Harry and Meghan - everyone still being respectful please

[Oldbutstillgotit]

Lots still to talk about .

Froggy you seem obsessed with an unnamed, unknown, unidentifiable site.

You have called them racist, neo nazis, and all sorts of vile names without the slightest shred of proof this mystery site even exists.

What exactly does that have to do with this site, or topic?

@froggygoneacourting

I can't believe this is true froggy. Do you have any links/proof to substantiate this accusation?

Yes, I have both, but as explained above linking to or even writing the name of the other forum is banned here.

Perhaps now is the time to leave discussion of it in the past as it isn’t this forum and has no relevance to the discussion we are trying to have. If you have concerns about people posting on here, just report them and deal with MN instead of frequent posts about it.

Hi all,

We don't want to drag arguments from (or about) other sites onto this thread - so can we draw a line here, please?

As ever, any concerns - just report to us or send a mail to [email protected]

Thanks

Pheasant you seem obsessed with derailing and dismissing the objective and well-documented fact that trolls are attacking this forum and attacking posters.

I've already given explicit instructions as to where links and screencaps can be found.

I've had many conversations with MNHQ about the other site and they are very concerned about it. To whoever claimed MNHQ can't take action on things happening off-board: obviously they do not have any control over things that people do and say outside of MN, but they certainly can take action when it comes to thinks people do within MN, even if the proof comes from outside. If they are given proof that a Mumsnetter deliberately abused the report function, or that a Mumsnetter falsified screencaps of DM conversations in an attempt to get an innocent poster banned, that is certainly information that MNHQ can act on, as it pertains to action committed within Mumsnet itself and acts committed by Mumsnet posters.

Sorry, my post was aimed at froggy (and the others, like Roulette) who make references to the other forum. I appreciate they dislike whatever goes on there but this thread isn’t the place to air that.

@WinnieTheW0rm

When will the case Meghan brought against AP be heard?

From the BBC account of today's rules no:

"This latest hearing was unfortunately another step in a case that has already been drawn out by a defendant who uses the legal process to exploit the duchess's privacy and the privacy of those around her for profit-motivated clickbait rather than journalism."

I really don't see how the defendant is in any way at fault for seeking to mount their defence!

I believe it is the 11th January and due to last seven to ten days.

Froggy that sounds very concerning but I agree with the others by reporting to mumsnet directly

Of course Im derailing.

This is a thread about Harry and Meghan, for people intrested in the Royal Family.

I appreciate you want a very different conversation Froggy, why not start a thread about it instead of turning every H&M thread into rants about some website you dont like?

@EastonSarah

Can we stop discussing racism if there isn't any evidence here? It's as ridiculous as some of the older threads where people were being accused of being Brexiteers if they didn't like meg.

Yes please, very sensible suggestion.

@Madasahattersteaparty1749 that’s because froggy tends to be very positive about MM. If it was the other way round, they would have been banned. You can see historically that the case, so it’s not speculation.

@Froggy It would be interesting if you could post links to this other site. It sounds horrible. If it is banned by MMHQ then the worst that could happen would be that the post would be deleted?

PLEASE can we talk about this site only, about Harry and Meghan, and keep everything topical and civil?? Is that too much? What was said about PPs is in the past. As BoJo would say, “move on.”

I feel a bit sorry for Harry and Meghan now. They are clearly out of their depth regarding the AN court case and it is quite horrific what could happen. The Daily Mail won’t care, they will be loving the ready made headlines and click throughs. All this court case serves is to make AN a huge shedload of money.

Has any interviewer directly asked Scobie 'how do you know Meghan did a wee behind a tree? What about the layout of the tiara vault?' fascinated to see what he would say.

Let’s get back on track, I know it’s been asked before but is there a definitive answer on whether Meghan can chose to withdraw the case (assuming she wanted to)?

Regardless of what you think of her, I can’t see the DM letting this one go. They seem to win whichever way it goes.

Im not sure about being out of their depth. Harry maybe, but Meghan strikes me as more intelligent.

Id agree itd be fascinating to hear Omids responses! Where did he get that information from, if not Meghan?

Sorry crossed posts Swordfish.

Meghan can only withdraw the case if AN agree.

I cant see that happening, not with how much press the case is generating and how much information they will get from Omid and the watsap messages.

@StartupRepair

Has any interviewer directly asked Scobie 'how do you know Meghan did a wee behind a tree? What about the layout of the tiara vault?' fascinated to see what he would say.

This sort of information is what leads me to believe that either Harry and Meghan had input in the book, despite their claims to the contrary, or there has been a diary or some such, carelessly misplaced in Scobie/Durand's direction.

These are the sorts of personal information that can only have came from the people responsible. I mean, how many of us would write letters to friends and family, saying things like "I wee'd behind a tree in Africa". I know I certainly wouldnt.

@StartupRepair

Has any interviewer directly asked Scobie 'how do you know Meghan did a wee behind a tree? What about the layout of the tiara vault?' fascinated to see what he would say.

If it goes to court, I’d imagine this is exactly what the defence barrister is looking forward to asking. Then tripping him up with other things he has said in the past that contradict.

It would also be interesting to see what was pitched to sell the serialisation to The Times and whether it was touted then as having H&M’s approval or input. The authors’ note clearly makes out that they were involved and I wonder why that was in there in the first place if H&M didn’t have anything to do with it; also why it was left in when it must have been obvious to all concerned that the book gave every indication of Meghan cooperating with Scobie, which would go against her court case.

@PheasantPlucker1

Meghan can only withdraw the case if AN agree.

I cant see that happening, not with how much press the case is generating and how much information they will get from Omid and the watsap messages.

I agree that ANL won’t want the case withdrawn. I can only think that Meghan thinks she will win and that will somehow redeem herself in the public eye. Whereas even if she does win, which is now starting to look less likely despite at the start it being probable, she will lose what’s left of her reputation and cause lots of future damage (which celebrity will trust her now?).

Uh, I'm not the one who raised the subject of posters abusing the report function. You guys did.

I didn't see the deleted post, so no opinion on whether it broke talk guidelines or not. But if someone feels their post was wrongly deleted they should do what I did and email MNHQ privately. It's wrong to attack MNHQ publicly especially when it's not even your post.

In response to the conversation you started, I made a post describing situations where my own posts had been wrongly deleted and then restored, situations where MNHQ admitted I'd been victim to false reports, and the fact (which I have concrete proof of) that at least one Meghan Basher has admitted to making malicious false reports.

That is relevant to the conversation you yourselves chose to start.

It's not one rule for Bashers and another for Defenders. Maybe don't accuse Defenders of something when Bashers are openly bragging about doing that very same thing in easily screencapped/archived websites.

Our aim is to:
Make parents' lives easier by pooling knowledge, advice and support. We try, as far as possible to let the conversation flow and not to over-moderate. Mumsnet is a site for grown-ups.

Bollocks.