Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Qui tacet consentire videture... I want it to be understood by MNHQ and by guests to this site that my silence on the subject of the recent speculative threads does NOT condone their existence.

1000 replies

Aitch · 09/09/2007 11:47

Aitch.

OP posts:
Blandmum · 09/09/2007 13:12

suzy, you missed quite a day, it really kicked off.

Bink · 09/09/2007 13:12

Funnily enough, I wouldn't have felt the need to add my name here (as well as not appearing on those threads) were it not clear from this very thread that standing up & being counted seems to be necessary.

So,

Bink

Aitch · 09/09/2007 13:13

i love 'add my voice to the silence'... exactly right.

OP posts:
FlightAttendant · 09/09/2007 13:16

I don't know how many people have speculated in private, to a DP perhaps...but some of us don't have a DP, which leaves us with no outlet for our concerns or interest.

Not defending mawkishness or nasty gruesome stuff but just wanted to make that point. There are many, many things I discuss on MN because I don't have anyone to talk to in real life.

Perhaps it is inappropriate but I am glad I have it as a resource, because not to talk to someone all day about whatever is bothering me/in the news etc. is quite difficult.

VeniVidiVickiQV · 09/09/2007 13:18

Then set up a Yahoo group called "Mawkish Raking Of Speculation And Gossip" and get spittle-flecked in there, maybe?

God, I need to get unbanned, really. VVV's gonna kill me...!

FlightAttendant · 09/09/2007 13:19

Sorry?

artichokes · 09/09/2007 13:20

artichokes

Chirpygirl · 09/09/2007 13:21

Chirpygirl

Blandmum · 09/09/2007 13:22

But do people really need to speculate is such a horrible way? Not say, 'Gosh, the parents are now officila suspects' but actually run through scenarios that could explain how a body could have been disposed?

Do people really need to discuss that?

Beacause I would start to worry about a RL friend who felt impelled to do that.

This is a real child, a real family, and thank the Good Lord, the fates or whatever, it isn't our family. Why does anyone need to speculate? This is a serious question BTW, I'm not being argumentative

FlameBatfink · 09/09/2007 13:22

(You can always use the other account Hunker)

FlightAttendant · 09/09/2007 13:23

I was making a point in response to someone mentioning private speculation which she 'speculated' many of us might have been party to. That was all.

As I said, not defending what you are discussing here. But perhaps trying to explain it in a way...

it all depends on each of us trying to be aware of a line, and keep behind it...I may get that wrong sometimes. I try hard not to though.

lilibet · 09/09/2007 13:24

I comend the thoughts of the original poster and add my voice to the silence

Lili

(but i did talk to Cod and Expat about birhtday presents on one thread!)

Blu · 09/09/2007 13:24

Blu.

Because I find speculation based on rumour, misunderstanding and misreporting not only tatsteless but it DOES affect the people involved. Now and in the future. A documentary last night interviewed people who had had thier lives mauled over in print and gossip whilst being completely innocent - and it ruined their lives. I do not wish to be part of that. And I have chosen not to cotribute in order to avoid bumping and provoking reaction.

BecauseImWorthIt · 09/09/2007 13:25

Count me in too.

FlightAttendant · 09/09/2007 13:25

No, MB, they probably don't need to. There are a lot of people offended by it which differentiates it from most of the other things we don't need to discuss on here but do.

Boco · 09/09/2007 13:27

Boco Loco de Flamingo.

Aitch · 09/09/2007 13:27

i do see what FA is saying, but i see gruesome speculation as rather different from 'god, how unbelievably awful' which is what most people would think.

people seem to be clinging to their right to 'freedom of speech' without pausing over the McCann's right to 'innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'.

OP posts:
grouchyoscar · 09/09/2007 13:29

Grouchy Oscar

Aitch · 09/09/2007 13:30

tut. McCanns' right. [pedant]

OP posts:
EffiePerine · 09/09/2007 13:30

Effieperine

(mainly because I'm bored with the whole boiling lot)

FlightAttendant · 09/09/2007 13:32

You're right Aitch, I was posting on there at the beginning and wrote down a few thoughts I had, in a speculative way...as it went on, it began to get rather out of hand and I jumped.

Reading it later made me feel awful, I wished I hadn't posted at all. It was a distraction from my own rather dull and depressing day. Selfish and not very healthy.

elesbells · 09/09/2007 13:32

signed. but does this mean we cannot comment when we think a thread is inappropriate? or does everyone have freedom to speculate and degrade people (and their lives) as they see fit?

onlyjoking9329 · 09/09/2007 13:33

can i add my name please.
OnlyJoking

BoingBoing · 09/09/2007 13:33

BoingBoing

I've avoided looking at any of those threads like the plague, and am glad I have, given the glance I took at last night's row over who bumped what thread out of existence. I didn't even read that one in full.

Thanks for giving us a chance to walk with the silent majority.

onlyjoking9329 · 09/09/2007 13:34

course i am not only joking about adding my name

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread