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

[georgimama]

but I would be grateful if you could tell me that you have at least given serious consideration to banning the posters who were harrassing her.

Thank you.

pmsl aitch.

fair enough assumption ruty.

'It's pretty obvious that the people who suspected the Rev only decided to do so because they were pissed off with her views over the whole moldie saga and wanted some leverage to use against her.'

Bang on, dittany.

There seems to be some doubt here about the nature of PPH/Enid/Bubble99's posts. They weren't musings. They were vile and aggressive.

sorry Soph - shouldn't have. I'll ask MNHQ to delete my posts.

cowardice. otherwise explained to self as 'oh i just can't be arsed with the nastiness'

HighPriestess - yes, I did and have. See post from 18:51:11 above.

ach, pph is a decent sort, i'm sure she's a bit now. don't know why she doesn't just hold her hands up, though.

who is saying they were musings? anything but.

you too soph?

is there anyone left in the golf club bar??

i'm sorry if it's tense...... close your eyes and tell me all about it.... cos i am dying to know because you'll feel better when you do....

she is decent, but doesn't trouble herself or get angsty and is always taking the piss out of me for being too angsty about things.

Tortoise

"and MNHQ say that if you have concerns about a poster to let them know"

not call them "fucking fake fake fake" then?

they're all lovely posters in normal circumstances. it was horrible though.

Have asked for my posts to be deleted.

I'm becoming a boring, middle of the road, avid MNHQ supporter in my old age. To think I used to be a bolshie rebel in my youth.

I think picking on revs is a very nasty and bad idea and anyone who has done this should hang their head in shame. However, I also don't really like "hey hey we're the revrevs come and see us revving around" threads because I don't like mumsnet being about overt spiritual guidance personally. While I accept that the rev was fairly wishy washy liberal in terms of promoting dialogue and not doling out too many hail marys, I think having her own personal thread needing workplace supervision was open to misinterpretation. My personal ideal is a secular website with believers, non-believers, revs, rabbis, gurus, pastors, imams and humanist mothers of all shades welcome to engage in fierce debate but not plying their trade, as it were. So I think MNHQ are spot on in asking rev to lay off the revving and, even more importantly, everyone else to lay off the meanness.

lol, cf. it would be a bit undignified, i think.

suffice it to say that i still think that they aren't doing anything wrong (with the exception of these MN ram-raids which are KEECH) and i still very much like the vast majority of them. the ones i don't like on there i never did care for much on here anyway so it's no biggie. small board, big personalities, that sort of thing.

interesting, scummy.

well there's a suprise.... . well welcome back to the fold aitch (and you soph).... (and dont say you never left because you know what i mean)

it was not her own personal thread though.

B&J - wasn't on that thread, didn't read all the posts. Only responding to my own thoughts really.

But JF was a fraud in that she was giving wrong legal advice under effectively someone else's name. Even if rev was not a rev (and I understand that you seemed to be confused on that point even after speaking with her), isn't it also moot as to consider whether she is doing anything wrong.

The only accusation against Rev seems to have been that she was not what she said she was, despite having posted on her journey to being ordained for some time. For a fair comparison to JF she would have had to be doing something harmful in terms of giving advice. The only thing that she seems to have done wrong is to become popular.

i didn't leave because i was hounded off just to clarify (although i did feel extremely hounded for most of the time that i was there as I was critical and kept inconveniently and apparently aggressively bringing up the fact that the voting system might be hurtful that mn would eventually find out about moldies and that it would be awful and that people were going to get hurt. i was very unpopular both for saying that and for the 'aggressive' way that i said it.

i left because I felt uneasy about my profession being used against me linked with a poster that I didn't wish to engage with persistantly and insistantly trying to. in an unpleasant way.

that was the straw. but my (critical) views and aggressive tone were most unpopular there. with most of them. who just wanted to be left in peace to get on with their site.

I think that's a fair assessment of it. I could be a lot more unfair but i know that moldies may have a totally different view of it (that heartless horrible, nasty, aggressive, unempathic sophable etc).

I NEVER LEFT, I JUST HAD A BAAAAABY!

no im definitely not a mouldie/moldie
I dont know why you are ing at me aitch
what happened to you that was so awful that your leaving wasnt a 'revoking' of membership on your part?

and that was undignified. but somehow cathartic.

that aitch. she's much more dignified than me.