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.

MP

I now know more that I ever wanted needed to know about the ministry.

Well, yes, I think we're probably all much clearer on that one. Do you want to digress onto the pros and cons of the Distinctive Diaconate in the Anglican church as a sideline.....?

To be fair dittany some of the Moldies are doing that - FioFio has just posted on the other thread saying that she had no idea who the rev was before these threads

The fact she goes on to talk about shit stirring and drama I will leave well alone.

wiki has a nice little summary of deacons

any chance of MNHQ employing a Thread Summariser for this sort of occasion? life is a bit short to read it all but enquiring minds nosy bastards need to know what's going on

There should be an automated summary every 100 posts for those who'd like to be involved but struggle to start from the beginning....

why on earth shouldn't rev use "rev" in her name whteher she is or not? I'm not actually a Kewcumber.

Questioning whether she is really a rev or not is perfectly reasonable even if its not phrased very politely and I don't think MN should be banning anyone for that.

Anyone who who carried on past that - tbh even asking MN to prove who a poster is, is ridiculous (I don;t ask anyone on the adoption thredas to prove they have adopted - if their view is interesting I read and respond to it). If you can't take peoples contribution on face value without them having to prove a set of credentials to you despite people saying they have actually met the poster in question starts making the questioners look a bit deranged and they shoot themsselves in the foot.

Incursion into offline life is not on and IMVHO should result in poster being banned.

PS can someone link me to the secret list of who is a moldy so when people talk about the moldy invasion I know who we are talking about.

ahem.

so coming on here ONLY to post on that thread isn't harrassing someone?

'fake fake fake' and calling her a bloody fantasist isn't harrassing someone?

CLEARLY posting on another site in order to rally the troops to a thread that had nothing to do with rev and was about gaza isn't harrassing someone?

and then having the temerity to come on here butter wouldn't melt and claim that the actions were in the interests of the higher good?

shame on you.

all of you that only came onto that thread that day. no other mumsnet postings. that in itself says it all doesn't it?

and just as an incidental it was my claim on moldies that it (the site itself when it was discovered, and the way people were nominated) would be hurtful to people and that there would inevitably be a link between moldies and mumsnet that wasn't a very benevolent one was greeted with round condemnation and a huge amount of anger.

staggering really that after that some of those same posters should pull this stunt.

oh for gods sake.

I have no interest in outing the rev. She piqued my interest on the gaza thread and I found her 'jump on the bandwagon' stance on the people who set up a seperate chat forum was strange and aggressive to say the least.

But I certainly didn't 'out' her - in fact I haven't even seen the thread and only visited today as someone drew my attention to this. I will admit that I did think she was bullshitting - but I have changed my opinion and am sure she is a real rev - with a real rev dh - and they mumsnet together A LOT, on different pcs but at the same time which in itself I find quite odd but hey ho, my dh would rather stick pins in his eyes than have anything to do with mumsnet.

If you want to check ipc addresses or whatever they are with mumsnet be my guest - my conscience is clear!

Sorry, haven't read the thread and am of course against any kind of bullying but..
Georgie, you say you haven't read the thread, but want posters banned?

Surley Rev or people who did read the thread are better placed to make such a request?

I didn't believe she had family in the holocaust. I thought she was using that as a way of strengthening her argument. I admit that freely. But I now believe that noone is that horrid and that I was almost certainly wrong - I usually am , but I don't think disbelieving an amorphous person on the internet is a hanging offence quite yet.

I can see a very simple and sensible way forward that neither capitulates to the bullies nor deprives Mumsnet of our much loved woman of the cloth:

I give you DeaconJustAbout

Actually, in a weird way, I think it is GOOD that these things are looked into.

A few weeks ago I got a call from the bank. They had cancelled my debit card, because of a weird, small payment to the States (something like 90cents). They were worried that it was someone testing the card out, and didn't want a big fraud to happen. As it happened, that was dh using his card (which has the same number) to buy some sheet music. I verified this with dh, phoned the bank back and they reinstated the card.

In the same way, if someone was posting as me on MN (either me or someone else), and enough detail had been given to identify me, I would hope that MN would follow it up - if it wasn't me I really wouldn't want someone POSTING as me. And if it was then it would be very easy to say 'actually that is me.' Otherwise, using the JudgeFlounce situation as an example - he had taken on a real person's identity, and then using that identity of a QC, posted very dodgy legal advice, and that could come back to haunt the innocent QC - say in a job interview, or if someone on here had a grievance.

Checks can be very useful - they're not always insulting/harrassment.

ban me if you like, tbh I would take it as a badge of honour as this is all totally ridiculous.

is mouldies the mumsnet daughters of mediocrity? its one of teh things i found.

Oh dear.

The Gaza discussions were getting quite heated before but this is too much.

Sophable, hear hear.

I also agree with Mrsruffallo up there. I don't think that MNHQ have acquitted themselves with much distinction in this. It feels a bit as though the teachers are afraid of all of the arsey sixth formers who have left, but keep coming and causing fights outside the gates. Not very enlightening, or enjoyable for the rest of us, really.

Very brave of you to admit MrEniddo that you thought she was lying about her family suffering in the Holocaust as a way to strengthen her argument.

sophable please give it rest about moldies

am beginning to regret suggesting we invited you back now

I have no, nor wish to exert any control over other posters be they Moldie or not
A few posters were suspicious and raised reasonable questions.
It then got personal and both sides exchanged unpleasantries.

The posters who have issues with Rev and her role/title/identity voiced them and have had the issue pretty much dealt with. Some have obviously taken it further perhaps?
pph has vocally distanced herself from any private sleuthing and this is being ignored.

What exactly is the desired outcome of this thread?

putting a smiley face on the end of a sentence doesn't make it less aggressive enid.

yes I did, briefly. I don't 'know' her in the way you do as I dont read mumsnet much at all these days. I think you have to accept that people just walking in on an argument may not have the respect or deep feelings that active and current posters may have for each other .