ELEGRAN

Oh FFS.

I still believe that if anybody has an argument with someone else, that is between them and not for open forum. Just as in real life you would have a word with a friend/colleague about a personal matter and not write to the newspaper about it.

j07 Don't you think it might have been better to read it all, before making a public comment about it?

Nope. Don't want to read it. Up to me.

Was obvious from the tone.

I thought PM meant Private?

Yes. Definitely from the point of view of the sender. But I didn't sign up to keeping anything private.

I don't think a pm is the place for unfriendly comments and neither is the forum. Why make them in the first place?

Well, yes. There is that.

I think you should sort it out between the 2 of you instead of oblique references in a new thread. Please?

Thank you for replying, JO, even though you did not read it. I am not in the habit of sending pms, particularly nasty ones. Perhaps you should have read right to the end before reacting.

I did not post on the thread, because I thought there had been enough chewing that piece of cud and it was time the thread drew to a halt.

But I was annoyed enough at your dismissal of everyone's regrets at someone's leaving as "too much neediness" to write directly to you for once.

If you really want me to, I shall post it here, exactly as written, but not if it is then used as an excuse to continue the vendettas.

I think it's totally out of order to talk on an open forum about a pm that's been sent to you. I there's a problem jO7 you should contact HQ.

If JO finds anything abusive in my private post to her, she should either report it to GNHQ or agree that it be quoted in full to be judged by anyone who is interested enough to look at it, not just imply that it was nasty. It was not abusive, my motive in making it a PM was to NOT continue the thread and inevitable online muck-spreading.

Yet AGAIN we come back to the point of the perceived "tone" of something, although in this case it wasn't even read.

Elegran I didn't actually say the "neediness" thing to you!

I wouldn't as it happens.

Of course you can post it here. I don't mind at all. You don't need my permission!

(I shan't read it though)

I did say "unfriendly" btw. Not "nasty". Although..................

You were pretty quick to publicly condemn a private post which no-one else had seen, JO, and a stranger who did not know me as you do (or you should after all this time!) could have wondered just what dreadful insults I had been hurling at you.

You might not accuse me of undue neediness, but saying the "neediness thing" to anyone was uncalled for. You can't know how much people need to be reassured. I would accept that at times some posters do seem to have an awful lot of dreadful things happening in their lives, and if you are of a very independent nature you might wonder just how genuine continued appeals for support might be, and whether you are being wound up, but you can't know what anyone else's circumstances are . If others want to be supportive then you have no need to throw a bucket of cold water over them.

Leave them to it and keep out, if you can't see your way to joining them, that was my theme.

Re Neediness

Yes, JO, some people NEED the friendship and sympathy they get on GN. If you met someone outside Gransnet who was crying and desperate for reassurance because they lived alone and had no-one to share their sadness/grief/helplessness/ pain with, would you tell them to get knotted and stop being so needy? I know you would not, because you respond from the heart sometimes.

If I had been put off like these people have, I would not now have a wide circle of friends to support me when I am alone in the house and need conversation. You have your DH to talk to, just imagine what it would be like to come back to a dark empty silent house whenever you went out.

The advice always given to someone who does not like a particular thread is to stop reading that one (or perhaps, "WTF are you still here then?" quote)

The same applies to you - if you don't like people saying how they miss a poster who is so disgusted with the petty squabbles that they have baled out, then go to a different thread that you do like. If you don't like a thread, then keep out of it.

And don't repeat the behaviour that caused it to be started in the first place. THAT is exctly what drove Notso away (and I have met her and know that she is not a whingeing weed like certain members.) She is a sensible person who just does not like what looks like the prevailing atmosphere. When the petty squabbles fill all the "last hour" slots, the interesting threads are squeezed out and it looks as though everyone is permanently at everyone else's throats.

There is room for all voices and opinions, BUT NOT NECESSARILY IN THE SAME CONVERSATIONS.

Bet you can't resist reading that, JO, even if you pretend you didn't.

That was the text of the PM, by the way, in case anyone is still worried that I have been nasty to JO

Sounds ok to me!

I used to use an old chat room a few years ago.....am older and wiser now..........but one could sort of stop any private messages....sort of keeping the letter box closed. When someone wanted to send you an unsolicited message...i.e. you did not know them from Adam and you would like somesort of introduction before things got personal...you could ask in the open thread, 'Can I please sent you a message?'. Think it might be an arrangement that I would prefer. For whilst its lovely for someone to send you a message of support or to just say a cheery greeting its quite another when someone wants to carry on a row in private that you had not intention of even starting.

It is possible to block messages from particular members.

And it sounds fine to me, as well.