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

[G-Unit]

I disagree. I for one am quite happy to be enlightened by new facts from any quarter. The problem is that when things which can’t be readily explained are brought up someone will immediately explain them.

Often by 'explaining' how people's situation and feelings affected their behaviour. That's not a factual explanation. it's invented by those who think they know something they can't possibly know in my opinion.

[kizzy]

No, because until you have walked in their shoes and experienced what they have experienced how can you really judge them to have behaved improperly or inappropriately?  Even if they had both gone off the rails and turned to drink, drugs, infidelities, even if they’d decided to give up on Madeleine after a year or two and gone quiet never to be heard of again, IMO that would all be quite understandable and me slagging them off on the internet doesn’t help anybody IMO. .   I think they receive more than enough criticism from sceptics without supporters joining in too!

It shouldn't be about the mcns and how they feel - they brought that on themselves

It should be about whether they were involved in maddie's disappearance.

Some thing that maddie did not bring on herself.

[Vertigo Swirl]

I disagree. I for one am quite happy to be enlightened by new facts from any quarter. The problem is that when things which can’t be readily explained are brought up someone will immediately explain them.

Why is that a problem?  IMO if this forum was moderated in such a way that ALL emotive, judging language and ad hom attacks were banned we might get somewhere, but as it is we are all too deeply entrenched and emotionally involved, not just in the case, but in the argument itself.  We cannot seem to discus it entirely dispassionately or objectively IMO.

[G-Unit]

Why is that a problem?  IMO if this forum was moderated in such a way that ALL emotive, judging language and ad hom attacks were banned we might get somewhere, but as it is we are all too deeply entrenched and emotionally involved, not just in the case, but in the argument itself.  We cannot seem to discus it entirely dispassionately or objectively IMO.

Are you on the same forum as me? Crying foul seems to be a habit rather than a description of reality. The moderators are subject to rules too. It's certainly not to blame for a lack of objective debate. It's the lack of objectivity which is the cause of that in my opinion.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Are you on the same forum as me? Crying foul seems to be a habit rather than a description of reality. The moderators are subject to rules too. It's certainly not to blame for a lack of objective debate. It's the lack of objectivity which is the cause of that in my opinion.

I am on the same forum as you and I am allowed to express my opinion.  I don’t quite understand what you mean by the above anyway.  There are certain individuals who come along usually late in the evening and post in most disparaging, unobjective and troll like way which has the habit of destoying any reasonable debate that was being had.  I mostly ignore them now anyway but surely you can see that if emotive, goading, judgemental emoticon-heavy posts were removed the quality of debate might improve overall and people may be more inclined to have a more nuanced discussion?

[G-Unit]

I am on the same forum as you and I am allowed to express my opinion.  I don’t quite understand what you mean by the above anyway.  There are certain individuals who come along usually late in the evening and post in most disparaging, unobjective and troll like way which has the habit of destoying any reasonable debate that was being had.  I mostly ignore them now anyway but surely you can see that if emotive, goading, judgemental emoticon-heavy posts were removed the quality of debate might improve overall and people may be more inclined to have a more nuanced discussion?

I just wish sometimes that there was less complaining. Everything seems to be someone else's fault; the moderators, other members. I just take responsibility for what I post and ignore all those who wish to disrupt unless they attack me directly. Life isn't fair, people don't always agree and the only person you can control is yourself. I think my style is nuanced and you have asked me to be less subtle.

[Mr Gray]

I just wish sometimes that there was less complaining. Everything seems to be someone else's fault; the moderators, other members. I just take responsibility for what I post and ignore all those who wish to disrupt unless they attack me directly. Life isn't fair, people don't always agree and the only person you can control is yourself. I think my style is nuanced and you have asked me to be less subtle.

Perhaps some of us have something  to complain about... I made, a response to one of your  posts... Both you and rob replied... All polite, and within the rules... But the posts, were deleted... Why do you think that was

[slartibartfast]

Perhaps some of us have something  to complain about... I made, a response to one of your  posts... Both you and rob replied... All polite, and within the rules... But the posts, were deleted... Why do you think that was

Because it had degenerated into another vehicle for argument rather than a discussion about the case.

[G-Unit]

Perhaps some of us have something  to complain about... I made, a response to one of your  posts... Both you and rob replied... All polite, and within the rules... But the posts, were deleted... Why do you think that was

That;s the difference between us. I too noticed something I posted had disappeared, didn't know why, but accepted it and moved on.

[Mr Gray]

That;s the difference between us. I too noticed something I posted had disappeared, didn't know why, but accepted it and moved on.

the diference is that your post was allowed to stand whilst  my counter post has been removed....thats why you were able to move on...im not surprised you dont see the difference

[G-Unit]

In your opinion of course... I feel the use if the word invention to be wrong but you have allowed that description to stand and not allowed it to be countered... That is totally unfair.. Imo.. It's also offensive to suggest posters are inventing things

You were one of three who had posts deleted, but the only one who feels aggrieved.

Try phrasing your answer differently, bearing in mind that I was referring to posters claiming to know what others unknown to them were thinking at a certain point in time. How can they know that? Empathising doesn't include mind reading. does it?

[Vertigo Swirl]

I just wish sometimes that there was less complaining. Everything seems to be someone else's fault; the moderators, other members. I just take responsibility for what I post and ignore all those who wish to disrupt unless they attack me directly. Life isn't fair, people don't always agree and the only person you can control is yourself. I think my style is nuanced and you have asked me to be less subtle.

I don’t think I’ve expressed myself as clearly as I could.  Do you ever concede that the other side may have a point, or do you feel that by doing so you would you lose too much face, or jeopardise your whole position?   Would you ever admit to being wrong, or do you believe are you always right?   Rhetorical questions, not specifically addressed to you.  I believe none of us could easily concede that the other side has made a valid point and that many of us struggle to admit when the are wrong about something. 

[Mr Gray]

You were one of three who had posts deleted, but the only one who feels aggrieved.

Try phrasing your answer differently, bearing in mind that I was referring to posters claiming to know what others unknown to them were thinking at a certain point in time. How can they know that? Empathising doesn't include mind reading. does it?

I feel agreived because you were allowed to make your point and I wasnt

No it doesn't have to include  mindreading... If someone has suffered a, tragedy it's not mind reading or invention to think that they might act in a certain way.. It's common sense based on reason... No invention

[slartibartfast]

I don’t think I’ve expressed myself as clearly as I could.  Do you ever concede that the other side may have a point, or do you feel that by doing so you would you lose too much face, or jeopardise your whole position?   Would you ever admit to being wrong, or do you believe are you always right?   Rhetorical questions, not specifically addressed to you.  I believe none of us could easily concede that the other side has made a valid point and that many of us struggle to admit when the are wrong about something.

As a sceptic I can accept other opinions, possibilities and facts. As I don’t have a rigid theory on what happened whatever the final outcome is, it won’t disturb me greatly. This isn’t a religion so don’t expect me to swayed by other’s beliefs.

[slartibartfast]

I feel agreived because you were allowed to make your point and I wasnt

No it doesn't have to include  mindreading... If someone has suffered a, tragedy it's not mind reading or invention to think that they might act in a certain way.. It's common sense based on reason... No invention

If it is couched in the proper terms it isn’t a problem, it is a problem when it is stated as fact aka invented.