Dear MNHQ, I didn't see all the problems kick off over poor Revjustabout...

he was never on a bike

neither wsa his middle name anything beginning with H

I think it sums it up

I don't think he ever was. On a bike I mean.

well that's not very appropriate is it?

christ on a bike

I agree with vonsudenfed. And to put the record straight (as rev is far too nice to drop anyone else in it), it was me who first mentioned the boycott of M&S. So if anyone's going to be hunted down by a pack of baying psychos who haven't got anything better to do, it should be me.

'It looks as though the bullying is being swept under the carpet, and the victim made to pay. If this was the narrative of a post about a child at school, MN would be roaring with outrage at the injustice.'

Exactly vonsud.

And nice satire Cod.

arf indeed.

There are two questions here, getting mightily confused.

One is the rights and wrongs of being a rev on mumsnet; for what it's worth, I came across her on a few threads - incl reluctant worshippers - and thought she was doing a brilliant, and very clever thing on them. But opinions on whether mn needs a rev will differ, and fair enough.

But the other issue is what the hell happened on that thread, which has nothing to do with her rev-ness or otherwise. It was deeply unpleasant, and, if she was indeed hounded off board, then possibly a matter for the police.

But by confusing the two, MNHQ have made a right hash of things, as Rubberduck, nantucket and a few other people have pointed out. It looks as though the bullying is being swept under the carpet, and the victim made to pay. If this was the narrative of a post about a child at school, MN would be roaring with outrage at the injustice.

And it is wierd that this kind of PR mishap keeps happening when there seems to be some kind of white fungal element to things. I don't know if it's accidental - MNHQ are embarrassed and so keep being cack-handed - or whether they are actually on Mouldies. But it is starting to really piss me off. It doesn't feel - as someone else said way back - that we, the punters, are being told the whole truth or treated fairly, and that's not normally how MN works.

And by the time I've typed all that out, the whole thing will have moved on so far it won't make any sense

(he had been thrown out a few months previously, poor chap. Can't think why )

he was the chef for the abbey!

Why thank you my dear

"choooner paster back. 1 Can 2na, mix wiv pasta innit? thx"

that sort of thing?

OMG. A Catholic priest in Westminster Abbey! Now that is a grey area...

Hey Kerry, all I do is correct the spelling mistakes in the 700 recipes for tuna pasta bake.

I too, am really disappointed in MNHQ.

It's the equivalent of telling a bullied child at school to "keep your head down and stay out of the bully's way" than actually address the hounding that they've had to endure.

It's one thing to refuse to do anything, but to only request that Rev change her behaviour when she has done nothing wrong is outrageous.

oh and I mean, a dog collar with a leather leash attached

just to clarify there

then we went and had lunch in the refectory at the basement of Westminster Abbey

I agree Nantucket. I was rather disappointed by MNHQ's response.

I once took a catholic priest to a bondage shop to buy a dog collar for his boyfriend

Now THAT I would say was more of a gray area

That Justa's stuff is contentious, however, I find baffling (and boring TBH) and I am upset for her, because she is a really GOOD person who genuinely wants to be positive and helpful and I think she does it very well.

Nantucket, that is kind of it I think. And actually, if a doctor gave medical advice that was incorrect, they could (I think) be disciplined by the GMC for it.

So are you saying that by having 'rev' in her name suggested some official role, whereas those who make thier professions clear in posts and give advice on them, but do not put it in their name, are obviously not official and therefore OK?

I can see your point, but it a very grey and blurry sort of argument.

I still think, that asking her to change her name after these attacks sends out a very bad message and does suggest in some way some wrong doing, or inpropriety on her part, which at the very least is most unfortunate in my opinion.

She has been attacked and now made to feel she has behaved inproperly. I find that extremely disapointing and think MNHQ have made the wrong decesions in this matter.

(Also being rev does not make her spokesperson for the church, anymore than teachers on here are spokespoele for thier profession, or doctors for the medical profession etc etc.)

She doesn't need to post as a rev to post kind, compassionate and funny posts. Those aren't qualities peculiar to revs. But posting as a rev sets you up as an authority (to some people) on these things. And firstly MNHQ don't want that sort of structure on-board. And secondly it can be abused. Perhaps not in this case, but it has in the past, and probably will in the future. So best to avoid it altogether.