Charles financially supported the Sussexes until summer 2020

[SnottyLottie]

news.sky.com/story/duke-and-charles-paid-substantial-sum-to-harry-and-meghan-after-megxit-but-couple-paid-back-rent-for-frogmore-cottage-12340192

Prince Harry revealed in his Oprah interview that the Sussexes stopped receiving money from the royal family in the first quarter of 2020. However, newly published accounts reveal that Prince Charles continued to financially support the Sussexes until summer 2020.

I wonder if this is going to be a case of their truth or incorrect wording on Harry’s behalf. Interesting!

As I did a few posts ago, I found the discussion on the acting persona interesting. It would be nice to continue to have discussion rather than filling up a thread with “they said this and that and I reported it blah blah”. I think it’s reasonable to point out inconsistencies or unpleasantness, but do it and then move on. Someone came in to a thread a while ago to point out this sort of behaviour which derails and takes over a thread. They were correct. Can we do something different?

Hi all. If this thread continues towards discussing other deleted threads then we'll have to take it down. Please do try to keep things on topic - and report any personal attacks etc.

@ohforarainyday

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

I haven't seen a thread where people defend Andrew - although I will still make the factual point that he hasn't been found guilty of anything.

Bringback I post an emoji so I'm rude?
Good grief.
Lucky you if that's all you have to put up with.
I particularly made a point of excluding you from any of what I said but I'm rude for an emoji.

Your post sums it up

There are lots of interesting posts on this thread so would be a shame for it to be deleted is my good morning post.

I hope the state unveiling does indeed go smoothly and no points are made/scored either way about recent events.

don't usual bother correcting but in circumstances a "u" can give a very different meaning to that sentence

I repeat: why was my post asking why multiple posts from black women stating "I have been racially abused on MN" are all being deleted?

And why was a post stating an opinion that it's misogynistic to accuse a pregnant woman of touching her bump to attention-seek deleted?

Neither of those posts broke talk guidelines.

@MNHQ
Is it possible to prevent people whose comments are deleted from posting further on a thread, rather than delete the thread altogether? It seems a pity to lose the information that others have shared, because some people become very involved.

@MNHQ that's a good idea and then can say it on another thread as sometimes it can derail a thread - if a post of mine is deleted then I'd happily accept not being able to continue on that thread - seems to make sense.
Would prevent (all over MN) threads ending up being deleted - I'm in - happy to accept I can't continue to post on a thread if had posts on it deleted and may have to start another one.

Yes that’s a great idea.

[quote Marmaladeagain]@MNHQ that's a good idea and then can say it on another thread as sometimes it can derail a thread - if a post of mine is deleted then I'd happily accept not being able to continue on that thread - seems to make sense.
Would prevent (all over MN) threads ending up being deleted - I'm in - happy to accept I can't continue to post on a thread if had posts on it deleted and may have to start another one.[/quote]

I'm not sure it would work tbh.

I think we'd just end up with a proliferation of threads all ostensibly discussing the same thing as posters started new threads to circumvent their ban on another.

I think the best approach is not to respond to the whataboutary and derailment that sometimes occurs on the threads.

Just "scroll back" to the last reasonable comment and pick up from there to keep the thread on track.

On that note it's being reported that H will be attending a surprise charity event this evening (charity not yet specified) and that W&H will have a private meeting after the statue unveiling.

Let's hope both events go well.

@myrtleWilson

I think at the height of the deletions period I saw a noisy collective of posters who were very much anti MM and some of which were in the group of name changers etc. At best some of their behaviour was childish, malicious and had more unpleasant aspects. There was and still is a relatively sized group of posters some of whom are fixed in their 'champion or critic' position and some of whom hold variable viewpoints depending on the context. These groupings generally imo try to hold interesting discussions with occasional friction, disagreement and dollops of humour. Then, from my reading, there is a smaller group who appear unwilling or unable to countenance any criticism of PH and MM and seem to tar anyone who does with being members of (or behaving like) the first group I mentioned. I personally don't think that approach increases the credibility of those (smaller number) of posters as their posts increasingly become predictable.

There have been interesting and insightful discussions on these threads, more often away from the "heat" surrounding the Principals but moving into wider discussions about the principles of a monarchy - evolution, restrictions, cultural shifts etc. I thought the discussion upthread about personas and actors was interesting and an example of that wider debate.

I agree with this and particularly that the "wider" discussions that emerge when the thread is allowed to "breathe" are the most interesting.

I've learned a lot for example about constitutional monarchy and the extent of power/influence the RF have, the way HMQ and PC are funded through the Duchy's of Lancaster and Cornwall.

Also the difference in approach between the British RF and other monarchy's in how they've "modernised" (or not).

How mysterious about the charity event! I suppose the 1 July date has been fixed for some time, so once it was clear the birth of his second child wouldn't clash, there's been scope to organise something. Will be interesting to see if it's military / Invictus related.

Yes secretly planned that is revealed so not a secret etc

The whole "no-one knows that 3 days before" always makes me laugh as I think of Spinal Tap - "Stonehenge" - Nigel Tufnel - "no-one knows who they were or what they were doing" Druids.

Funny enough there is a statue unveiling during the song as the tiny Stonehenge backdrop is lowered towards the end of the song and the measurements are wrong - oh it is funny - inches instead of feet etc

I do like the photo you posted Serenster and that would be lovely - it's the looking away and not directly face on gives it "open to interpretation" of the onlooker.

@ChiefInspectorParker

I hope William and Harry can enjoy some cake together!

Yes let's hope so. Family is so important I really hope H has had time to reflect and is going to try and build some bridges. 'Reach out' as they like to say.

oh wrong thread...statue thread

@Marmaladeagain. Although it’s the wrong thread, you have now left me with a mental image of Spinal Tap and the leprechaun dancing round a mini Stonehenge 😂

I know - the little tinkly music as they dance around Stonehenge and the look on David St Hubbins' face -

"no-one knows" (is always said in Nigel Tufnel flat tones in my head and makes me smile)

I saw an opinion piece somewhere the other day (sorry to be vague) that suggested that H is saying one thing when he is in contact with his family and the going back to Meghan and saying something else. This suggests to me something that I have suspected all along, namely, that he is easily led and eager to please the person he is with at the time. I don’t know if this is true, of course, but not would certainly explain some of his more contradictory behaviour 🤔🤷‍♀️