Please GNHQ ... would you consider letting *EllanVannin* come back to this site?

I am confused by mention of 'cliques'. I have been here for donkey's years and know of none. Naturally, we are friends with people we have known for a very long time and/or people with whom we might have something in common - be it sons in law who are idiots, the way we vote, a liking for Rufus Sewell (to be clear, he's mine!) etc.

A clique, to me, is something much more sinister and suggests a combined effort to do something. I'm not sure we have them on GN.

This thread shows why GNHQ hold fire before commenting.
They know that it will go in different directions; allude to other posters; ‘break talk guidelines’; etc etc
Therefore: loads of reasons to delete the thread.
They just sit back and let others do their work for them.
A similar thread was active in September, and GNHQ made their thoughts known.
There are many ways to skin a cat, as it were.
I look forward to seeing EV posting again

I agree, kittylester. I don't see cliques on here either. I see people who have similar views on particular issues, people who, as you say, have things in common, but not cliques.

I think that there are those who think that they are always right, so if more than one person disagrees with them they must be 'ganging up', but that's not, to me, 'dcliqueyness' - it's just disagreeing.

I've never seen intimidation, either. Admittedly, I don't tend to go on the chat threads or the royal family ones, but even so, I can't imagine that they will be intimidating (although I have seen comments that suggest that the RF ones can get heated!). I'm sure that if someone were being intimidated then people would shout up and put a stop to it.

This is a thread about a poster being banned. Whilst I absolutely take WWM's point about those who may also have lost the right to post but who may be less well-known, it would be a pity for it to lose its impact because of accusations of intimidation and cliqueyness that are untrue.

FarNorth

I'm sorry to hear that GagaJo.
I hope those things are reported, even if they are in PMs.

Not sure about the reporting. But I've seen some very unpleasant comments made. Which s/he hasn't responded to. (I assume she, but I could be wrong. No contact other than via the forums.)

The idea that banning someone from a forum is the same thing as solitary confinement is laughable.

I don’t think I ever interacted with EV, but I have seen her posts in the past and disagreed pretty vehemently. At the end of the day, this is a website run by a major company with significant lobbying power. It’s not a church hall meeting, or a group of friends having coffee.

That is the point, isn't it ASG? If we post exceptionally offensive things (I'm not speaking about anyone specific) and it gets into the media, it reflects badly on the brand.

I agree with you whitewave it should be about all posters who have been given lifetime bans.
I would support all posters being let back on site unless they hold racist,homophobic and other unpleasant views.
Gransnsnet needs to be fair to all posters.

Thread now rendered pointless

I can’t understand why some have to go into everything in such detail. If certain posters don’t like the idea of cancelling the ban on an 81 yr old lady that lives on her own and has stated to someone that knows her, how much she misses this contact, just scroll past. Why get so involved?

As for unknown others intimidating and threatening on here - how intimidating can it be? We’re all anonymous and posts get reported very quickly for all sorts of spurious reasons. I’ve never seen anything I would consider even slightly threatening or intimidating but I’m not on here all the time and miss a lot of what goes on so who knows? Maybe that’s for the best.

However. GNHQ, please consider reinstating EV, after all it is the season of goodwill.

FannyCornforth

Thread now rendered pointless

??

Why is the thread now rendered pointless? The whole point of the thread is to make the case that all points of view should be able to be expressed, and that it is draconian to ban a poster for expressing her own.

Are you saying that because others have expressed points of view they have somehow invalidated that point?

Please GNHQ let EV back!

As for unknown others intimidating and threatening on here - how intimidating can it be? We’re all anonymous and posts get reported very quickly for all sorts of spurious reasons. I’ve never seen anything I would consider even slightly threatening or intimidating but I’m not on here all the time and miss a lot of what goes on so who knows? Maybe that’s for the best.

Agreed, tickingbird. 'I don't know how 'constant threats and intimidation' would work on here. Threats of what?

I do not feel intimidated and threatened on here, as stated, in the main we are anonymous, although some posters know each other.
I accept though that some people feel like that, as we dont know what happened fir them to feel like this.

Doodledog

*As for unknown others intimidating and threatening on here - how intimidating can it be? We’re all anonymous and posts get reported very quickly for all sorts of spurious reasons. I’ve never seen anything I would consider even slightly threatening or intimidating but I’m not on here all the time and miss a lot of what goes on so who knows? Maybe that’s for the best.*

Agreed, tickingbird. 'I don't know how 'constant threats and intimidation' would work on here. Threats of what?

Very occasionally a poster has tracked another poster, found out who they are and 'stalked' them or caused trouble in RL.

Ah, doxxing.

That should definitely be a banning offence with no reprieve. I think it is now a criminal offence, too.

Sorry, that is definitely moving away from the EV case; but I think that has been made clearly and equivocally, and I hope that GNHQ will act on our request to have her banning reconsidered.

I posted on here yesterday and am now shocked to find it has gone off topic. Reflect on what Urms wants, so please, no more derailments. It's those, that could possibly cause HQ to stop the thread.

Remember Urms words:
This lady of 81y lives alone and GN was a great source of company for her. These long winter days are difficult for many to cope with at the best of times. I learned recently that she was given a lifetime ban. I feel very sad about this.

In the spirit of ? and goodwill to all, HQ let her rejoin

Thanks to everyone for contributing to this thread. It has generated far more interest & wonderful support than I’d hoped for.

We’ve not had a decision yet from GNHQ. However, it is the weekend. And there is a lot to read on here!
?

Fingers & toes crossed in the meantime.

Thanks to you Urms, firstly for discovering EV’s plight and secondly for giving us all the opportunity to ask for her reinstatement.
I hope it’s going to be a happy Christmas decision.

I hope it’s going to be a happy Christmas decision I'll drink to that well, I would if I did!

I posted on here yesterday and am now shocked to find it has gone off topic. Reflect on what Urms wants, so please, no more derailments. It's those, that could possibly cause HQ to stop the thread.
You really can't police threads and tell people what to post. In any case, the message of this one is loud and clear, and HQ have apparently told people that they are considering the matter. Whatever posters say now won't have any impact on that, unless, perhaps, someone makes a case for EV's ban to continue, which nobody has done.

I'll have one for you, Chewbacca

Cheers!

Chewbacca ☕️ cheers

Me too chewy!

Cheers Chewbacca ?