Pond slime

My conjecture could be wrong (though I doubt it) but it is not illogical.

Jings got banned.

It appears from everything I've heard that she got banned because her posts were reported more times than HQ could reasonably deal with.

Logically this means someone or several someones reported her posts.

Jings came back with another name and got banned again. She told me this morning via Twitter. I wrote the OP because I was angry

about the REPORTING that, as I said earlier, seems to me the most likely explanation for the repeated banning.

Illogical?

Nonsense.

Thanks bags , I was just curious.

In that case I still lean towards innocent until proven guilty - I like hard evidence .

I'm sorry you are upset .

Surprise is good. Who wants to be predictable?

Which part is illogical? I thought I explained my thinking quite well in my post at 19:57:14. It looks logical to me.

I haven't accused anyone of anything. I've said plainly that I think people who tell tales on others in order to get those others into trouble are pond slime/bastards (take your pick). That is exactly what I think, it doesn't appear to me to lack logicality, and it doesn't accuse anyone.

Even a worm can turn, Jane and even Bags can get angry. It has more impact when it is a rare occurence!

You surprise me Bags.
You usually argue with the force of logic and now, without any direct evidence, you accuse other Gransnetters of 'tattling' and use words like 'pondslime' and 'bastards' to refer to them.

Hear, Hear, Maggie

What a good post, Maggie. I agree absolutely!

Why would anyone think they were being accused of being mean-spirited etc if they had not been? Why would they be hurt?

And as for getting in touch with jingl via thatbags, I for one have no desire to form friendships with people on here outside of Gransnet. Perhaps if I met any face to face that might be the case, but enjoying someone's input and getting to "know" them on GN does not mean I want to add them to my Christmas card list.

I just feel that GN has been diminished by the absence of a witty and controversial character who often made me laugh out loud. Yes, she could be sharp at times, but so can many of us on a bad day. And I have seen her apologise for this on many occasions. I have also seen some pretty mean comments aimed at her, so it wasn't all one way traffic.

Several members have requested an "ignore" button in the past, as available on several other sites. It seems a good idea. If we had that facility we could happily carry on enjoying GN while never again having to be irritated by the posts of someone we don't get on with.

Perhaps my use of the word 'colluded' was inapproptiate. I don't know for sure whether there was any collusion.

But quite a large number of members have obviously reported jingl's posts and also her reappearances. To deny that is just ridiculous.

As in Occam's razor a principle from philosophy. Suppose there exist two explanations for an occurrence. In this case the simpler one is usually better.

I don't think posts get deleted unless they're reported is what it boils down to and someone has to have had their posts reported a lot to get banned. It's very simple really.

And so is HQ not wanting to be bothered with it.

As I have said already at least once on this thread and one other threads at other times too.

It's not complicated.

I don't have a conspiracy theory if that's what you're after. My reference to pond slime was not about that.

I haven’t mentioned collusion, jane. I don't know of any and I don't care. As I said, my educated guess as to what happened has come from what HQ tell us about what happens when posts are reported, from multiple deletions of Jings' posts, from her comments about emails from HQ, and from my understanding from what has been said about why Jings has been banned.

Someone has already commented that Jingle seems to work hard to get herself banned.

Please calm down dear.

What on earth is this all about?

Ana and Bags
Do you have any evidence that people have 'colluded in getting Jingl banned' or is it conjecture on your part?
I'm not asking you to disclose your evidence. I just want to know if you have any.
I'm obviously obtuse, but it isn't deliberate.

Thank,you Anya for your good wishes. Yes, there are kindred spirits in Soop's kitchen, why do you feel the need to mock? There are kindred spirits elsewhere, why disparage?
Nothing "rankled" -as you put it - solely on my own behalf unless the epithets below were of course addressed to me and if they were , well as I said you were wide of the mark, but I spoke generally because I think your choice of language not only insulted fellow members of GN but demeaned you yourself. Would you really say that face to face to luckygirl, annsixty, annodomini, Elegran, nanaandgrampy, jalima me or anybody?
I wonder who you were accusing of what. It seems clear that nobody is to blame for GNHQ's decision at least not by dint if reporting anything. Nobody had a finger on any trigger or any button and a lot of people felt justifiably upset, aggrieved, hurt by random accusations such as I quote below.
Sneaky, underhand, vicious, anonymous little bastards
The KKK of GN
It says more about the person who wrote these than anybody else.

I don't know for certain, n&g. It's an educated guess given that it must have been reportings that got Jings banned originally. It just looks, from where I am, as if someone or someones had it in for her.

Thatbags how do you know someone reported it?

I'm sorry if I've missed how it happened . Or is this just guessing?

That's all it's about.

I've no idea who the tattlers are either, iam. But there must have been some to get Jings banned in first place and, I speculate, been again to get her scrubbed out again.

There are some very unpleasant comments here. It's rather like being back in the high school ( or even primary school) girls play ground where cliques of girls make nasty comments to and about others. I had no idea what it was about until it was spelled out, that in essence it's a bring back jingle thread.
Who are these 'tittle tattlers" - I've no idea. This is a moderated forum, if someone is banned for repeated breaches of the rules, who are we to moan? Go off and form a relationship with that individual via twitter, as some clearly have done.
GNHQ don't delete posts without careful thought and i'm sure the same applies to banning.
For what it's worth, I'm in support of Daphne Broom and others who don't seem to me to be joining in any sniping that is going on. As for allowing gransnet to be 'boring' if we don't have controversial contributors - this is a very boring thread indeed.

I have condemned tattle and what I see as mean-spiritedness. I shall continue to condemn them. If anyone thinks they are being accused of being a mean-spirited tattler, that is their problem not mine.

I posted the OP for Jingl's sake.

You poor thing DB I didn't realise my remarks had rankled so, but obviously they must have done to deserve not one, but two of my posts being quoted by you. I'd forgotten all about my little asides, but I do understand that some people take things to heart very much.

It's not a thread I visit very much, but I hope you found some solace in a nice safe place, such as Soop's kitchen. At least when GN gets a bit tough there's always somewhere to find like-minded friends.

Best wishes.