So Sam did something first and posted on twitter about how the GC had 'come for them'. That was dated 20 April 2024. So there had clearly previously been an issue discussed with HR then. (If indeed this was real and not a made up story. It was later claimed to be made up by Sam which is mentioned on the original MN thread above).
Then in May a MN starts a thread with these screenshots from April in it, saying they'd like to clarify policy with the hospital as someone was saying that they were deliberately doing something unlawful whilst recruiting.
As well as a bunch of anti-MN posts.
They'd previously put up a tweet saying where they had worked, in effect meaning they were easily identifiable. That's poor understanding of what you put up on social media and how it might reflect on you and your employer. That technically might put you in breach of your employment contract over social media usage by bringing your employer into disrepute.
So a single MNetter (using a throwaway username never to be seen again) then claimed to have then contacted the hospital over concerns. We have no idea if this actually happened or was a set up. And the complaint did seem fairly reasonable, given it was boasting about acting unlawfully - and given they'd put their place of work online by their own free will, hard to argue in terms of doxxing.
The comments throughout the thread were not about getting someone sacked though but actually about clarifying policy and easing concerns over discrimination. And saying they doubted that Sam actually worked there at all and it wasn't real. And concerns over Sam's mental health.
This person has now done a gloat about how MN (plural as in everyone) doxxed them, didn't do their research because 'the trust found there was no one by that name working there'.
Which is hardly reflective of the original short three page thread. Nor the fact that concerns were much more about policy. Nor how numerous posters didn't think Sam was real and said so at the time.
Nor can we establish whether the poster who claimed to report was actually real and that the report did in fact happened. And wasn't just a set up to smear MN later on.
Either way there certainly wasn't a clamour of multiple posters begging for a head on a stick and a sacking. The fact it was only three pages shows the general lack of interest in this on MN. That's a far cry from what we've seen happen to gender critical women.
But Sam wants to make this out to be something that was much bigger than it was, and how much hate and vitriol MN had. It's rather attention seeking and frankly totally different to what was posted which can't even be said to be a regular MNetter rather than a set up.
Sam is seeking a drama and a boogie man.