"Kate's Rebranding Masterclass May Finally See off Meghan"

[MrsMaxDeWinter]

"Five months since she moved up to the second tier of the monarchy, the Princess has started beefing up her top team to make sure she succeeds not only with her “life’s work” on child development, but also with the task of besting Meghan Markle."

Why does Meghan have to look bad for Kate to look good? Why does Meghan need to be bested or seen off? Why is it a competition?

archive.ph/2023.02.08-070754/www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2023/02/08/kates-rebranding-masterclass-may-finally-see-meghan/

There are plenty of photos of Catherine hugging people, particularly children, before she'd even met Meghan. The papers are after a cheap headline which is nothing to do with her. Same with headlines about Meghan. They aren't the journalists.

On another note I can't remember people's name in real life let alone online, particularly as some don't exactly roll off the tongue.

As to nasty things that have been said the things that were being said about William and that the "affair" was a cover for something far more scandalous would take some beating.

As to nasty things that have been said the things that were being said about William and that the "affair" was a cover for something far more scandalous would take some beating.

Would take some biting hum How about Meghan is a gold digging former prostitute whose mother went prison and who faked her pregnancy and broke into Charlotte's room to take photos to sell to the papers and had to be escorted out of KP by security?

This and more was said on the threads that were deleted.

I don't think I'm so important. The actual data is there. Are you saying that my computer is somehow lying?

I understand that most of it is about marketing and personal data collecting. Just surprised that MN features so heavily on blocked tracking sites.

You also just read that people get hounded across boards, with one poster saying they were identified IRL. That is not new either.

Personally, I once received a really strange call ( I don't think it had anything to do with MN, but it did sound sus as I was active on another site at the time and it was tied to it. Will not go into details).

Surprisingly, I think I'm taking things less seriously than most.

I can understand why people may look at someone's posting history if they feel strongly about a topic but IRL?

I don't doubt anyone who says they have had a problem with being tracked online. Or stalked in real life. And that is because I have had experience of this. I typed out a long paragraph here describing my experience, but even now, years later I am too nervous to open up about it.

So... let's not dismiss what someone is saying please.

Maybe you didn't read the posts but prostitution and crime wouldn't be as scandalous as what they were suggesting William enjoys.

Oh yes. I could easily top that but won't repeat the vile slurs lobbed at MM. And the volume of them is astounding.

Are you talking about something beginning with 'P' that was all over Twitter but as far as I am aware, I didn't see threads about it on MN?

Yes, it might've been said on a thread, and that sort of thing should be reported.

I've had trolls from another site stalk me on here, constantly AS and reporting back to their trolly pals, trying to find out who i am irl. So I really can see why folk nc. I don't bother on the royal threads as its obvious it's me but I really do understand why folk do it.

Once you're outspoken and go against the grain which I often have on politics threads you get all kids of trolls targeting and trailing round after you. One quoted stuff I'd said a couple of years ago. Takes some level of adoration to go through my posting history

Did you see the slurs about William? No one should be repeating these things about any of them but seriously were there accusations that MM was engaging with some very extreme sexual activities? I don't focus on these threads but yes I've seen the gold digging, not criminal and not particularly weird, I don't see prostitution as in the same league, I might be influenced as I've known many nice prostitutes, what her mother did or didn't do isn't really a slur against Meghan in fact if her mother was in prison when she was a child surely people would have sympathy for her? As to breaking into Charlotte's bedroom, is she kept locked up? If people are suggesting she broke into KP that is clearly so ridiculous as to be laughable.

That is awful @Janiie. Oh my goodness, what is up with people. We are all entitled to our views whether others like them or not. That would freak me out.

Absolutely. Thread after thread about pegging and alleged affairs. It's just pathetic and all generated form the weirdo 'Sussex Squad' on Twitter. They don't care about anyone else's mh just poor Harold's who is a blabbermouth and brings it all on himself, i hope they make him sign a NDA before the Coronation. That would sting.

Were there threads started on here about this alleged sexual activity he was supposed to like?

I deffo saw it on Twitter by the weird Sussex Squad but I didn't see threads on here about it.

As I said, it was mentioned within royal threads, I saw that.

This is probably a cue for wide eyed ingenues claiming they don’t know what the p is for….

It was rarely removed.

It was used to throw shite about when someone dared criticise H for something he’d said or written. And repeated by a good many. Over and over. And over again.

It was, and will remain, the twat Olympics when it comes to these couples. Folk can’t wait to outcunt the person before them to show their so called allegiance.

And who would probably suffer most at such oft spouted gems? The women.

Yep the p was definitely on here

Yes. Possibly deleted but they ran and ran.

Thanks for support about trolly stalkers Rousette. As we've said we disagree daily but have always kept it polite. Just.

Hehe yes Janiie. I have great sympathy with what you have said.

I called it the 'p' word, but I obviously know what it was. I was trying to avoid being accused at some point of spreading rumours about W. That is all.

It was rarely removed.

Did you report?

@Roussette

You posted - this year 2023 - that you thought William had an affair and last week posted that you don’t comment on personal relationships. I was struck by the hypocrisy of this statement and called you out on it

quite different to ‘your truth’ above, and calling me ‘pathetic’ for pointing out the hypocrisy.

i just stopped believing you after the Hello article (which you denied linking to until a number of posters called you out it).

so thirsty !

Yes.

am I missing something? I think I know what was said about William, and why is that more scandalous than what has been said about Meghan?

I have no problem with someone NC on different boards eg. a different name for Education/TV/Politics etc. But I believe in people using one name for that specific board.I have no problem with someone NC on different boards eg. a different name for Education/TV/Politics etc. But I believe in people using one name for that specific board.

I think people do tend to N/C for specific questions on certain boards of sensitive or very identifying.

However if you're moving round boards and looking at what comes up in active it is very clunky to NC every time you switch boards and very likely to lead to NC failures and inadvertent sock puppeting - at least I find it so.

You can raise it in site issues though I think general idea is NC while creating some issues means many more people can post - though I couldn't say if linking a particular user name with a particular board has ever been considered or if it was technically feasible with their behind scene setup.

I've seen many a thread de-railed by some poster trawling though past posts and raising unrelated issues from years ago - so I still think they'd always be some need for NC after certain amount of time.

FFS... I have addressed the Hello article in my post at 10.11am. I suggest you read what I said.

You are one of the posters who follow me round throwing this at me again and again, despite about ten apologies from me.

Go and harrass someone else.

You are one of the posters who follow me round throwing this at me again and again, despite about ten apologies from me.

I hate this people following you round and quoting stuff - often very selectively.

It's off putting as well if you are only seeing one or two threads from that board and have no idea who or what the old issue is and really would like to join the current discussion - its not usually as informative as claimed and comes across petty point scoring.

@Roussette

I have seen you being harassed by that poster, who has harassed me too, and I believe you. Take it easy.

@Roussette

you are the one who dragged me back in by referring to me as ‘pathetic’ on your post

the truth clearly hurts.

you say kate didn’t get bad comments when she joined the RF proved otherwise by serenster show your comments are untrustworthy and unreliable

followed by a sniffy ‘well not as bad as Meghan’ when it’s pointed out to you - even though some of the comments wished ‘death’ on kate

now that’s pathetic

Now sling your hook, find another poster to feed your victim thirst

Whatever the point being disagreed is, and I’m not following enough to know, harassment isn’t right