be sign in only these days.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewforum.php?f=143

There does seem to be a connection between the two sites;

It has come to our attention that the anti McCanns are quoting as fact, a Channel 4 article which suggests that the site they refer to as the "hate wiki" was "deleted" after Brenda Leylands death. In fact, it was made private on Thursday 2nd October, two days before her death - a conscious decision so that it didn’t distract from or compromise any police investigation. Additionally, comparison of the wiki with the Sky report about the dossier clearly determines that the wiki is NOT the dossier. Nor, as has been suggested, does the wiki contain information of a personal nature other than that which was already contained in the public profiles of the tweets and posts
themselves.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7538

What an unpleasant forum. Their main interest seems to lie in criticising and name-calling.

[Erngath]

I found it on Wayback. Just type the name in;

https://web.archive.org/web/20180301000000*/http://mccannhateexposed.pbworks.com/

I think it may still exist, but hidden. It was picked up earlier this year. There is a link here too, but it seems to be sign in only these days.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewforum.php?f=143

There does seem to be a connection between the two sites;

It has come to our attention that the anti McCanns are quoting as fact, a Channel 4 article which suggests that the site they refer to as the "hate wiki" was "deleted" after Brenda Leylands death. In fact, it was made private on Thursday 2nd October, two days before her death - a conscious decision so that it didn’t distract from or compromise any police investigation. Additionally, comparison of the wiki with the Sky report about the dossier clearly determines that the wiki is NOT the dossier. Nor, as has been suggested, does the wiki contain information of a personal nature other than that which was already contained in the public profiles of the tweets and posts
themselves.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7538

What an unpleasant forum. Their main interest seems to lie in criticising and name-calling.

My goodness!
Such hypocrisy.

Am I mistaken?
Are you a member of that ghastly site  The complete mystery of .....??

[jassi]

I found it on Wayback. Just type the name in;

https://web.archive.org/web/20180301000000*/http://mccannhateexposed.pbworks.com/

I think it may still exist, but hidden. It was picked up earlier this year. There is a link here too, but it seems to be sign in only these days.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewforum.php?f=143

There does seem to be a connection between the two sites;

It has come to our attention that the anti McCanns are quoting as fact, a Channel 4 article which suggests that the site they refer to as the "hate wiki" was "deleted" after Brenda Leylands death. In fact, it was made private on Thursday 2nd October, two days before her death - a conscious decision so that it didn’t distract from or compromise any police investigation. Additionally, comparison of the wiki with the Sky report about the dossier clearly determines that the wiki is NOT the dossier. Nor, as has been suggested, does the wiki contain information of a personal nature other than that which was already contained in the public profiles of the tweets and posts
themselves.

https://www.stopthemyths.info/viewtopic.php?f=149&t=7538

What an unpleasant forum. Their main interest seems to lie in criticising and name-calling.

I entirely agree, kindergarten level.  I landed up there once (followed a link) - never again.

[G-Unit]

My goodness!
Such hypocrisy.

Am I mistaken?
Are you a member of that ghastly site  The complete mystery of .....??

Are you calling me a hypocrite?

[Erngath]

Are you calling me a hypocrite?

It's not against forum rules
Faithlilly called me such last night.

That ghastly site where they have taken a sweet photo of an innocent little girl and renamed it the "Lolitta" photo.
That ghastly site where they show sympathy for a known paedophile, because his name was linked at one time to Madeleine's disappearance
That ghastly site where they routinely accuse named people of being paedofiles.

If you are a member there, then yes  you are a hypocrite to decry any other forum.

If you are not amember of that forum, then you are not a hypocrite and I will apologize.

[Lace]

It's not against forum rules
Faithlilly called me such last night.

That ghastly site where they have taken a sweet photo of an innocent little girl and renamed it the "Lolitta" photo.
That ghastly site where they show sympathy for a known paedophile, because his name was linked at one time to Madeleine's disappearance
That ghastly site where they routinely accuse named people of being paedofiles.

If you are a member there, then yes  you are a hypocrite to decry any other forum.

If you are not amember of that forum, then you are not a hypocrite and I will apologize.

I saw the posts accusing people of being paedophiles,  shocking and very disturbing,  disgusting site.

[faithlilly]

My goodness!
Such hypocrisy.

Am I mistaken?
Are you a member of that ghastly site  The complete mystery of .....??

I take it you’re a member ?

[faithlilly]

I saw the posts accusing people of being paedophiles,  shocking and very disturbing,  disgusting site.

Yet one of the Stopthemyths members was a paedophile.

[Robittybob1]

Yet one of the Stopthemyths members was a paedophile.

That needs a cite.

[Erngath]

I take it you’re a member ?

I believe you know that I am.

[G-Unit]

It's not against forum rules
Faithlilly called me such last night.

That ghastly site where they have taken a sweet photo of an innocent little girl and renamed it the "Lolitta" photo.
That ghastly site where they show sympathy for a known paedophile, because his name was linked at one time to Madeleine's disappearance
That ghastly site where they routinely accuse named people of being paedofiles.

If you are a member there, then yes  you are a hypocrite to decry any other forum.

If you are not amember of that forum, then you are not a hypocrite and I apologize.

How interesting. You seem to be saying if a person is member of a forum they are responsible for and in agreement with everything posted on that forum. Guilty by association in other words.