I am very upset VM has been made a Guest. She/he has given so much good advice to people on this site.

DITTO ! VM's 'absence' will be a very substantial loss to this forum. She has worked her socks off to help people here. This is a total miscarriage of justice !

An outcome which passeth all understanding.

When I joined this forum I was under the impression that everyone was free to give their opinions/advice and it was up to the individual as to whether or not they took the advice/opinion given ?? clearly I was wrong!

Victoria has given his/her valuable time and lots of factual and well researched facts and I for one think this forum will be poorer without V.M.s input.

Forum members are NOT free to use abusive and threatening language and any such posts will be deleted.
Also 'Guests' are not permitted to post on this forum (see the 'sticky') and software is installed to prevent it. This is primarily to prevent the posting of unpleasant, inappropriate and offensive material. Steve.

So why oh why was one person allowed to stir up so much resentment/unhappiness/distress with repeated unsubstantiated innuendo and nastiness, directed at individuals whose unstinting efforts had been aimed at helping those fighting the bureaucrats? Sorry - I'm just somewhat bewildered - maybe it's the damp Devon air that's got to me and maybe there's a rational explanation.

juwi wrote:So why oh why was one person allowed to stir up so much resentment/unhappiness/distress with repeated unsubstantiated innuendo and nastiness, directed at individuals whose unstinting efforts had been aimed at helping those fighting the bureaucrats? Sorry - I'm just somewhat bewildered - maybe it's the damp Devon air that's got to me and maybe there's a rational explanation.

Exactly, that's what I don't understand Juwi?. One 'member' ( FM) causes so much mayhem and is left to run riot, but when the others who have been insulted defend themselves they are banned???? I don't believe it as VM would say !!

If you check the posts by 'Finn Mickey' and 'Victoria Meldrew' you will see that they are equally responsible for the 'stirring up'. Consequently they were both banned. Patrick11 - Mick - has been suspended because of his very abusive and offensive 'phone call - apparently because he thought that I should have banned 'FinnMickey' sooner! That is not his decision: I am the forum moderator and I decide who should be banned because I have ALL the facts!
I have been 'fighting the system ever since I won my own case 14 years ago - and shall continue to do so on behalf of all those who have been refused the NHS care which is their statutory right. And it's damp in my part of Devon too - Dartmoor! (Well, it would be, wouldn't it?)Steve.

Esquires wrote:If you check the posts by 'Finn Mickey' and 'Victoria Meldrew' you will see that they are equally responsible for the 'stirring up'. Consequently they were both banned. Patrick11 - Mick - has been suspended because of his very abusive and offensive 'phone call - apparently because he thought that I should have banned 'FinnMickey' sooner! That is not his decision: I am the forum moderator and I decide who should be banned because I have ALL the facts!
I have been 'fighting the system ever since I won my own case 14 years ago - and shall continue to do so on behalf of all those who have been refused the NHS care which is their statutory right. And it's damp in my part of Devon too - Dartmoor! (Well, it would be, wouldn't it?)Steve.

Steve, Please forgive me, but I can not agree with you. Every time FM came to the forum it was solely to make snide remarks at either Mick, VM or Ian.
Over the last few weeks FM never offered any assistance to others regarding FFCC, he only came here to offend. You were asked many times on the board by myself and others to put a stop to his behaviour and ban him but you chose not to. Then for some weird reason you became judge jury and assassin to Mick and VM. Why did you suspend Mick but ban VM?
I'm not having a dig at you, but I really do not understand your actions at all.
VM has always, always given so much help to everyone here. She has always worked tirelessly for the benefit of others here. Lord knows it must have taken up so much of her private time to research and then come here to advise others what to do or where to find help. I think your actions to ban her will be very detrimental to this forum. Once FM had been banned the 'stirring up' would have stopped immediately, because the perpetrator had been removed. I can see that, others can see that, so I don't understand why you couldn't have seen that.
This forum without VM's postings will suffer greatly. Surely you can see that, or was she just a thorn in your side because she 'challenged' you on some of the things you wrote? But that is what freedom of speech is all about isn't it? And lets face it, some of the things she did challenge you on, she was correct and you were wrong and visa versa. May be that's the main reason for you banning her, because her up to date knowledge was out stripping yours which in some aspects is outdated now? I haven't come here to offend you and I hope I haven't but I really can not understand why you took the action against her that you have? Is my head on the chopping block now?........

Pussycat - I agree with all that you have said and you have put it so well and much more constrained than I suspect you may feel (and how I feel).

I can answer some of that!!

Mick telephoned Steve and lost his cool (not surprisingly), I suspect over the injustice done to VM because it was after VM was banned. This reveals a lot about Steve but is in no way a reason to ban him - Mick did it privately and all credit to him.

As for VM - I doubt he/she can be replaced - such a wonderful help.

And now, as a consequence of VM being banned, I note that Steve is coming out on his bandwagon again - don't pay / go to court / etc etc - which some of us here think is total rubbish advice.

Whether the Forum can survive, I do not know. But at present I am not posting our recent news and cannot be bothered to research and pass on information (not that I am anything like VM or Mick).

This is all so sad.

maryjo

Hello Pussycat,

Exactly my feelings totally and I dont need to add a word to it.

Very Kind regards Ian.

Extremely well put Pussycat (and Maryjo) Mirrors my feelings exactly.
HK

It will be apparent to anyone who saved all the relevant postings that VM swallowed the bait offered by FM and responded accordingly as did Mike, trading 'like for like'. I would have expected anyone who was offended by FM's postings to simply ignore them - not respond with equal venom! I am convinced that had I banned FM only I would have been accused of bias by those who found VM's responses equally offensive! Since I launched the original MSN forum I have received a steady stream of requests to ban members by those who found some reason to object to the views expressed. Some such requests were reasonable whilst others were not, so I have always tried to reconcile differences of opinion in an amicable fashion, allowing offender and offended time to resolve their disputes. Steve.

Hello Steve

So from your last post are you implying that you were fully aware of what Finn Mickey was doing and that you waited nearly three months till the situation had become critical in the hope that the parties would have made up?

You made the comment " that you would have expected VM to ignore FM ever growing tirade of insults"

Would you have done the same if you were in this same position? Would you have ignored FM insults?
I dont think so!

The point is that VM shouldnt have been put in this situation in the first place.

Because you are the moderator of this site you should have acted within the first month of this starting.
You didnt so you are at fault for what eventually occurred.

Ian

Esquires wrote:It will be apparent to anyone who saved all the relevant postings that VM swallowed the bait offered by FM and responded accordingly as did Mike, trading 'like for like'. I would have expected anyone who was offended by FM's postings to simply ignore them - not respond with equal venom! I am convinced that had I banned FM only I would have been accused of bias by those who found VM's responses equally offensive! Since I launched the original MSN forum I have received a steady stream of requests to ban members by those who found some reason to object to the views expressed. Some such requests were reasonable whilst others were not, so I have always tried to reconcile differences of opinion in an amicable fashion, allowing offender and offended time to resolve their disputes. Steve.

What a load of utter stupid rubbish Steve. It is YOU who cannot see what has happened. Or perhaps you can and you are pleased to have let it run and run so that you could ban the one who got things right and who was not afraid to stand up to you.
Total and utter rubbish. Your self-justification just won't wash with me.

Esquires wrote:It will be apparent to anyone who saved all the relevant postings that VM swallowed the bait offered by FM and responded accordingly as did Mike, trading 'like for like'. I would have expected anyone who was offended by FM's postings to simply ignore them - not respond with equal venom! I am convinced that had I banned FM only I would have been accused of bias by those who found VM's responses equally offensive! Since I launched the original MSN forum I have received a steady stream of requests to ban members by those who found some reason to object to the views expressed. Some such requests were reasonable whilst others were not, so I have always tried to reconcile differences of opinion in an amicable fashion, allowing offender and offended time to resolve their disputes. Steve.

As you would say Steve, HUMBUG !!. As Ian has said no one would have ignored the abuse written to them from FM. I most certainly would not have, and I am sure had it have been someone else you would have stepped in earlier.
The forum is very quiet now, it seems people are not bothering with it, Unfortunately you made a very grave mistake by letting FM run riot on the forum and now the forum is paying the price. So sad really when it was such a wonderful and enjoyable place to come and seek advice from people in the know.

From the forgoing posts it is clear that if FM's agenda was indeed to debase and discredit this forum then he has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams!
NOTHING will be gained by attempts to pin blame onto me simply because some may hold the pointless view that he should have been banned sooner! As I have explained, I believe that everyone is entitled to be given the opportunity to resolve their differences of opinion. I do not subscribe to the view "off with his head - we can have the trial later" (Red Queen, Alice through the looking glass). Although this does seem to be the policy adopted by certain NHS managers! Really though that is close to what this forum is all about, isn't it?
We have far more important issues to contemplate such as the 'Dillnot report and the proposed changes to the NHS. This surely deserves a separate topic which I will post shortly. Steve.

Esquires wrote:From the forgoing posts it is clear that if FM's agenda was indeed to debase and discredit this forum then he has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams!
NOTHING will be gained by attempts to pin blame onto me simply because some may hold the pointless view that he should have been banned sooner! As I have explained, I believe that everyone is entitled to be given the opportunity to resolve their differences of opinion. I do not subscribe to the view "off with his head - we can have the trial later" (Red Queen, Alice through the looking glass). Although this does seem to be the policy adopted by certain NHS managers! Really though that is close to what this forum is all about, isn't it?
We have far more important issues to contemplate such as the 'Dillnot report and the proposed changes to the NHS. This surely deserves a separate topic which I will post shortly. Steve.

Well I didn't think it was a 'pointless view', and I strongly believe he should have been banned sooner. I think it was 'Off with her head' (VM ) with no trial at all! Oh and I think you may have got the Red Queen wrong Alice 'through the looking glass', I am sure she is in Alice in Wonderland the Queen who ordered off with the Cheshire cats head, two very different stories which are confused, but two very different queens .....

But my wife who played the Red Queen in our local panto. tells me that it was the 'Knave of Hearts' head that she wanted removed - afterall he did steal those damned tarts, didn't he?
I think it time to draw a line under all this FM/VM/Mick nonsence other than to add that the matter of 'VM taking the bait' was introduced by a forum member, not me. Also, Mick was 'only suspended' because he chose to 'phone me rather than post his foul-mouthed complaints on the forum. Steve.

Hello Steve

REF to another forum member making the bait statement Steve. Sorry it was you; there was nothing in that post of yours to indicate that it was anyone else but you making the statement.

Still can not believe why you did not act seeing that you were well aware of what was going on and while I agree it is a good idea to see if arguments blow over. Surely not 3 months.

You do realise that this is against the providers of this forum site rules dont you Steve?

You have a copy of them dont you?

When FM posted that sick post about VM being in a care home etc, no matter how it was meant was clearly against this providers code of practice and you should then have immediately acted and not just for VM benefit but for every member of this forum including yourself.

He called me a liar on a number of occassions over the case I helped win in Morecambe and about another case I am working with alongside Huge James. Thats against the code of practice too Steve and happens to be against the laws of this country. A 6th grade school/pupil knows that.

This had damaged this forum and its damaged you ( but you dont want to see it ); thats sad Steve because you are a focal fighter-figure for CHC and have brought good publicity to our cause and your cause.

Its never too late to reconsider a decision and for the sake of every member on this forum and especially for you, I hope you do.

Ian

Now you are calling ME a liar - and based purely on your irrational assumptions and beliefs! NO I will not divulge the identity of the member who muted this observation as I was asked not to. Now perhaps you will explain what you expect to achieve by all this pointless bickering? I have explained why I did not immediately ban FM and will not do so again. Further discussion is pointless and this topic will be locked forthwith as there are far more pressing matters which require my attention. Steve.