Pond slime

Well I'm another one who didn't have a clue.

I just have one question.....is this thread based on a guess that this person was reported or is that a fact ?

The reason I ask is I really dislike this site-wide blanketing of being a 'tattle tale' . It's like punishing everyone regardless of whether they did it or not.

No problem with being blamed if I did it ..... really object to it being inferred when i didn't .

Just bring her back and let's have an end to it.

Good idea.

Right, having read the Gransnet Today thread, I now understand what this one is about.
I haven't been on Gransnet all that long, but I have been on other forums, both moderated and unmoderated, for a very long time. I was wondering where all the really interesting threads were :-)
I can't help feeling that there should be a Quote function, so you could make it clear which message or part of message you were referring to. So nobody could get the wrong idea as to what you actually meant!

Not from me. I don't ignore people, only annoying threads.
No, not you yggdrasil

and that's the best policy

If I quote something, either from another post of from anywhere else, I copy and paste it with a ^ and a " at the start and end, which puts it into "italics" That way there is no ambiguity.

I am assuming that those who are upset by this do in fact already make contact with this person in other ways - it is certainly implied by the posts.

If not, is it possible to ask HQ if they can send a message from you saying that you wish to make contact outside of the forum and HQ can then contact her to suggest she makes herself known to you on Facebook or some other medium. Presumably they still have her contact details. I can see that you might be peeved to lose contact with someone you saw as a friend, so maybe that might be a way around it.

Eh? How on earth is it implied by the posts?

Anyway, that's not the point, as should be obvious to anyone who gives a damn!

I was replying to bags - sorry I should have made that clear.

I felt that it was implied by the posts = otherwise how would they known the new poster's identity? I certainly had no idea.

Well, I for one am not in touch with this person jingl in any way other than Gransnet so I don't know where you get that idea from, Luckygirl

Reading Candlefran's posts, I had a feeling of déjà vu, Luckygirl
Likewise Jessielovestuna? or I could be wrong there.

Bags has said (somewhere) she is in contact with Jingl on Twitter which of course is anyone's prerogative.
Losing contact when a friend/member disappears can always be hard, but I imagine mutual FB/Twitter friends could provide a link if that is what is meant.

And her identity was deduced from certain posts made under her new username.

I'm not 'upset by this' apart from the fact that jingl seems to be being treated like some sort of criminal by GNHQ and they don't appear to give two hoots what anyone on here thinks (apart from those who love to report posts, of course).

As I said before, contact via another medium is not the point...[roll eyes emoticon which of course we haven't got]

isn't this a "roll eyes" emoticon? Well close!

Merlot - can Bags help you as she is in contact on Twitter?

The situation is as it is, and if the issue is losing contact with a friend then I am sure that some way can be found around that - I hope so.

If it is about the principle of HQ banning a poster then I do not think anything can be done as the rules are there and they've been broken. I suspect that HQ do not invoke this very often.

I didn't recognise any new posters.

Where is the rule that says 'members will be banned if...'?

This thread sounds like, "dont mention Voldemort."

NanaandGranpy wrote:
"The reason I ask is I really dislike this site-wide blanketing of being a 'tattle tale' . It's like punishing everyone regardless of whether they did it or not.

No problem with being blamed if I did it ..... really object to it being inferred when i didn't "
That's what upsets me too, N&G. And that's what using the Report button leads to.

That's not the point, Luckygirl. Jingl was a big part of Gransnet and if being outspoken is breaking the rules then there are plenty more here who should be hoofed out....Myself included

Jingl broke the rules - she knew that, to the point where she deliberately baited HQ and told them to ban her. The end result is not a surprise and was inevitable. Just as a pub has the right not to serve someone, so a site like this has the right to make decisions that they see to be in the best interests for them and for all the members.

But it would be good if anyone who feels they wish to continue contact with her should be given a way of doing so.

And I do agree that a generalised accusation of "tittle-tattle" does not feel comfortable and has already caused hurt to more that one member.

I do not think that being outspoken was the problem - plenty of people on here fall into that category and are very much still here! - and rightly so.

It seems that certain posters on this thread are being deliberately obtuse, but obviously there's nothing to be gained by labouring the point.

Thank you, bags for starting the thread. And shame on those who have colluded in getting jingl banned.

Well, I wouldn't like to see anyone banned unless they were a troll or spam.

We are grown-ups (well, most of the time) aren't we?