EllanVannin and Anniebach

Yes, that’s why I can’t get a handle on the personal comments thing, at all.

Because some are ok and some are not ok and I can’t work out the vital difference.

Some actual examples with an explanation as to why would be helpful for me.

Norah

Doodledog

Allira

Downton Abbey? 🤔

Of all threads?
Did the Dowager Countess take offence at something she said?

Downton Abbey?? Does anyone have a link, please?

The tread was about a film, I've never seen the film. However I understand some people thought it was 'historical' and others disagreed.

Hair tongs for curling?

Well, I've just looked at the first couple of pages and quite frankly, I find some of it quite funny!

A new? poster called MatildaMay takes offence at something which Germanshepherdsmum said to her which was fairly innocuous - GSM's posts get deleted but then quoted and this new poster takes offence and is extremely rude in response - but her posts do not get deleted. Why?

It looks like a storm in a bone china teacup to me and why anyone should have been banned over it is a mystery.

MatildaMay may not have been a new poster of course as she inferred that GSM was always rude. 🤔

Rather ironic!!

I'm not talking rubbish. Her posts on the thread I am talking about are not there, although references to them are.

A quick search did show me that .

Doodledog
Whoever said that growstuffs posts have been erased are talking rubbish, it doesn’t happen.
A quick search shows that.

Norah

Here www.gransnet.com/forums/chat/1338392-Downton-Abbey-electrical-curling-tongs

Oof! What an unpleasant thread.

Here www.gransnet.com/forums/chat/1338392-Downton-Abbey-electrical-curling-tongs

Doodledog

Allira

Downton Abbey? 🤔

Of all threads?
Did the Dowager Countess take offence at something she said?

Downton Abbey?? Does anyone have a link, please?

The tread was about a film, I've never seen the film. However I understand some people thought it was 'historical' and others disagreed.

Hair tongs for curling?

Allira

As you know from Pensions threads, Doodledog, I have disagreed with you and said so!!

I know, and that is as it should be.

I think we may be at cross purposes on this thread for some reason. I was confused as to why you were quoting my posts and talking about double standards, but I don't see you as someone who makes snide comments, and nor do I, so wasn't making them about you either .

Allira

Downton Abbey? 🤔

Of all threads?
Did the Dowager Countess take offence at something she said?

Downton Abbey?? Does anyone have a link, please?

Probably VioletSky as I'm sure she was banned but I can't remember why.

Downton Abbey? 🤔

Of all threads?
Did the Dowager Countess take offence at something she said?

I think it was a thread about Downton Abbey and/or realism in TV dramas.

Allira

Maremia

I think GNs it depends on which posts are reported.
Perhaps no-one reported the comments about the male politician.

No, probably not, just argued on the thread!
Much better.

I don’t think the banning of GSM was as a result of the Green Trouser suit thread anyway though, as she was still on Gransnet for a while after that, I was looking up a Michael Portillo thread today in light of the Mandelson release, and she was on that thread, at the end of July 2024.

I’m staying away from the “personal problems” threads because I don’t know how to respond other than directly to the person that’s posted.

Usually I prefer a more abstract argument anyway.

As you know from Pensions threads, Doodledog, I have disagreed with you and said so!!

Lathyrus3

I’m totally confused about what counts as a “personal” comment. 🤔

I’m learning to write things in a more sidelong sort of way but it doesn’t come naturally to me.

The direct and indirect speech model that was said to differentiate the working class from the middle class.

I may be in danger of becoming snide.😬

I agree, Lathyryus. We had a spate of posts a while ago where 'Some People' were referenced in such a way that it was obviously a dig at another poster on the thread. The thinking was, presumably, that a comment is only personal if a poster is named, which is patently untrue, or at least that this could be used in defence if the post were reported.

It could have been a case of passive aggression versus assertiveness, or possibly the elaborated versus restricted speech codes you describe. But I think it was just a deliberate misunderstanding of the 'rules' that allowed people to be extremely personal whilst pretending not to be.

I have just read the thread on which it seems that growstuff was banned, and her posts erased. I didn't always agree with growstuff (particularly when it came to means-testing and pensions) but she said what she thought, which is, to me, the whole point of a discussion board. There is no point in everyone agreeing or 'just saying nothing at all', like Thumper in Bambi, is there? I would much rather disagree with someone up front than mess about with snide comments and digs. As can be seen from my posts a few above this one, I'm not always sure whether I'm being got at or not anyway . It's easier all round if I know for sure and can respond accordingly.

I’m totally confused about what counts as a “personal” comment. 🤔

I’m learning to write things in a more sidelong sort of way but it doesn’t come naturally to me.

The direct and indirect speech model that was said to differentiate the working class from the middle class.

I may be in danger of becoming snide.😬

The banned and unbanned poster was Very Silly
Don't remember them.

Maremia

I think GNs it depends on which posts are reported.
Perhaps no-one reported the comments about the male politician.

No, probably not, just argued on the thread!
Much better.

I think GNs it depends on which posts are reported.
Perhaps no-one reported the comments about the male politician.

X post again.

I need a cup of tea.

Sorry - am I being accused of double standards? My most has been quoted twice to make a point that has nothing to do with what I am talking about. If I am missing where I am guilty of double standards, please tell me - I never (and have never) report(ed) people for disagreeing with me 😀
Why would you think that? I was just commenting in general.

Posters (plural) were offended when a female politician was criticised for her dress, her way of life etc and one poster was allegedly banned because of that apparently? I don't know. But posters had been criticising a male politician from another party for similar 'crimes' but were not banned.

Those are the double standards I meant.

Sorry - cross posted!

Allira

Allira

TheatreLover

Doodledog

Allira

petra

FGT
I spoke to MissAdventure a couple of weeks ago. She can still crack a joke despite being unwell.

Say hello to MissAdventure from me too 👋
We miss her.

And me. It would be lovely to hear from her again, but if she's not up to it yet, do let her know we are asking after her and wish her well.

MissA wasn't banned, in case anyone is unaware. I do think it's important to make that distinction, as even though I am not always in favour of permanent bans they are made for a reason and should never be about popularity or how much advice posters can benefit from.

One person somehow managed to get a well-deserved ban overturned and came back with what felt like protected status. She is now banned again, but not before causing numerous lovely posters to leave GN and making mischief and grief for many others. It's not always straightforward. I'd be surprised if people posting when the 'unbanned' one was around won't have realised what she was up to, but sometimes if someone leaves you alone you only see one side of them. If you are on the receiving end of the reason they were banned you might feel differently.

Speaking generally, if someone has been banned because of nasty behaviour to individuals, it is unreasonable of the unaffected (who may be entirely unaware of that) to campaign for their return.

It might also be useful to know why someone was banned, although I know that is difficult to do that when the banned person has no right of reply. We know that reports can play a role, but we don't know who has reported individuals. I am aware that at least one poster thinks that I reported them, leading to a suspension, but I most definitely did not - I prefer to argue my case on the boards. We also know that lurkers sometimes report. I was astounded a while ago when someone made her first post to say that she didn't contribute to the board, but did report contributors who overstepped what she saw as the mark. Unbelievable, but true.

This is a really thoughtful post Doodledog. I thought that GSM was banned because she was posting potentially libellous comments about a female politician? These posts included attacking the politician's morals because she had children when not married, and included various abusive descriptions of the politician, including calling her a tart? I didn't contribute to the thread, and have never reported anyone, but GSM quite understandably upset quite a lot of posters with her insulting language about the politician, so it is quite possible that posters drew the moderators' attention to these particular posts.

In any case, I think that these comments were picked up by the National press, and reflected poorly on GN. If that is correct, then, in the interests of GN, the ban is understandable.

The posts could have been deleted and probably were.

I remember similar posts about a male politician's appearance, his hair and his morals but posters weren't banned because of that.
Those posts could have been reported in the national press too.

Are there double standards here?

I will add to that the comments made when that politician ended up in ICU with Covid - inferring that he and the wonderful St Thomas's Hospital, were lying.

I am not defending that politician's record, but just pointing out the double standards which seem to apply here.
Is it because of the Party each belong to or the fact that one is a woman, the other a man?

Sorry - am I being accused of double standards? My most has been quoted twice to make a point that has nothing to do with what I am talking about. If I am missing where I am guilty of double standards, please tell me - I never (and have never) report(ed) people for disagreeing with me😀.

If not, fine, but I'd like to know.

After that reference I was, as I said, speaking generally.

As was I.

Apart from when I referenced myself!!