Omid Scodie says Meghan was wrong about Archie becoming a prince at birth

[artquejtion]

He has publicly stated that Meghan was incorrect about her understanding of the protocol around Archie becoming a Prince.

Considering Omid seems to the M & H unofficial spokesperson, it is more than likely that Meghan now realises this is the case and his skin colour would not have been a deciding factor in it.

it does make you wonder why Harry did not explain it to her ? did he just not have a clue about about Royal protocol and succession, maybe he never needed to understand it. . Or was he so desperate to get her to marry him that he fed her a load of bull, i.e. our kids will be princesses and princes. Did he hope he could convince the queen to change protocol for his family?

Please don't get this thread deleted with comments which MN don't like, I am beginning to suspect there are posters who purposely troll M & H threads to ensure MN will delete them, so there is never a discussion allowed to stand..

@ohforarainyday

What is the “other” forum people keep mentioning? Why the secrecy?

The secrecy is because its name is banned here. Posts containing that name are auto-deleted.

It's a forum started up by posters who had been banned from here, and they're extremely critical towards MN and towards specific people working at MN, so for obvious reasons MNHQ don't want to give them traffic. There was also an issue where the people who started the other forum kept coming here and spamming threads and spamming people's PMs with links to their forum.

Oh this makes sense. I was wondering why there is a sudden influx. So their hate site is closed now? I wish they could go back, MN would have to close down MM threads again, I can see they are getting out of control again, from the same posters, repeating the same thing, just like the last time.

There is one I clearly recognised. They have changed names most of them. But this one posts around 50 posts a day. A real nutter who used to claim to live in Canada when H&M were there. I see now they live in the UK suddenly. Very aggressive responses, lots of personal attacks, always 'correcting' people even when they provide proof or say something positive about H&M.

I knew about the name changes, at some point MNHQ complained about the confusion of name changing. I wish MN was advanced enough to have track IP addresses. Although judging by some of them, they would go out of their way to post from a different computer and location.

Unfortunately if you want to disguise yourself to troll on MN, you can. NCing makes it easy, then you can hide your ISP with a VPN and so on. It happened a lot last year and has undoubtedly happened this year too.

I also recognise writing styles from these posters. And the fact they are always 'new' or have been around a week or so. Very cowardly. and it's weird and over the top.
I barely see who I'm replying to because I am responding to the post and what's written and not targeting the actual poster because of their name and wanting to troll them.

@Roussette so true.
its so obvious its funny.

You just can’t believe people are entitled to dislike her and her behaviour can you without people being ‘trolls’ or having sinister intent. I think that is very strange. Disliking her or having issues with the way she has behaved or expressed herself does not make someone a troll or a ‘hater’. Or a racist. No doubt there are such people out there. There are nutters on the internet who express lots of unpleasant opinions. MN in general is not a site which attracts these people. However there are some who are absolutely convinced MM can do no wrong and anyone expressing an opinion otherwise must be a mad person with l ill intent.

You just can’t believe people are entitled to dislike her and her behaviour can you without people being ‘trolls’ or having sinister intent

You have no idea how wrong you are with that. I presume you don't know the history of the last year or so with the trolling. If I went into details, I'd be here all day. But please do not dismiss what happened. I and other posters lived it.

You are quite entitled to dislike her.

I do know. Yes. So don’t patronise me.

@mermaidsariel

I do know. Yes. So don’t patronise me.

if you know, why belittle the awful time people like me and Roussette went through. some of those posters are back posting on these threads.

I'm not patronising you. I'm stating facts.

If you do know, why are you saying MN is a site that doesn't attract these people?
Obviously incorrect.
It has and it does.

Unless you are responding to me saying 'you are quite entitled to dislike her'.
I don't know. Your post isn't clear.

It's not even belittling , it's insinuating it doesn't and didn't happen.

Even worse.

There's actual solid proof that some of the posters on these threads have done all of the things mentioned. SOME. Not all.

We have the proof of MNHQ emails and deletion messages, and the proof of screencaps of posts made on the 'other' forum, that some of the most virulently anti-Meghan posters are previously banned trolls.

We have the proof of MNHQ emails and deletion messages that mass sockpuppeting has occurred, with the agenda to make it look like more people hate Meghan than do.

We have the proof of having seen literally hundreds of threads containing real extreme hatred, so many threads that were deleted, and a constant influx of new usernames and usernames that stick around for only a short time.

We have the proof of posts on the other forum, and MNHQ emails admitting posts were reported maliciously and announcing decisions to undelete posts, that anti-Meghan posters are using tactics to censor pro-Meghan posters.

We have personal first hand proof of pro-Meghan posters being abused and harassed both here and on other forums, including being doxxed. We have black Mumsnetter's personal experience of posting under two usernames and receiving very different treatment.

We have the proof of being able to look at certain posters' prior posting history in threads about BLM, Gollys, and other race-related threads, to show they they hold fairly extreme views about race and racism, and/or have a history of repeatedly being goady in threads about race.

We have the proof of having seen the many (now deleted) Meghan threads that contained direct racism and racial abuse, including the now infamous thread where a poster typed the N word out in full in all caps.

We have the proof of the criminal hate campaign and doctored PMs against PatricksRum (in response to her campaigning for a Black Mumsnetters section) orchestrated by some of the same individuals who are the most vociferous against Meghan.

If you're not one of those posters then none of that is about you, and defensiveness in proving they don't exist is misplaced.

Are there people who just casually dislike her solely for her behaviour? Who liked her fine, but only dislike her due to recent events? Absolutely yes.

But it baffles me why people in the latter category want to deny people in the former category exist.

Context matters. History matters. There are plenty of perfectly innocuous things (like plimsolls, primary school children asking teacher to go to the toilet, Bob Dylan, and Maddie McCann) that are an automatic red flag due to past history.

@ohforarainyday

Calm down! deleted comments and deleted threads. So trolls troll on the Internet, didn't you know?!

Look I have my own fanclub of social misfits who follow me about but can't debate with me without getting deleted. They do not represent mn as a whole.

And stop derailing!

Bob Dylan? I don't like him but wasn't aware he was some kind of code.

Are there people who just casually dislike her solely for her behaviour? Who liked her fine, but only dislike her due to recent events? Absolutely yes.

I'm glad we can establish that.

@Cacacoisfarraige
You are very kind, thank you.
I just know that I had a run of about four posters, all new to MN, who were really unpleasant a couple of months back, following me from thread to thread posting underhand, sarcastic and rude comments to me every time I said anything, however innocuous.
After a while they stop and never post a thing again with that name. So it's pretty obvious what they are doing.

Janiie hope you don't mean me lol. We made up didn't we?!
I agree that it's not MN as a whole, course not, but to deny it happened or happens is wrong

Basically.... this... But it baffles me why people in the latter category want to deny people in the former category exist

Those tactics above work both ways though.

What is known about SM is that it attracts agent provocateurs style posters who are in for a bun fight or who genuinely "hate" everything/everyone. Those types can be posting as anyone and can create a history to support their chosen identity on a particular subject etc.

It's best to always be sceptical about a poster's identity and what anyone says about themselves on SM. No-one knows their motives.

You say there are black posters pretending to be white on MN, equally some posters may pose as a black person or pose as a NF racist or just post as if they're ignorant and dim, but might be stunningly bright. People's agenda is unknown as to what they're saying and why they're saying it.

None of it means that people don't experience racism. It's just the person typing the N word as you described, could be a racist twat or they could be looking for a reaction or they could potentially be looking to use it in the future as evidence to support claims of racism on MN. No-one knows for sure which of those it is.

Extreme of any argument always attracts people described above. The EU arguments - I was always called a Russian bot back in the day. Left for a bit - not because they'd won - just nowhere to go with people that don't understand someone can have a different point of view.

Similar has been attempted to happen on MN ie. shut down debate regarding H&M. However, when people are called racist, people will stick around to defend themselves against that accusation. It is only natural. So the discussions gets more heated when facts are misunderstood by so many that are offended on behalf of Harry.

However, as people mostly aren't disliking H&M for racism (I'm sure as you say - some may dislike them only for the fact that M has a black mum, not met anyone in real life that joins dots in that way, but you say you have).

None of us know for sure, so we stick to facts of what happened - and the facts, unfortunately for H&M do not come out on their side. They are both very entitled and self-absorbed people that expect to be forgiven any bad behaviour, but equally and hypocritically will not tolerate anything from anyone and cut people out left, right and centre. They were only here 18 months as a married couple and been gone just as long and every day it's longer. When they stop using titles and earning from the institution they despise, people will lighten up on the ridicule. Have the gumption to stand up for what they apparently believe would be a start. Bin the RF because they claim it's racist, but don't look ridiculous using titles.