Ok Cari

Come on Eglantine if you're reading this. I know we've disagreed in the past and I could have strangled you on occasion, but I still miss you!

I agree with all the above posts. There is no real harm in jings which cannot be said for some posters. We are all aware rhat jings gets carried away. At least those of us who know her are aware.

Oh my gosh!! How did I miss this? Since coming back from holiday I've been offline due to computer problems for a few days and then really busy so I've barely had time to read/comment on posts; hence I've only just caught up with this thread and I'm really shocked. I've skimmed through all 12 pages and it's not clear what prompted jingl to be banned - or whether the ban is actually permanent? My understanding (from when she's been banned in the past) is that after a suitable (??) time has elapsed people can re-register, is that not the case any more?

jingl's comments can be ascerbic, confrontational, insensitive, nit-picking and obstreperous. They can also be warm, caring, sensitive, thoughtful, kindly and supportive. Her contributions to Gransnet are rarely anodyne and because of that they frequently engender lots of responses, which is what keeps Gransnet interesting to its wide range of readers. There are always people in a community who rub some others up the wrong way, but surely it's up to the individuals within the community to find strategies that allow co-existence rather than excluding people.

This community has been, and is, a great resource for a diversity of people who otherwise would have much more limited social interactions; please GNHQ, let's demonstrate that we are truly an inclusive body. I will be very sorry if jingl is actually excluded permanently and think that the Gransnet community will be the poorer for her absence.

I may not always have agreed with jingls but often I did - she called a spade a spade and did not twist words and dissemble as some others do to twist another poster's meaning and, it would seem sometimes, enjoy taking umbrage.

The thread was from the heart and one the majority will feel strongly about so to have it turned on its head with what amounted to provocation like that must have been so frustrating and the resultant upset was predictable.
If one person got banned then why when it was an anguished response? When another one did not?

This will probably be deleted.

And me. She's my mate!

Well said, bags. I haven't contacted you directly but if jingl is reading these threads I'm sure she knows I want her back on here ASAP.

Been thinking while I was showering smokiness off. There is a saying that when you aren't sure about a person's real personality you should look to their friends. Several long term, well known and utterly respectable gransnetters (much more respectable than me) have got in touch with me and asked me to tell Jingle how much she is missed by them. I cannot 'out' them without their permission. They can out themselves if they wish.

The point is that Jingle has made some real friends on Gransnet in spite of and because of (yes, I mean both) the way she posts on GN. Some of those friends, including me, have had "run ins" with Jingle in the past before we got to know her properly.

So, Cari and Lara and others at HQ, please consider that thing about a person's friends being an indication of how nice a person they are and let Jings back.

This sort of thing crops up time and time again and we all keep saying the same views we hold.

Those who have a 'trigger ready finger' to report posters are the ones who are usually ' the cause of the problem '.

GNHQ are put into a situation by those who report and are between a rock and a hard place.

However it is noticeable that at times there are quite nasty, personal posts left to view and others that don't come close to them get deleted. Surely the common denominator is the poster who reports , or does Gransnet actually read every post and make the decision to delete and make that decision as a form of 'Censorship'?

I might be naive but I have always thought GNHQ are responding to reported posts and that brings me back to those who report others. I would by far prefer to decide for myself what I feel is upsetting or below the belt and not be ' presumed ' to agree with another poster who feels it worthy of reporting a post. I have always said that the deletion of posts leads to consequences in itself.

1). The person who's post is deleted is assumed to have done something so bad it required deletion, not always the case as time and again we read others chip in to ask why this happened as they found nothing wrong had occurred.

2). I feel some who might report another's post could be using the act of reporting others to use it as a 'personal tool' to covertly attack a poster who is opposing their view and use it to hinder a debate / discussion not going 'in the direction he/she wants '. Childish, yes but I think it does happen.

3). We are inevitably bemused, cross or upset because we cannot decide for ourselves if we thought a post worthy of deletion. I for one would prefer to engage with posts/posters and make my view known as to the posts I am taking the time to engage with. As it stands we have to abide by what perhaps one poster feels upsets him/her and that is where the system falls down.

4). Worst of all the deleted poster has to take it on the chin and if he/she hasn't deserved it in the eyes of others the poster who has reported has been given the upper hand and I think some will therefore 'REPORT BECAUSE THEY CAN'.

As for the challenge that tegan mentions, I think HQ ought to be big enough to ignore stuff like that when it's as silly (which is all it was) as that was.

I'm off out to burn some more cypress branches.

But, lara, some people feel attacked, and say so or hint at that often, even when they are not being attacked but their views are.

Oh, right, just seen your post about being in contact, glass. That's good.

I'm in from bonfiring for a cup of tea and just wondering if Jingle ever got banned from posting on mumsnet. If not, that says it all about the different treatment meted out on GN.

Do you know, glass, as I think you knew her on Mumsnet first, didn't you? I hope she has managed to contact you via Twitter too.

Maybe we should take along hard look at the forum and work out why it depends on one poster. A lot of people no longer or very rarely post. There seem to be a lot of new members, but most posts still tend to be from the long established people. I often hesitate before I log on as I find the place far too confrontational, which saddens me as I've made some amazing friends on here and for that I'll always be grateful. There also seems to be a lack of respect for HQ and the thankless task they do. We either have guidelines or a complete free for all. If we have guidelines we must adhere to them. The OP was a taunt of 'come and get me if you dare' which obviously backfired. Yes, I know those will have a response of 'she's sucking up to teacher', but I've never gone along with the 'school analogy' constantly put forward.

Could be because they don't want it to settle into too much comfy chair and slippers complacency, with nanny stepping in every time someone thinks that a reply to their post has been harsher than they like. Other sites "for the elderly" have withered away because there was nothing in them except vapid platitudes.

I posted the questions because if you want to understand the reasons for the rules and guidelines, and decide what you think of them, these are what you ask yourself.

Your view of what Gransnet is about and how much control there should bve over what is posted may differ from someone else's.

[I didnt need the stinking cold bit in there!].

Actually I am surprised that a number of long term posters are still querying GN on their stance.

Elegran I have a stinking cold. Your questions are for GN not me.
I personally gave up debating them with GN a long time ago!

Obie and the other questions?

I'm off to do battle in Aldi. The cupoard is bare.

It makes you think, doesnt it wot.

Perhaps they should consider doing so, then, or at least listen to our opinions on the suject.

Elegran, GN make the rules. Their rules. And they dont look like changing them.

Sure she is, and she has stated it. Others are entitled to disagree with her. You are entitled to your opinion too, Tegan