Tempest v Rural Payments Agency Tribunal Thread 2

[myladydisdainisyetliving]

Previous thread: https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5546841-tempest-v-rural-payments-agency-tribunal-thread-follow-on-from-chair-of-seen-is-being-sued

TT substack: https://tribunaltweets.substack.com/p/tempest-vs-defra-and-rural-payments

Tempest (a TW) is claiming discrimination, harassment and/or victimisation on grounds of gender reassignment. Central to the claim is the existence of the Sex Equality and Equity Network in the Civil Service (SEEN). SEEN has been granted right to intervene. Parts of the original claim against the co-chair of SEEN (Elspeth Duemmer-Wrigley) and another party (Andreas Mueller) were struck out or narrowed. Another claimant, PQ, is no longer part of the case.

I will also note that Elspeth still has a garden in need of seeds and water to support the ability of SEEN to be an intervenor in this case. The claim originated because she said "only women menstruate" and a search with her name and those terms at the usual gardening website should point you to her plot.

Cannot recall page number of email demonstrating tit.

Well indeed. I've been responsible for moderating forums a few times, and have never systematically kept copies of things I deleted. Most of those things were just obvious spam anyway - supposing I'd landed in this kind of situation, without knowing much about the subject matter myself, it's easy to believe I'd have been slow to realise my decisions might end up in front of a tribunal and need to be evidenced!

He knows an unseemingly large amount of detail about the moderation process, right?

interesting… ST seems to know this spreadsheet inside and out and back to front. Now, when would he have found the time to get his PhD in 'spreadsheet I don't like'?

The knowledge that my words
from an internal workplace platform had been copied and discussed on a
public forum, by people who could potentially identify me, caused me
significant anxiety.

Oh the irony.

Oh and the claimant really didn’t want to discuss the examples that AL picked out of the WS and tried to take the court to other examples instead. Not quite a Ben Cooper moment of “you know how this works, I ask the questions and you answer them”, but close enough.

ST: I have an issue with this one- action appears to have been taken before it was posted. Not sure this entry is accurate

Like this - he appears to have intimate knowledge of dates etc. Wondering if what is referred to here (comment removed before it was posted) is simply a typo?

As pp have said ST was looking for offence, I suspect many allies were supplying evidence (adding fuel to the fire) and DEFRA/RPA, HR were trying to reassure ST they were being even handed.

I did once keep a public sector complaint log. It was a fairly simple spreadsheet but there weren’t nearly as many complaints!

My spreadsheets are accurate and clear, it's not my fault this one is a load of old tut!

Does anyone remember how much time NC was initially given to question him, and if that gets reduced now because of all this spreadsheet stuff extending AL's questioning?

Mumsnet keep the messages they delete. I know as they very kindly sent me a load they had deleted when I asked them to! I don't know if they keep them indefinitely though or just long enough to send a "Mumsnet calling will you please behave yourself" email.

@myladydisdainisyetliving WOW - doesn't that just beggar belief!

I think she wanted a day and will get that. The spreadsheet has caused an extended cross exam from AL.

Interestingly by ST insisting on the SS it’s backfired as AL has been able to direct the judge to specific posts on both sides of the debate.

Flip me - that’s shocking!

You’ve been sent case management papers in this case??

I mean that’s a disciplinary offence.

Not all this absolute crud from Tink. Oh he liked a post saying a woman wore a bra once and it annihilated me as a womanly man.

I'm with him on that. I've currently got an ongoing complaint with a government body and part of the complaint involves an excel spreadsheet (2 actually) that the government department keep failing to understand, whereas I'm intimately familiar with just about every entry dating back to 2016. But then I'm a lady of leisure with an axe to grind.

They aren’t deleted. They’re just set to “do not display”.

Actually removing data from an online system is a “finger of God” level function, that should be reserved for court orders and the like. Post moderation is far too junior to actually do that.

The right database query should be able to turn up every edit and mod action.

@myladydisdainisyetliving That is shocking. Was it the same clerk or is there more than one eejit working at Leeds?

The difference is my dear Beetle - this was his evidence references in his witness statement using an excel spreadsheet in his possession provided to the court by his lawyers.

So all they had to do was print it out correctly. Even having a laptop as they did allows him to go the the right lines.

On the day his examples aren’t slam dunks - they’re piss poor. It’s clear people were trying to be even handed but even hanging and quartering wasn’t ok for sex realists. They needed to be ground into beef and fed to gender neutral crows. 🐦‍⬛

It’s nothing confidential, it’s just another written confirmation of judges directions on a matter already discussed in open in court, but still.

@myladydisdainisyetliving fuck me! Their first error was bad enough but to then fuck up again? WOW!

It’s not so much as to the content but imagine it was the ID of the anonymous PQ or whatever.

Their data handling is shocking. And the judge gets upset about a public document being you know public!!

Thank you. I did not know that.

Bloody hell, they really are all the talents, aren't they.