Open letter to all Gners

gg, I don't think anyone has said HQ should "take no notice" of the complainant. That is certainly not what I said, nor what I meant in my earlier comments. I meant that they should consider very carefully (which I'm sure they do most of the time) whether the poster whose post is being complained about needs to know that someone complained. That's not taking no notice; it's considering whether a certain course of action (informing the poster of the complained about post) is necessary.

If they decide such an action isn't necessary, they can then explain their reasons to the complainant. Notice will have been taken and an assessment made.

It's what they do very well most of the time, just thst this time I (and others) think they got it wrong.

Which thread title was that gg? Do tell!

Can't imagin you putting a foot wrong.

Could we have some sort of signal on our names to indicate we are in that rather exclusive(?) club of people who have been reproved by Gnhq ?
* a reproof from hq
** a deleted thread
* barred or banned but returned
Wear your asterisks with pride.
Please don't go GandT. Perhaps whoever complained just simply doesn't post just reads.
Thank you someone for the expression about walking over hot coals so as to complain. I've added it to my useful phrases.
Annsixty

Should be three asterisks for banned.

Maybe if a thread or a post offends someone they should pm the poster first before reporting. To give them a chance to make changes if they agree, or want. It doesn't need to be a nasty pm.
I've only once reported a thread (I think) because I thought it was spam or commercial.
As Kitty says, so many different natures, and I'm not confrontational.

thatbags they were not just telling the OP of that thread that someone has complained. They were asking him to change the title from what he said. I am sure they would not send out unnecessary emails.

You are so kind JbF but we all have to learn I'm afraid I can't remember, it was a long time ago so perhaps I took notice of what was suggested as, of course, we all should.

I don't think anyone should be sending such PMs "TriciaF". I have a feeling that is exactly what the mods on any site would not want you to do.

On one forum I joined (little knowing ) PMs had been turned off because they had problems with people letting other people know they were offended. It had undermined the forum and I didn't stay long.

How can posters change the title of a thread when there isn't an edit facility???

I think nasty PMs are very cowardly. If you can't say it in front of everyone, stay schtum. The messages I've had have usually been putting me right on something I've misunderstood - in a very nice way, to stop me making even more of a fool of myself!

They can't. I think HQ probably told G&T that someone wanted the thread title changed. They needn't have told him that or anything since no change was made (by them: the only ones who can). I guess someone was going to change it, or agreed with the complainant that it needed changing, and then was advised otherwise.

For which advice, or clarity of thought by WhoeverHQ, I'm heartily thankful.

thatbags you are making it up as you go along! GNHQ did, according to GrandTea, ask him to change the title.

The reason that I knew it had been reported was that GNHQ contacted me by email, as it appears they do. They did not say who had reported me or the specific reason, just that they wanted me to change the title of the thread to something that could not be complained about.

Apparently many, including GrandTea, do not respect the Mods wishes but that is not the same as them not saying it.

You could interpret that two ways, gg, either that that HQ (they) wanted G&T to change the title, or that the reporter (they) wanted him to. since it is not possible for G&T to change the title, only HQ, I assume that the reporter didn't know that when they asked for him to and it is the second interpretation.

Gracegran I have not read anywhere on this thread that GandTea does not respect the Moderators. Can you point me in the direction of where he says or intimates that? As far as I can see all his posts have been polite and level headed.

Read it again sunseeker I did not say the GrandTea does not respect the Moderators.

And G&T did not say that HQ wanted him to change the title, but that "they" did. (either HQ or the reporter, and more likely the reporter, as HQ are well aware that G&T can't)

You said he "didn't respect their wishes" - well, he couldn't, could he, since he has no power to change what is published!

Well, I didn't understand your comment about respecting the mods' wishes either, gg, as the mods are the final arbiters and no poster can go against them if they decide to delete a comment or thread.

Yippeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

I'm well-chuffed with the outcome. Out with the ukulele. Give us a tune, GandTea

Is this a storm in a GrandTeaCup?? Ducks and runs!

Well I wish someone would PM me as I have totally lost the plot over who is who and who they were.

Sorry folks that last message may seem a bit random I was replying to granjura but for some reason when I opened the link it hadn't updated the page

Right, I'm offended. Anno agreed with my post saying I'm a gran of little brain.

Im leaving!

Is this kerfuffle about the Spanish Slugs thread?
Really ?

Going to take me a week to read all the new posts