The changing face of Gransnet?

Problem with reinstating someone after a ban is it’s never quite the same for them.
They can’t be the person they were before the ban because they’ll be watched like a hawk and any complaints will see them banned again immediately.
I’ve seen It on MN. Very prolific poster banned ( she was on the relationship board all the time ) but reinstated after a thread like this. She did return, and is still there I believe, but she was never the same feisty poster she was before. It was like the air had been let out of her ballon.
A bit sad to see actually.
I’m of the view - if I can’t be myself it’s probably best I’m not here.

Casdon there is nothing on here that was not known previously if posters had ever interacted on Gransnet with any of the posters mentioned in this thread.

If previously unknown information had been revealed then I think that it would be a worrying breach of confidentiality.

If GNHQ has ignored previous requests regarding this and a a request for clarification of their guidelines then there is no other way to bring to their attention how posters feel.

I suspect the decision from on high was ‘let’s send a vanilla response, carry on ignoring all the concerns and eventually it will go away’.

They know they own the site and there is nowhere to go for those who are appalled at their high handed behaviour.

Thanks to everyone who reported my post. And credit to GA who suggested that I could do it myself which I was going to do this morning after I'd seen your reactions! Surprisingly(?) I haven't yet had an email from HQ saying I have been reported and giving me a warning.
I'm waiting, Moderators, if you're reading this.

Although I must add I have absolutely no idea who the poster is in this case and the circumstances around it.

Callistemon

Oh yes, I had one of those too, Lisagran

An anodyne response from a computer.

Me too.
I’d really like to see all those other (exhausted) avenues ??

anno good idea. I am going to report you. I have already written to GNHQ twice about this but will have another go.

With my hard hat and flack jacket on it looks like we have two separate but co dependant issues bubbling to the top here.

Sometimes businesses are set up and their owners aren't nimble enough to understand and act when a sea swell of change is occurring. Customers/posters don't always conform to entrepreneur's preconceptions and drift away from a product/forum if their needs and feedback aren't thought to be of value.

Many of us value our online relationships with other posters which have a tangible real value, contributing to our well being. We want to know and trust that GN has an understanding of our values.

Perhaps we need to have a feedback group who represent our interests and can work with GNHQ to improve it....but NOT a committee!

In real life, if a friend dies or is taken ill there is a system for being told and for offering support......we do seem to need a daily hatches, matches and dispatches thread or pinned note.

An edit button would also allow the hot headed and fat fingered to take five and reconsider.....and a like/dislike facility would let people know when their views were upsetting others.

Socially responsible advertising from companies GNetters could trust might not be a bad idea either.

A complaints policy and procedure that can be seen to work and which feeds back.....

There are ways to make this site work for all of us but we need meaningful dialogue with the facilitators. Otherwise this site will become a casualty on the forum high street.

Well said Mamissimo

gt66 I appreciate that we don’t all like each other but even those we aren’t particularly friendly with we wouldn’t like to be banned.

I can understand posters have strong feelings about certain things, politics being one of them but to deny someone companionship permanently is a cruel and unkind act.

If anyone on this thread is pleased that a poster has been banned for life then I think it says more about them than the banned poster.

Does anyone know how many warnings are given before a ban?

I assume they were given.

I don't know if Gransnet as such has changed.

Some threads are more controversial than others and on the more controversial things can get rather grumpy.

Right now, I think a lot of us are feeling the effects of lockdown,

I have felt all along that we really need to focus less on the virus, but I caught a lot of flak for saying so.

Good post Mamissimo

This is, of course, a business.
Someone upthread said, I think we are the employees but we are, in fact, the customers.

If customers become disgruntled they can take their business elsewhere, often to the detriment of the club or firm, but this is a niche market.
Even so, can a firm rely for ever on recruiting new customers or members? It was only last year that GN had a "recruitment drive".

I've have a suggestion perhaps if the lady you are concerned about is reading this you could suggest she joins another online site, Mumsnet, Netmums or some other site you all suggest she joins and tell her to use the same online name as on here you could all communicate on there and even exchange email etc. Just an idea.

I too have had a vanilla response. Sigh! Not unexpected.

Dons hard hat. As Kandinsky(?) said further up thread, we don't know how many warnings the banned person chose to ignore, how much GNHQ may have helped her, made suggestions. I am just trying to be devil's advocate here really, we have to assume that this ban was not done on a whim based on just one person's reports. It was fairly obvious that there was a serious personality clash, and frankly it was tedious when it started derailing threads, but I just tutted and skipped over their posts, I never felt it serious enough to press the report button. I have only done that a couple of times when the odd commercial post slipped past the censors. As for the person who flounced yesterday, I did feel that certain posters were very quick to jump in with the 'but you don't live in the UK' comments, which must have been exasperating. I do however, appreciate the reverse, that the frequent criticism of the UK could get irritating. I don't know what I am saying really, just that both parties are maybe responsible in part for the position they find themselves in? I am sad to see them both go, whether voluntarily or not.

muse

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.

No need to apologise to me .

I was unaware that this was against the rules, too (as it seems t me like basic general knowledge) but I was finally sent an email explaining why my post was deleted, and that was the reason given, so I am sharing my new-found knowledge with others, so that they don't inadvertently cross any lines as I did.

I do admire those of you expecting a response from GNHQ experience and cynicism tells me you won't get anywhere- but Good Luck!
If we widen the discussion beyond the Forums has anyone noticed the distinct lack of freebes on the site now? There used to be a book a month and sometimes free bundles of books. There were also lots of competitions -very few now. Is this just Covid or the first sign of a fading site?

That's not really the point Firecracker we believe that she was set up and consequently unjustly banned.

I have thought long and hard about adding my two penny worth. I am a very infrequent poster. Last year, I made an observation about a developing situation & received a robust & patronising put down from said poster, apparently I had angered her with what she considered to be an hysterical response. I did not report, indeed I apologised for making her angry, as that is what polite & considerate people should do. In social or work situations, if one were to be persistently confrontational on a regular basis & were asked to refrain, wouldn’t it be sensible & civilised to do just that? If a person ignored those requests, surely some sort of censure would be inevitable. There may well be posters to whom the banned member had been kind and supportive, but to others with whom she disagrees, she is certainly neither. There are many posters who are more likely to take offence than I would be & consideration for them should be taken into account when disagreeing with their point of view. It is not the disagreement, but the tone of that disagreement which has provoked this situation. As a footnote, my observations at that time sadly proved to be correct.

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

Checking out other sites that we could migrate to.

I think that is very well said Mamissmo .

No doubt they are afraid to post on ths thread because they might be bullied!!! On the other hand they could be purely imaginary -it's something you can never discover!!!
GNHQ hold all the Aces and they're really good at sleight of hand!

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