Removed thread

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 3,447

I am sure those who were following things might be able to guess why the Shoreham thread was pulled, and regulars will know how 'twitchy' Key get when lawyers are circling, but would it be possible for there to be some statement here pinning down the precise reasons, if only as a warning / instruction for future use of the forum?

Original post

Member for

18 years 4 months

Posts: 2,810

The forum is open to all to read and copy,perhaps it was easier to remove the thread than the few comments which were causing potential issues with legal aspects. Surely any statement would by explanation actually repeat those comments?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 8,464

No idea chap - I came to respond to 1batfastard earlier to find it had been removed t the safety of the mod forum.

Profile picture for user 1batfastard

Member for

11 years 2 months

Posts: 3,650

Hi All,
Bruce - Well just PM me please.

Geoff.

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 3,447

Ah, ok. Scotavia, of course I wasn't suggesting anyone wrote "You can't say (insert disallowed phrase here) on a forum and that's why we pulled it". Maybe 'Precise reasons' isn't quite what I meant. I was really just thinking about guidance for the future about how not to libel, or be offensive, or whatever it was, or even which of the rules were broken. There was a good conversation about a deeply serious topic in the midst of some questionable commentary in there, and it was a shame to lose it.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 8,464

I suspect it was because the case has now closed - so any ongoing discussion could be termed as questionable. Yes, I agree it was mostly a good thread - with one or two exceptions!

1bf - have emptied my inbox - do try again!

Bruce

Member for

14 years 5 months

Posts: 3,447

Whoever did it could have locked it instead..

Member for

15 years 6 months

Posts: 291

It is understandable why it was pulled. Unfortunately the law works in "mysterious" ways not only for the court matter in question but also towards potentially slanderous comments. The jury made their decision. Speculation as to how or why can have unintended consequences.

Member for

10 years 7 months

Posts: 188

Closing the thread because the case is now closed seems odd. PPRuNe closed their in-trial thread early and the one here stayed open with a few judicious warnings, but their post-trial thread was alive and kicking a couple of hours ago. This suggests that there was something even more out of order than some of the posts I read on here. Like many posters I am always curious about why a thread needs to be killed. The answer is usually obvious to the last viewer of the thread.

Member for

17 years 11 months

Posts: 2,024

. I was really just thinking about guidance for the future about how not to libel,

Such matters are rarely 'black and white'; a solicitor may well threaten legal action over something that is on the margins (either way) of libellous, just to get it removed, thus it is easier for the Admins just to pull the whole thread.

Member for

17 years 7 months

Posts: 1,444

It was a tedious thread anyway and stopping it was not surprising

Member for

16 years 3 months

Posts: 1,813

"""tedious"""....to whom ?? I am sure there will have been some (many ??) who found it of great interest.

Member for

6 years 1 month

Posts: 168

It was my thread! Please can the mods reinstate it, but perhaps lock it?

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 824

... and you take full responsibility for everything that was published in it? I really don't think you want to do that.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 16,832

If it wasn't a Mod who binned it, then a Mod would be unlikely to want to reinstate it. It patently wasn't Bruce, and it wasn't me as I was on leave.

Can I suggest you raise the matter direct with the webmaster?

Moggy

Member for

20 years 5 months

Posts: 223

Certainly the last time I looked at it, I couldn't see anything that was contentious. It was a sensible discusion about the trial and its outcome. Compared with some of the pitchfork comments on the dark side, I'd have thought it unlikey to attract any attention. Very odd...

Member for

6 years 1 month

Posts: 168

If it wasn't a Mod who binned it, then a Mod would be unlikely to want to reinstate it. It patently wasn't Bruce, and it wasn't me as I was on leave.

Can I suggest you raise the matter direct with the webmaster?

Moggy

Hi Moggy,
I tried to send you a PM, but it said your inbox was full. Please can you tell me how to message the webmaster please?
Thank you,
Kurt

Profile picture for user 1batfastard

Member for

11 years 2 months

Posts: 3,650

Hi All,
KurtB - Please accept my apologies as I fear it was my fault for posting alleged comments that where published in an article by The SUN. A rag which I fear is much despised on here, but it only has itself to blame as questionable journalism seems to be a trait all to often with a number of articles over the years. Being perfectly honest though which rag hasn't been guilty of the odd one or two articles in the past at some time ?

I was only trying to show how there was a commonality between Mr Eric Browns comments featured in (Post 368 by Paul178) and alleged former colleagues of Mr Hill and they're opinion of him as a pilot, seeing as they where anonymous sources you obviously would call the report into question.

Again if I was to blame I apologise unreservedly...... :o

Geoff.

Member for

20 years 7 months

Posts: 7,025

The Scum and Faily Daily should be condemned and banished to save the forests .

Member for

20 years 5 months

Posts: 223

Interestingly the thread on the Pprune Mil forum has one of Andy Hill's defence barristers posting (Legalapproach).

He doesn't seem even slightly interested in some of the more colourful posts in the thread...!