Dan Wootton obsessed with H &M

[BeverleyMakka]

Why is Dan Wootton so obsessed and full of hatred for Harry & Meghan?

i recently listened to Spare on audible - purely because it was free and I was interested to see what he had to say. ( most of it was boring self indulgent crap imo)
predictably the algorithms have filled my YouTube with H &M stuff!

it seems there is a daily barrage of videos from DW about them, such vitriol from this man. It’s unhinged!
I mean don’t get me wrong, I’m no fan of theirs at all but Jesus he acts like they murdered his granny.
He’ll post a picture of one of them literally smiling and turn it into a massive conspiracy theory about smirking at the Queen on her deathbed or some utter nonsense

rant over!!!

Conversations meander.

H did indeed criticise the first amendment (as was mentioned) and I think it is a natural progression to discuss what has happened since.

No-one has made the thread about the president.

If conversations are not supposed to evolve, then we would be stuck with stuff like DW has a YouTube channel. DW has a YouTube channel with sections. DW has a dislike of H&M. DW was some sort of showbiz correspondent. DW has brown hair. DW has teeth.

Report as a derail if you wish.

And then we can discuss DW typing with DW’s fingers. That are on the end of DW’s hands. On the end of DW’s arms.

I’d like to hear more about how Dan Wooten got fired and if Meghan was really involved as someone suggested upthread.

Are Byline Times threads a good place to start? The wrote about him constantly, right? Were they obsessed?

In addition to others posts, it was Grandmistress who introduced DJT to the convo (in a completely reasonable way) and (at least under this name) Grandmistress isn't a 'long term poster'. Occasional contributor I'd say (not a criticism GM!)

Not that I think it’s a derailment at all but perhaps the complaint should be levied at the person who first introduced trump into the conversation! ..@Grandmistress991!! Rather than trying to blame or attempt to smear “longtime posters “
facts matter afterall 🤷‍♀️

Acutslly it was BemusedAmerican from yesterday banging on about Harry and the first amendment which has nothing to do with this thread topic Don’t blame Grandmistress they didn't start it.

I already posted to say why he was fired and what for you could start there

Someone wrote that “she” got him fired. What does that mean?

This was @BemusedAmericanpost ! ….I’ve looked and read it several times! 🔍 , where exactly is trump mentioned???
perhaps the poster doesn’t wish to challenge the actual poster who first mentioned him because they agree with them!! 😬

You were complaining about Trump being mentioned @BemusedAmerican never mentioned Trump!

This feels very dismissive. Did you want to get the thread back to the original topic, or just complain about how it has evolved to shit down the discussion?

Technically the facts are ..Wooten was fired from gb news because his guest Lawrence fox made a very unsavoury comment about not “shagging “ a female mp , this obviously led to complaints!
it has nothing to do with Meghan whatsoever.
facts matter 🤷‍♀️

@LipglossAndLies I think you owe @BemusedAmerican an apology for saying they were ‘banging on’ about Trump which is 1) quite rude and 2) isn’t true.

Any idea what that poster meant?

or know how their relationship went from feeding him one of the biggest RF stories of the decade to what it is now?

I won’t hold my breath!!

I admit that I didn’t focus on that poster’s comment Susan , but it seems it’s a similar situation to the one that c string revealed, she was leaked the information about the “peace” meeting by Sussex sources and then took photographs and wrote the story….the Sussex’s then blamed the palace of leaking!
it seems that he was also discarded and thrown to the wolves when he wasn’t useful.

I feel that describing someone’s post as ‘banging on’ is rude and uncalled for.

It was three sentences. Short ones too. And an opinion they are entitled to.

The only ‘banging on’ (not my favourite term as I do think it is rude but I will use it on this occasion) I have seen is about derailing.

Which, in my opinion, is derailing the thread more than the alleged derailing.

The conversation then went on to mention Trump regardless its still derailing. Don't you agree?

I said banging on abojt harry and the first amendment.

I mentioned Trump cos its also been mentioned

The serial began with bemused American

I dont have anything to apologise for perhaps they should apologise for derailing especislly after MNHQ came on to say not to derail, the rules obviously don't seem to apply to them.

Of course you will defend it, its ok if they derail perfectly acceptable in your eyes.

Looks like those social media behaviours from psychologists were spot on after all

You clearly have no idea on what derailing actually means, I posted upthread what MNHQ actually said, it was NOTHING to do with a thread evolving, once again

but please could we do away with the personal digs, coded in-jokes jokes and group heckling. We ask posters to argue with the point, not the poster

The only person doing the derailing is you “banging on” about non existent derailing.

Harry made one comment once over 5 years ago calling the First Amendment 'bonkers'. It was a stupid thing for him to say but 5 years ago?? And the US has far more problems to worry about quite obviously at the moment.

I had no idea what on earth it had to do with the thread, completely irrelevant!

Oh dear….you seem to have forgotten that I have repeatedly asked you not to directly tag me or quote me! , I deliberately don’t engage directly with you!
so this is the last time I will respond directly!
but seeing as I am now I will take advantage of it!
You who constantly demand facts and exact quotes are trying to get out of the fact you, publicly accused longtime posters of derailment by “banging on about trump “ .
let me present the facts now for you!!

1. @BemusedAmericanmade a very on topic comment about Harry criticising the American constitution ( this is a thread about h and m too!) .

2.@Grandmistress991took this opportunity to bring up trump ( in what I consider a rather pointed comment to an American poster to defend Harry) . 3.@BemusedAmericanobviously replied.

these are the facts and sequence of events!
I don’t know why you are trying to blame @BemusedAmericanfor the posts of another poster @Grandmistress991, or why you are now trying to gaslight everyone on this thread when we can all read what you posted!
you owe @BemusedAmericanan apology for your untruthful comments.

please don’t tag me or quote me again, I will return to my normal position of not responding.

@LipglossAndLies This isn’t your thread. Stop being the thread police, it’s not your job

If you think a post is derailing then why continue responding to it? just make a report to MNHQ.

Simples.

Whole looking at the stupid Dan Wooten channel yesterday a video about Oprah and her interview or them popped up. Apparently she’s recently talked about it.

I never connected how strange it was for Harry to say he was looking into the first amendment after Meghan claiming to be “Silent or Silenced” until now.

I’m not defending it. Read my post.

I’m saying that describing someone’s very short post as ‘banging on’ is rude.

And that all the substantially longer posts about derailing are derailing the thread more.

And don’t tell me what I apparently find acceptable or try to attribute behaviours to me or others on here.

That is getting personal. And funnily enough that is one of the things that HebeMN mentioned in her post.