Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Chat

Join the discussion and chat with other Mumsnetters about everyday life, relationships and parenting.

Thread 12 Starmer: From Prescott to Rayner, working class grit

1000 replies

DuncinToffee · 21/11/2024 20:08

Previous thread

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/_chat/5203242-thread-11-starmer-will-that-phone-call-be-to-harris-or-to-trump-the-decidedly-superior-looking-cats-thread?page=40&reply=139989436

OP posts:
Thread gallery
68
dontcallmelen · 29/11/2024 17:48

I’m sure I read some time ago about Louise Haigh & the phone business someone please tell me I didn’t dream it.

ContactNightmare · 29/11/2024 17:49

Notonthestairs · 29/11/2024 17:10

On a different note I quite enjoy the now regular ploppers and their dismissive goady posts even if I cant be arsed to respond.
I have no idea why anyone would bother to read these threads whilst simultaneously being so contemptuous of them.
These threads are just a dozen or so people swapping thoughts. I can't think what we have done to deserve the attention.

They enjoy being called ploppers? Life is meaningless without leftie grit to make rightie pearls?

I find it like when you’ve got a table at pub and a nice vibe going and the oldest drunkest soak can’t help but interpose.

PandoraSox · 29/11/2024 17:50

Notonthestairs · 29/11/2024 16:58

The Bill as is short on detail. As with all PMBs there hasnt been an impact assessment. Dominic Grieve described it as a skeleton bill.

I appreciate that those in favour believe the as yet undrafted safeguards will be sufficient and workable.

But it is worth bearing in mind any drafting changes will only reflect the quality of the original instructions from the committee.

Frankly until you have read those safeguards nobody can authoritatively state that there will be suitable protections in place.

And that is before we consider how the legislation might be challenged and adapted, be that in court or by future governments.

However, I appreciate that I might be coming at it from a particular angle as a carer. It is very difficult for me to trust that Parliament and future Parliaments will act in the best interests of my child.

I agree with you. I worry a lot about what will happen to my DH if I die first. I can only begin to imagine the worry parents of disabled children have.

pointythings · 29/11/2024 18:09

SerendipityJane · 29/11/2024 17:35

I have a strong suspicion that when it is all signed off, we will discover a couple of years later than absolutely nobody will have been able to take advantage of it as the criteria will be so narrow.

It will be (yet) another right we can't exercise.

I think that's plausible. It's very narrow in its scope. I'm not giving up my Switzerland fund just yet, that's for sure.

BIossomtoes · 29/11/2024 18:13

pointythings · 29/11/2024 18:09

I think that's plausible. It's very narrow in its scope. I'm not giving up my Switzerland fund just yet, that's for sure.

Mine will remain intact too. There’s a long way to go.

Rummly · 29/11/2024 22:47

I see I’ve had a comment removed.

Ha! Posters on this thread throw poo insults at others but complain about - perfectly reasonable - responses to them, to get responses deleted.

Well done Labour cheerleaders! That tells us all we need to know about you.

cakeorwine · 29/11/2024 23:11

Rummly · 29/11/2024 22:47

I see I’ve had a comment removed.

Ha! Posters on this thread throw poo insults at others but complain about - perfectly reasonable - responses to them, to get responses deleted.

Well done Labour cheerleaders! That tells us all we need to know about you.

Can I ask why you used the words "you" in the post?

Am I interpreting it correctly that you are using "you" to generalise about people on this thread?

Zonder · 29/11/2024 23:13

I haven't reported you but does it matter? The fact is MN decided your comment, whatever it was, was against their guidelines. That's on you.

DuncinToffee · 29/11/2024 23:14

cakeorwine · 29/11/2024 23:11

Can I ask why you used the words "you" in the post?

Am I interpreting it correctly that you are using "you" to generalise about people on this thread?

I was wonderimg more about the 'us'

Who is watching?

OP posts:
ilovesooty · 29/11/2024 23:24

Rummly · 29/11/2024 22:47

I see I’ve had a comment removed.

Ha! Posters on this thread throw poo insults at others but complain about - perfectly reasonable - responses to them, to get responses deleted.

Well done Labour cheerleaders! That tells us all we need to know about you.

I didn't even see what you said but presumably it breached the talk guidelines, whatever it was.

PandoraSox · 29/11/2024 23:47

Rummly · 29/11/2024 22:47

I see I’ve had a comment removed.

Ha! Posters on this thread throw poo insults at others but complain about - perfectly reasonable - responses to them, to get responses deleted.

Well done Labour cheerleaders! That tells us all we need to know about you.

No need to be so snarky about MNHQ mods. They are only doing their job.

Eta: who has thrown poo insults? I don't recall any such posts.

Notonthestairs · 30/11/2024 00:44

I haven't reported anyone. 🤷🏼‍♀️

Alexandra2001 · 30/11/2024 07:11

The Association for Palliative Medicine (APM) says there is a risk the funding needed to pay for doctors and the courts to oversee assisted dying could divert money away from care for the dying

This is my fear, the Tories had already cut funding by 25%, despite an aging population.
NHS trusts will need additional funding to setting this all up.

Rummly · 30/11/2024 08:16

cakeorwine · 29/11/2024 23:11

Can I ask why you used the words "you" in the post?

Am I interpreting it correctly that you are using "you" to generalise about people on this thread?

Yes, of course.

I made a general comment - plural “you” - about the pettiness of reporting my post because, obviously, I don’t know who reported it. If that poster wants to put their hand up and explain themselves we can (civilly) discuss why insulting descriptions are apparently acceptable against the very few who post criticism of the government on this thread, but it’s not OK to reply in kind about any government supporters.

As for “us” (which a different poster raised), it’s pretty clear it means ‘anyone reading this thread who is not part of the regular group who post’.

One of the posters on this thread tagged me a few times into criticism of me on a different thread set up to moan about pro-government posters. I hadn’t posted on that thread (I thought the thread was Reformy and pathetic). She apologised to me. I said it was all fine and there was no need for apologies. She thanked me.

That, IMO, is how debate should be conducted.

As for Zonder’s comment, I didn’t breach any guidelines; nothing’s “on me”. MNHQ will delete posts more or less on request, as far as I can see. I once saw loads of posts deleted from a woo thread because the poster had said there’s no such thing as ghosts.

I’ve never reported a post, not even on the appalling anti-vaccination thread that’s currently running. Disinformation that encourages exposing children to harm seems to me about the most delete-worthy stuff of all. But MN tolerates it. 🤷‍♀️

BIWI · 30/11/2024 08:17

Notonthestairs · 30/11/2024 00:44

I haven't reported anyone. 🤷🏼‍♀️

And for the record, neither have I.

BIWI · 30/11/2024 08:19

@Rummly

I’ve never reported a post, not even on the appalling anti-vaccination thread that’s currently running. Disinformation that encourages exposing children to harm seems to me about the most delete-worthy stuff of all. But MN tolerates it.

This is daft. If you think it's delete-worthy, then why aren't you reporting it? MNHQ don't read posts unless they're reported to them, so it's not about them tolerating such posts - just that no-one has thought to make them aware.

Piggywaspushed · 30/11/2024 08:24

MNHQ will delete posts more or less on request, as far as I can see.

That is emphatically not true. I have had full on ping pong rows with MNHQ about why they haven't deleted outright racist/ homophobic and transphobic posts.

I can't remember your post but it must have done something quite specific.

And, yes, you absolutely should report anti vax disinformation.

Edited to say - which is exhausting btw as HQ wants you to point out every single anti vax post rather than a thread. I have no idea why they don't often take down whole threads.

BIWI · 30/11/2024 08:29

Oh yes - @Piggywaspushed is absolutely right. MNHQ do not just delete because someone has reported. Therefore your post (which I didn't see) must have breached their Talk Guidelines, or been deemed 'NITS' - Not In The Spirit.

Alexandra2001 · 30/11/2024 08:31

@Rummly Nope, they do not delete posts on demand, i rarely report as i think the offending post is often best left up for anyone to read but i have had 1 or 2 very imho offensive posts refused, the explanation being that MN is not there to stop wholesome debate or police FOS.

I didn't see what was written & its possible it was reported by a lurker, so probably not helpful to throw around accusations.

itsgettingweird · 30/11/2024 08:37

Didn't see what was deleted.

Not interested in what it said.

Not interested in people coming on to be rude and make generalised (completely incorrect anyway!) comments.

Don't even acknowledge - let alone - respond - to posters like that on any thread.

I'm more than happy to let people talk to themselves in a busy room 😂

Rummly · 30/11/2024 08:39

BIWI · 30/11/2024 08:19

@Rummly

I’ve never reported a post, not even on the appalling anti-vaccination thread that’s currently running. Disinformation that encourages exposing children to harm seems to me about the most delete-worthy stuff of all. But MN tolerates it.

This is daft. If you think it's delete-worthy, then why aren't you reporting it? MNHQ don't read posts unless they're reported to them, so it's not about them tolerating such posts - just that no-one has thought to make them aware.

I have posted several times in the past to say that I think anti-vax posts should be banned as a matter of policy. Others agreed. MN has never acted on it. The old vaccination board was a magnet for crazy, dangerous posts. And they still pop up now and again.

There’s no point in reporting. If MN is going to allow anti-vax posts it’s better to oppose the anti-vaxxers and explain why they’re talking foolish and dangerous crap.

BIWI · 30/11/2024 08:40

Well then, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy that there will be anti-vax threads/posts then. Hmm

Zonder · 30/11/2024 08:42

As for Zonder’s comment, I didn’t breach any guidelines; nothing’s “on me”. MNHQ will delete posts more or less on request
That's so funny @Rummly
Like other posters above there have been certain times I have tried really hard to get MN to delete a post because of disinformation or a feeling of stalking! Neither were deleted as they didn't break MN guidelines. So it really is on you and perhaps you need to take up your problem with MN.

cakeorwine · 30/11/2024 08:45

Rummly · 30/11/2024 08:39

I have posted several times in the past to say that I think anti-vax posts should be banned as a matter of policy. Others agreed. MN has never acted on it. The old vaccination board was a magnet for crazy, dangerous posts. And they still pop up now and again.

There’s no point in reporting. If MN is going to allow anti-vax posts it’s better to oppose the anti-vaxxers and explain why they’re talking foolish and dangerous crap.

That's not going to change their mind though.

Facts don't change people's minds.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.