Diversity

My DiL and DGD met them in Diseyland Paris and got Ashley's autograph. Wish I'd been with them.

Friends took their teens to see them in Glasgow last week and said they're fantastic role models. Very positive messages.

That's a brilliant dance group.

That's what my first thoughts were!

More Diversity on GN www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtwVfJqBfms
(Sorry-things were getting out of hand)

And infantile

Wish I'd thought of that!

Can we put this to bed now? It's depressing

I could answer gj's post with

DONT READ DONT READ DONT READ

but I won't.

But I can tell you that somebody will not be upset by these comments. They will be relishing them. They are getting attention, any attention, it doesn't matter from where it comes

Is that a fact or a supposition petra?
It's not the impression I get from stb but perhaps you have gleaned more than me.

I promise I'll stop now, granjura

TOP?

STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP S

If it really needs explanation petallus, my comment "2+2 does not = 5" was in response to the assumption that because one member had at some stage in the past said her DH was Asian, soontobe extrapolated that we had at least one member who lived in London and attends a mosque regularly.

Jingle. Your post of 15.58. I'm afraid to say you are completely wrong IMHO.
I always thought you were pretty astute when it came to human nature. But I can tell you that somebody will not be upset by these comments. They will be relishing them. They are getting attention, any attention, it doesn't matter from where it comes.

-^I think that is going to be quite easy for me to go and check later^

If I said it "sounded like snooping,"maybe it was because it (to me) sounded like .etc etc etc etc.
My opinion.
Nobody obliged to agree or indeed to express similar sentiments. We are not sheep are we?

As for the rest, if you had read the Katie Hopkins thread you would know what I was talking about but I am not going down that road of a thread about a thread.
I think we should agree to differ and perhaps get back to more important issues?

(that's the person who did the exposing, not stb)

You can't absolve soontobe of all blame in this whole débacle, jingl.

It started on the Katie Hopkins thread with stb saying that only two GN members lived in London (according to her) and escalated from that. Then she started the thread about whether GNHQ should be keeping all posts from 2011 and questioning the search facility, repeating her opinion that it's so easy to find out about members from what they post and their photos etc.

No wonder people were getting a bit exasperated by all the 'I know more than I'm saying' stuff and bringing up occasions when information has in fact been made known to other parties, with malicious intent.

and . Both stand for "confused"
"Confused" means "bewildered, perplexed, not sure"
So I am what your point is.
And as for the rap on the knuckles ??
black, the, pots, kettles , the, calling.
Rearrange these words to make a well know saying and move on.

And I don't see why it was necessary to put a at the end of the OP. That immediately gave away your opinion of soon's suggestion.

I'm sorry if you're feeling battered. But soon must be feeling the same, through no fault of her own.

Also, your post of 09.31 Sunday. Not good.

Alea a couple of extracts from the posts I mentioned from p1

'Bit of a narrow outlook, but a good try at recovery after revealing a degree of ignorance regarding "Asian" or even your reference to Muslim family members.
2+2 does not equal 5.'

and

'Sounds like snooping to me soontobe.'

I think you were one of the first to mention snooping, after which the thread escalated almost to hysterical levels with people talking of dossiers and feeling threatened and leaving GN.

I have been on GN for over two years and cannot remember seeing a thread before where the OP is quoting someone else's opinion and asking others what they think. I don't think it's fair to do that, especially when the opinion quoted is likely to attract hostile responses.

I agree that other posters were equally unpleasant.

As for your final comment, no I am not trying to cause trouble or dissent. There has been enough of that already. I just thought some things needed to be said.

Because it WASN'T about a thread, Jingl but a new thread about a topic and crediting the person who made the original observation.

Read my post of 10.02 in which I was perfectly clear about why I was starting a new thread with a subject which IMO might have led to a discussion. As it did, to begin with.

No. Neither is it necessarily true.

I got cross and said so.

Jingle you have your opinion on posters it doesn't follow that what you think is obvious to all

Many people's blood pressure was raised by what seemed like, "I can find out all about you", posts. These were subsequently followed by ones that changed it to be more like, "I meant that anyone else could find out all about you", but by then some sharp replies had been made.

BTW It is perfectly true that anyone who really wanted to could find out a lot about a poster by adding together all the bits of info that they give, and if their Facebook page gives more info that could be added on too and perhaps make their identity and location traceable. A couple of years ago I myself tried doing just that about someone on here -( just to see whether it was possible!!!) - and with a bit of crafty digging I found a name and address. If they had been posting something really personal, or something they subsequently regretted, someone nasty could have used that against them, as someone seems to have done against one of our regular posters!