The changing face of Gransnet?

Yes, it refuses but I’ll try for the 5th time

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Iam did you follow a link or actually type it into your address bar? It might make a difference.

Maggiemaybe

Good post, Casdon.

As a bystander without the obviously long history I feel uncomfortable about the level of detail of some of the references to individuals and the inferences made

Even with the long history, I’m uncomfortable with it as well.

I don't think any more information has been forthcoming about any posters than has been posted on many threads therefore widely known.

Indeed, I think the references have been fairly circumspect, apart from the expressions of disbelief, concern and anger.

Doodledog

*GNHQ must know that someone can register again and again under another name.*

You aren't allowed to say this, as it is 'encouraging posters to break the rules'.

Apologies Doodldog. I had checked on talk guidelines and couldn't see any rule to do with reregistering under a new name. It was one of the reasons for me asking so much about the ins and outs of GN.

In user name changing it says: We discourage members from changing their usernames because we want everyone to be able to trust the relationships they build with others on Gransnet. However, you will be able to change your username once for sensitive threads.

Re the changing face of GN. I'm thinking that the Talk Guidelines are in need of urgent updating to cover the issues raised through this thread.

Iam64 I used the [email protected] address and it seems to have gone through ok.

no fanny
We should not give it a rest someone has been unfairly treated and it needs to be put right and the only way of putting anything right is to have it out in the open This is supposed to be a democratic country not North Korea

An excellent post janeainsworth you have encapsulated the feelings on here very well. I sincerely hope it will bring about a reversal of GNHQ’s decision.
??

Thanks Urmstongran.

Can't edit my last post . Kittylester and others have said my last comment already. Sorry to them.

I must admit to not having read all the comments on this thread but would like to comment on something Bogmyrtle says on mon 1st Feb 13.31. The poster says that ‘It sounds to me that if two or more are gathered together and share a point of view they are being accused of hounding or bullying’. Whilst I don’t disagree with this statement it is also fairly obvious to me that on occasion it is the same posters who are ‘gathering together ‘. Coincidence or deliberate? Also I feel obliged to add that I have never reported anyone. Why do I feel the need to say this I am asking myself?

I have also added my voice. Lets hope they listen.

Very well said, janeainsworth ?

Well done Jane HQ are being uncharacteristically quiet. ?

The problem with trying to come back with a new name is that the poster has the same email address so HQ can sus them out.

I do hope MB returns we often discussed the theatre/plays together on pms.

annodomini

In view of the strength of feeling manifested in this thread, I suggest that HQ should consider a general amnesty. Rescind the permanent suspension and cancel the final warnings issued to other members. This would be 'in the spirit of the site", as you say, Maggiemaybe.

GNHQ please note the comment above and act upon it.
Please appear on the thread to assure members that this whole issue is being properly investigated.
Please make the guidelines clear.
I am reporting my own post to draw your attention to this important request for a complete amnesty.

Callistemon

gt66

Not everyone is unhappy that the lady with the thin dog has been banned.

Are you a new poster, gt66?
If so, welcome.

You're entitled to your viewpoint of course, but, as a new poster, how do you know what is going on and why?

gt66 has been a member for at least eighteen months Callistemon, however even if a person doesn’t have an account, or does but rarely posts, all posts on Gransnet can be read by anyone.

Well said janeainsworth. Let's hope our combined voices are ringing loud and very clear in GNHQ's ears.

Good letter janeainsworth. Surely with all these letters and emails going to GNHQ they'll have to respond.
If MawBe isn't reinstated however, what should we do then? Of course Maw may well be so fed up that she won't return. Very sad times.

As a new joiner and relatively new grandmother it is good to have somewhere to go to discuss topics - well, mull over others contributions. This is the first time I have commented !

Fannyc
You might think it's a good idea to give it a rest but you have no idea of the back history which brings this thread to the place it's at.
As for people being uncomfortable with the amount of information given out I can assure you that many on here practically know the inside leg measurement of the poster being discussed. Her life/financial situation has been posted ad infinitum over the years.
And I'm Not referring to MawBe

I really hope the very extreme threat of a lifetime ban made to Charliegirl, which has been hanging over her for the past 6 months, will also be lifted. Also for anyone else to whom this applies.

I sent a very similar letter to GNHQ janeainsworth and received this reply -

Callistemon the point I was making was that those of us on the site who previously had little or no knowledge of the detail of the lives and possible transgressions of the posters being referred to, have now been told an awful lot more about them than we knew, which may or may not be true, and which they may not be comfortable with, whether or not they have shared it in groups or in person, or via private messages in the past with some members.
It just doesn’t seem right to me that this is done on a public forum, or that GNHQ are criticised without being in possession of the full story from both perspectives (as in a court situation). There has to be a better way to resolve this in my opinion - but I do appreciate that I’m probably a voice in the wilderness.

Oh yes, I had one of those too, Lisagran

An anodyne response from a computer.

Yes I see it's Maw B. Never saw her being offensive.