Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Other subjects
Original poster

SORRY TO MNHQ

125 replies

Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 09:05

Dear all at MNHQ, i would like to say how sorry i am to hear this morning that some of your members have actually seen fit to grass you up with regard to the advert.
I consider this to be a complete overeaction and pure nastiness imho.Especially as you have already made it clear you are revising your policies on advertising.
I don't and never will have a problem with the advert, despite being a breastfeeder. I assume we are all intelligent enough to realise that ad's on websites are pure revenue making and to choose our own method of feeding our babies.
I don't know what to say except i am sorry
Hattie x

OP posts:
beetroot · 26/08/2005 22:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

HappyMumof2 · 26/08/2005 22:08

Message withdrawn

beetroot · 26/08/2005 22:10

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 22:14

Beetroot????

I am not saying nobody reply to me. Just the initial unnecessary and brown nose comments were just petty and not genuine dicussion.

FGS there really are times when i feel 'ganged up' against here.

Well i hope you saw that i stuck up for you whilst you were on your hols Beetroot!!

OP posts:
HappyMumof2 · 26/08/2005 22:23

Message withdrawn

giraffeski · 26/08/2005 22:25

Message withdrawn

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 22:33

Giraffeski i am not aiming my those comments at everyone who is against the ad!!!!!!

I have already told you its not you, its those who have reported mumsnet.zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

OP posts:
moondog · 26/08/2005 22:35

And who did then Hattie?

Demented · 26/08/2005 22:39

Shouldn't 'they' be saying sorry then, rather than you Hattie???

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 22:40

see here

OP posts:
Demented · 26/08/2005 22:45

Still don't see why you are apologising for them?

moondog · 26/08/2005 22:46

So????

JoolsToo · 26/08/2005 22:46

moozo - plagiariser!

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 22:48

Well obviously someone has Moondog!!!!!

Demented i am not apologising to them i am saying sorry to hear ........

OP posts:
Demented · 26/08/2005 22:50

Ah right got it now. Sort of like 'sorry to hear you've broken your leg'?

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 22:52

I like your name, suits you.

OP posts:
Demented · 26/08/2005 22:56

Can you see me?

JoolsToo · 26/08/2005 22:58

Mummyraver!!! fancy seeing you here, interesting!

Heathcliffscathy · 26/08/2005 22:58

hattie, bottom line: if you were really really sincere and not in any way trying to stir you'd have sent an email to mumsnet.....

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 23:19

Sophable, i am being sincere, and thought others may have felt the same and that a thread of people showing support for mumsnet may have been nice for them to read.
Oh how wrong was i, forgot that unless your name is one from the clique, then nobody could possibly agree with you, instead they have to rip you to pieces for one comment made.

OP posts:
Demented · 26/08/2005 23:22

Still intrigued about this clique ...

giraffeski · 26/08/2005 23:35

Message withdrawn

Original poster
Hattie05 · 26/08/2005 23:37

It was cod that pointed out the clique to me, as she told me i'd only been posting here about a month (not true) and so why have i started this thread?

Well imo that is evidence of the clique.

Complete unfriendliness to anyone you don't recognise who has a different opinion.

OP posts:
giraffeski · 26/08/2005 23:41

Message withdrawn

BadgerBadger · 27/08/2005 00:18

I also reported Milupa to the BMAG.

I received a reply from them including the recent update of the monitor page of the baby feeding law group.
I took from reading the BFLG site that they were seeking to prosecute Milupa and carriers of the ad.
Another member quite rightly questioned whether MN in this case could be prosecuted.
I queried this by email with the BMAG and received a response.

The response stated that it is trading standards rather than the BFLG or BMAG who would be responsible for bringing any prosecutions regarding the Milupa ad and that whether they view the MN case as illegal is down to their discretion.

The email then went as follows.....

"In my view as it displays the Aptamil name and this is an infant formula
brand it breaks Article 17 of the Infant Formula and Follow-on Formula
Regulations 1995. See
www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1995/Uksi_19950077_en_1.htm

This article states: "No person shall publish or display any advertisement
for an infant formula..."

As such the site displaying the advertisement could also be liable to
prosecution."

I do see it as my right to report Milupa or any other brand I witness flauting the law.
I do not think I was wrong to contact the BMAG, although it seems many MNers got there before me! (Fair play to ye )