Poor Jade fading fast - she looks quite beautiful......

[PillicockSatOnPillicockHill]

and do you know what

i wont have a bad word said about her

Poor girl

Shit parents and crappy childhood
YES she went in BB and acted like a fool and YES she went in BB a second ime and said some ignorant racist stuff

but she was 'ill educated' and she did not 'know better' but in her favour :

she educated herself

she learned her lesson

she apologised and meant it

I AM a fan of Jade

I like her a lot and feel much sadness at this vibrant and humour full life cut short

Her little boys were goign to have the mother she never had and i SO relate to that

so KISSES for Jade tonight and much love -sign in if you wish !

No dessention please - not on here!

there was on the day I asked, they have since dwindled

so anyway they didn't give in to the request for oen thread so what/who is being sidelined?
or do you mean 2shoes shouldn't have asked?
you are still being vague I'm afraid, you need to give examples not sweeping statements

I think asking is ok....
mn hq were right to say no(tis their site)

who is sweaty betty

what does sidelined mean in this context please?
i didn't understand your post either mt and still don't

ah I see, thanks Fio

Have you read the Jade threads Compo? Or even the Madeline thread - that's maybe what started it off - creating one thread so not to annoy or irritate other posters. Well it might be irritating that people want to rubberneck - but that's what the 'ignore' option was for. If you choose to post on a thread, that means you actually don't want to ignore it. Actions speak louder than words sometimes. I really don't think anyone should be able to dictate to anyone else which threads are 'legitimate' or not. Or to be able to sabotage other peoples threads by posting on them until the posting limit is up. Argue by all means, if you (general 'you') lose the argument, have the decency to withdraw not wipe the other argument out of existance.

I have no wish to fall out with anyone on MN. It's been a great debating platform for women who need extra stimulus outside of domesticity, be that gossip or intellectual debate.

Got to put ds in bath.

I thought the arguement on this thread was not about only having one thread, but what you could post on this thread.

I mean 'the one thread' for all morons, as someone put it in a Jade thread. Won't say who as it's not their greatest moment on MN and I really don;t want to rub it in, as I like them, but it was a nadir for MN.

I mean, what if I want to start a thread criticising Goody (as many people feel) but can only post on the one thread thread? It's a recipe for conflict! I just wish MN could get back to being liberal proper and that means letting people discuss what they want, in as many threads as they want, as long as they don;t break any laws.

but apart from the MM and baby P thread, mn hq don't as a rule make just one thread.

i think MT is talking generally 2shoes...not about this thread in particular....but she's absolutely right...press the hide button if you don't like a thread...

well I am talking generally now DP

What is there not to understand about just pressing using the hide option if you don't like a subject matter? I found the shouting down on the Baby P threads really unpleasant (missed the MM debate thankfully).

i don't really get the press hide button bit. this is a discussion forum. if i pressed hide on stuff i disagreed on controversial issues with i'd do nothing but backslap.

say for example this thread, which i didn't contribute to for hours because i didn't have anything to say on the matter as was in broad agreement with OP, then i did say something, then the convo moved onto a more interesting area for discussion (rather than just 'kisses for jade') and then it didn't, and then it did and so on. why should i have pressed hide back at the beginning? i've agreed with people on this thread and disagreed with them. when exactly should i have pressed hide?

you can't be talking generally if you mention two specific threads 2shoes....

oh you know what I mean

I think giving people the choice to basically say, ?Justine, Carrie, can we turn the chav noise down over there ? can we put them in a room and shut the door so we don?t have to hear them,? belies the supposed egalitarian spirit of MN.

Am I really missing a sinister mumsnet controlling plot?

I think not

At one point the number of Jade threads did seem (not sure how close my grip on reality was) to grow by the minute
T'was irritating that it seemed to be on every thread endlessly. Asking that all the Jading be done in one place isn't so unreasonable and nor is refusing as it has died down.

I'm completely unaware of a controlling elite or underlying subplot
Sounds exciting though

2Shoes, MNHQ thankfully have only actually sidelined threads a few times, but the requests to have threads sidelined have shot up with peoples expectations that they might be. This is what I mean about that power, subtle as it may be, being corrupting.

I am quite prepared to be flamed, shouted down, and even agreed with by some - that's all part of life enjoying free speech.

I dunno what this tendency is, if it is just an expression of society becoming less tolerent of - bizarrely - liberal ideals. It worries me on that level too actually, but that's a different thread (tho that's being ignored! )

lol Ronald. I think you just outed yourself!

i think the requests for sidelining etc encourages more debate, which can only be a good thing, no?

MT, i am a bright, intelligent woman, educated to post grad level, and sometimes i really struggle to understand your points, although on the whole you are very apposite and eloquent, but i did not really udnerstand your earlier commetn..what does 'medatious' mean ??

I'm not sure this would be the forum I would chose tbh..probably speak to my dh first

outing?

anyhow, i think that some threads were better off as one big emotional melting pot, soem of the baby P and Madelaine threads were quite , quite unbelievable.