Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
The royal family

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Does anyone want a thread for people who are happy for Harry and Meghan? Thread 2

999 replies

DaveCoaches · 23/02/2020 21:26

I wimped out of the other thread title I planned as I thought it might look goady.

But please let’s keep it as the reality-and-let's-avoid-idle-speculation-and-reliance-on-dodgy-sources thread (thanks Seneca!).

OP posts:
Thread gallery
13
Roussette · 26/02/2020 18:17

I love women sticking up for themselves and taking no shit!

Yes. I have to say, I've possibly underplayed it a bit, it was getting her down (it was horrible what they were saying) but she was the one to write to the Principal and tell him what for! (Didn't know she was doing it)

TheMustressMhor · 26/02/2020 18:32

The other threads were very confusingly titled

That isn't true. They were all titled "Harry and Meghan" (plus a number)

Everyone seemed to find them without any difficulty.

rockingchaircandle · 26/02/2020 18:41

As to their purpose. There was nothing to indicate a direction like 'a place for people who are happy for Harry and Meghan'. They were open titles, and sometimes convoluted.
Still, anyone can post where they like-hopefully as civilly as possible!

rockingchaircandle · 26/02/2020 18:43

Its a really horrible experience but she sounds very decisive! Good on herSmile

Froq · 26/02/2020 18:44

There was nothing to indicate a direction

Well except for you, rocking Wink

peridito · 26/02/2020 18:51

Ah Buttery actually I was asking if anyone else found it sad that a poster felt she should explain why she wouldn't be posting in order to avoid being accused of not engaging .

If you believe Annie to stop this thread becoming "toxic"you need to avoid putting words into someone's mouth .

Obviously everyone should be able to step away at any time, or contribute at any time very kind ,glad the time limits and mockery for "popping up several pages later " haven't been imported here . Really good of you to clarify .

Not seen that happen elsewhere ,here or on other threads .

peridito · 26/02/2020 18:54

The not seeing happen elsewhere applies to posters explaining that they were leaving the thread for a while and not refusing to engage !

peridito · 26/02/2020 18:58

Froq sorry you've lost me ,I know you're not directing the comment to me ,but I'd like to understand . Explanation ?

drina27 · 26/02/2020 19:00

The other threads were very confusingly titled...
Rubbish. The titles were clever and not in in the least bit confusing.

drina27 · 26/02/2020 19:03

The consecutive numbers idea was inspired!

TheMustressMhor · 26/02/2020 19:03

Encyclo I still don't understand what you meant when you mentioned my having performed a U-Turn.

Could you clarify?

drina27 · 26/02/2020 19:05

As the Queen would say, “ Oh pleeeease.”

drina27 · 26/02/2020 19:05

@peridito

Butterymuffin · 26/02/2020 19:09

peridito I didn't put words in your mouth. What you've posted since narrows down what you meant, in my view, in your initial post. I find it disappointing that 'you're not engaging!' has become a stick to beat other posters with (I've seen rocking use the stick metaphor a number of times so I take it it's deemed acceptable) for any reason, whether that's going to work, simply wishing not to begin/continue dialogue with another poster, or whatever. You still seem to think people have an obligation to 'engage' with posts they find contentious, then, but it's just that there shouldn't be some kind of time limit on it? If I'm misunderstanding, please let me know where I'm not getting your intention.

drina27 · 26/02/2020 19:13

Weirdly real life gets in the way, sometimes. AND It feels like an imposition to engage if one does not wish to. I shall decide the rules of engagement - or not - for myself.

Butterymuffin · 26/02/2020 19:19

I shall decide the rules of engagement - or not - for myself

Totally agree with this drina. I don't think anyone should be harangued about 'not engaging'. (Yes, deliberate verb choice there.)

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:20

Why is no one engaging with me?

And you haven’t even asked me if I’m alright?

I shall flounce

Encyclo · 26/02/2020 19:21

Encyclo I still don't understand what you meant when you mentioned my having performed a U-Turn.

Could you clarify?

That would be a TAAT discussion. Probably not allowable. It just struck me as funny 😄

rockingchaircandle · 26/02/2020 19:23

The 'engaging' thing came from Annie. If you go back you can see some posts, but she's had deletions. Annie brought up posts from last Sunday from another thread and was tenacious to say the least. Annie claimed Seneca wasn't engaging or was selectively engaging. Seneca pointed out she was at work. I think it did come across demanding so I understand Peridito's point, and I've always found Seneca admirably calm and polite. Do the 'haranguing' originated with Annie.

I've had lots of posts and points ignored, some quietly, some less so!

So I think we all agree about engaging as you wish and in your time frame.

Encyclo · 26/02/2020 19:27

At one point Annie had 8 posts in a row this afternoon.

The tenacious AnnieL

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:28

ANNIE!!!!!!!!

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:28

OVER HERE!

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:29

1

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:29

2

SussexRoyalties · 26/02/2020 19:29

3