News on Meghan and Harry

[Viviennemary]

Since they are in the news more or less daily why not a thread on this. Latest I've read over the last few days is that Meghan is going to produce a film from a book. And later this month she is teaming up with Michelle Obama for project on gender equality. Both sound interesting projects.

there’s plenty of robust discussion on other fora

Is Fora the plural of Forum?

Genuine question! And I bow to the superior linguistics of Cartesiandebt

@Myimaginarycathadfleas

It would be helpful if a reason was given for deletions. I appreciate this might prompt objections but I think in many case something more than a link to TGs is warranted. At the very least the breached TG should be referenced.

Completely agree. Just posting a link to the talk guidelines is a bit of a cop out. An explanation would be good.

Yes, I agree, we need a reason for deletions and how exactly posts contravene the rules.

Chancery have consistently awarded higher damages. QB lower damages (in similar cases) That’s fact

Interesting ... thanks too for clearing up the bit about judges being selected according to relevant experience, rather than being the next in the queue

Every day's a schoolday on here

@Cartesiandebt

It would be helpful if a reason was given for deletions. I appreciate this might prompt objections but I think in many case something more than a link to TGs is warranted. At the very least the breached TG should be referenced

Agreed the perceived censorship of seemingly blameless posts is tiresome. I suspect people will vote with their feet if it continues, this is a major story & there’s plenty of robust discussion on other fora

Which other forums? I think I need a visit.

There is no way most (or any) of the recent post breached talk guidelines. By all means delete and say legal concerns due to ongoing case, and then specify what is and what is not permitted although I think people will still vote with their feet eventually.

I can't even remember what I said in my deleted post.

I have consistently tried to post factual comments. Or comments that are freely available from reliable highly experienced commentators elsewhere, eg Joshua Rosenberg. It’s difficult to understand why posts are deleted when my posts are not contravening anything where MN could have legal difficulties.

Some of the late-evening posts were still there on the laptop though, so I scrolled back to check, and they weren't spats so much, but posts that might be considered libellous if you were so inclined - opinions about MM's motivations, for example.

I can't recall the exact posts anymore but most of them had nothing offensive or insulting or remotely racially motivated in them. They were clearly personal opinions which is what a discussion forum should be about? Many were related to court documents or news articles that are already in the public domain.

To be fair, we're all on MN and must play by their rules but does seem a bit strange when posts here are intensely monitored when other threads of people repeatedly calling Amber Heard "batshit crazy" are left up. I think (think = purely personal opinion here in a democratic country where free speech is allowed) there are some legal things happening in the background that aren't being communicated transparently as it might be more damaging to the images of certain people.

@My0My
Exactly yours were one of the posts that I found very interesting! I did noticed that all the posts referenced certain topics or initials so maybe that was also a factor.

The more I think about the events of the past couple of days, the more convinced I am that at least some of the 5 ‘friends’ don’t exist.

I didn’t use initials for the friends. I’m not sure if I talked about Thomas Markle giving evidence but this case is widely known as Markle vs Markle. Copyright vs ownership.

I’ve been on these threads for yonks. I think they either have a new employee on the night shift, who’s a little trigger happy with the delete button or something is going on behind the scenes. Probably the former given the timing of the deletions and how anodyne (compared to some of the posts on this website) my opinions were.

Whatever the reason, they aren’t being deleted because they breach talk guidelines.

I read your post and several others that were deleted and there was nothing wrong with them, or mine that also allegedly broke talk guidelines. As said elsewhere, some of the comments against other people like Amber Heard on other threads are horrific - yes she is an abuser, just like Johnny Depp is, but the targeted comments are far more insulting and actually do breach talk guidelines.

Then again, MNHQ has never managed to comment on the fact that comments against Harry and Meghan they view as racist are equally against a privileged, wealthy, white male.

ARoseinHarlem. Yes I read your post. I have no idea what was wrong with that either. However social media “friends” might be reading comments and complaining? That’s a bit conspiracy theory but as far as I’m concerned I didn’t say anything not already in the public domain and in very good truthful circles.

I might not always agree with you ARose but I always do find your posts interesting and informative.
I didn't see any of the deleted posts last night so I have no idea what they were about at all.

Nothing that a reasonable person would have found contentious!

I didn’t see them either Rousette

I didn't see the posts either. But it would be useful to know in what way they broke guidelines so the rest of us could avoid doing that.

why not ask mn hq? it would be interesting to find out. I wasn't on her last night so didn't see the posts so have no idea what they were about.

I've just reported your post above @Viviennemary to draw MN's attention to it and I asked if they can comment on the reason for the deletions.

I do think there is a difference between pure speculation and views that are expressed by well informed and expert commentators which are factual.

I absolutely loved Meghan when she first appeared. I like most people hadn’t heard of her before Harry met her so l came to see her without her back story or acting. I thought she would be amazing for the Royal Family and the country. The wedding was so beautiful, it all seemed so hopeful.
This is just so disappointing.

I have a question for those who are Pro-Meghan or those who feel neutral to it all - do you think your opinion of MM would change if it was revealed that there wasn't five friends and that all or even one or two of them where revealed to be MM herself?

Gosh I couldn't put a number on how many friends would be not enough friends if that makes sense!
I would hope there were five friends, and if she has made up all of them, I would think what a stupid ridiculous thing to do and what was she thinking, because her credibility would be severely compromised. I would like to think she hadn't made up any at all.

I cant see how they can be made up. She would not have brought the case. She would not. Unless you mean there is a false name given of a person who doesnt exist? It is inconceivable her lawyers wouldn't have pinned thus down. This is moving into 'the Queen is really an Alien' territory. Just no.