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

Thread now rendered pointless

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.

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 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.

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

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.)

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.

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 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.

Can I appeal to all to go gently please.
Urms started this thread specifically for EV and it would be a shame for it to wander off topic.
As far as I know EV doesn’t have an inner circle. She is known to most for good kind and interesting posts on the good morning thread.
Popular doesn’t mean part of any clique it just means a thoroughly sincere and well liked person.

Of course, if someone was a t***l or being constantly abusive towards other posters then a ban could be the right thing, after warnings

A lifetime ban, in these circumstances would be fair and just but what if they were then allowed back? What is the criteria to allow one poster to be banned, and then reinstated, but not another, who has done nowhere near as much damage and hurt to the general GN community? GNHQ often quote guidelines for posting but what are the guidelines for a banned poster being accepted back? What does GNHQ use as a benchmark?

I am not sure that is entirely true GagaJo. If that was the case surely she would leave of her own volition. There has also been a lot of support.

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

Yes FarNorth, and has received constant threats and intimidation ever since.

I am sure at least two posters came back this last year, who'd had lifetime bans. Once at least had upset others hugely.

Yes trisher some of us have been reporting our own posts on this thread, to get their attention.
I had a reply, as others probably did, to say that GNHQ is thinking about it and will get back to us.

Yes WWM2 someone did come back who started a thread to apologise for how they had behaved before.
I have no idea who they were previously or what they had said but others on the thread clearly did know.

As suggested WWN2* another thread if you like may be appropriate, this is for EV.

glammanana

I am friends with EV and saw her as I was driving down the Road on Wednesday she looked fine all wrapped up warm making her way back to her flat.
Tomorrow I shall be calling on her with a Card for Christmas and to see if she has seen the posts here I know she will be humbled at the thoughts shown by so many people.

That's good Glammanana.
Give her good wishes from everyone here.

If I get a ban, I will be in good company

I reported my own post to the moderator.

it could lead to a pile on with a clique getting someone banned.

Yes Gill, exactly. One of the clique was throwing threats of reporting around on a thread I was on recently (not naming it, not breaking the rules).

My thinking too WWM2.

If pressure did enable a ban to be overturned, then what about anyone who does not have a circle of people willing to put up a fight for their return, but who were banned for a lesser mis-demeaner?

This is what I’m saying.

That can’t be right or fair, as it is who is shouting the loudest.

I have noticed there are qute a few posters on here I have had disagreements within the past. It's good to know we are all in agreement about not banning EV. But there still seems to be no response from GNHQ. Do you suppose we need to report a post or the thread for them to take notice? Or are they all celebrating Christmas a little early and not in a fit state to answer??

Wrong quote -the quote should have been lauranorder