Am I missing something? What is it exactly that is up for discussion here?

I proposed a sub-section as a solution, now I'm not sure what the initial issue is/was!

If the issue is just one of libel and posting unsubstantiated claims then it's not a csa issue per se, it's a general forum one and we deal with it the same in all instances regardless of the subject being discussed.

If that isn't the issue could someone please tell me what is?

oioioi wrote:
That and a certain ghoulish fascination with the topic matter from what I can see.
Up til now moderation has been a rare occurrence, if its factual stuff and decent links then I see no harm but I doubt very much its going to end up that way given the reaction to what was IMHO a reasonable request.

If you have any serious evidence of wrongdoing, you should go to the police (assuming you think they'll do anything).

If you don't think the police will do anything, there's no point in discussing it.

If you don't have any serious evidence, discussing it on an Internet forum is wrong, irresponsible, libelous, etc.

To set aside a sub-forum purely for that issue is just totally wrong IMHO. I don't have any problems with people raising the subject as and when there's solid evidence / news, etc, but to devote an entire forum to it is pretty grisly.

For me, it's just not something to be liberally tossed around on an Internet forum, particularly given the fact that where I come from any mud that is thrown in this direction sticks. You could be found 100% innocent, but you would definitely have to leave permanently.

hugorune wrote:
It's OK I'm just off to Tescos for biscuits. :p

Thanks for the kind words Andy. Made me blush!

Verlander wrote: Andy's ex-military, if buy crap biscuits and he'll make you more than blush.

Wub has more eloquently summarised my reservations which were scattered throughout those hasty posts I made earlier.
The whole concept makes me itch.

feather wrote:
It's not him that wants them!

Verlander wrote: andy is hugo's fixer.

*fixed my omission of you in my original post*

This is just the second last page on the DIF Savile thread.
Look at what we're missing and that's AFTER the deletions which sparked the mod chastisements.

psketti wrote:
I feel I have a lot I can contribute to this topic, but I don't really feel like posting on this thread because of the persistent vibe more or less from the off if that helps, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

(I say this as an individual with simply a mutual interest with others who have been kicked off DIF btw - which isn't how I feel I'm being treated. The main ones fostering an 'us and them' mentality appear to be some folk already here - though I do understand that - one is protective of what one's got, and it sure sounds like some of you have worked incredibly hard to build what you have, which is great Also please understand that some will come here - possibly DIF socks and nutters - who wish to stoke those flames, or even start a fire where none exists.).

There have been some highlights though - Thoreau and Dub's long posts, among others, were very welcome indeed and a credit to this forum imho. Unfortunately the 'nasty' stuff tends to stand out to many I would guess.

It seems clear to me that you can't practically offer an alternative to the Savile thread or CSA sub-section on DIF, and nor should you be expected or even asked to. It does seem unfortunately like some have been 'mis-sold' this place like IWTT - (by whoever). That's pretty sad in my book and needs a bit of understanding and communication rather than anything else.

Back to the idea of a sub-forum - you could be taken down in a day or two imho (back to why Ickey can get away with it again huh?!) and with all the anti-Icke and TPV stuff you're right in the firing line already alas.

I never expected that when I came here and tbh it's pointless for all concerned imho. There's no wider audience on here for it, and you're just opening yourselves up to grief. There's a reason posters from the Savile thread have been threatened both online and irl, and it wasn't because we were posting 'meaningless speculation and unsubstantiated drivel' to paraphrase just a few of the comments I've read on here.

Surely folk can post threads on subjects where facts are already established as the forum is right now? For example IWTT and the excellent appeals against lenient sentences for elite paedophiles (or those lower down with the 'right' connections) that have proven results from the work done on the JS thread? That doesn't need to be buried in a separate 'members only' section - it's just 'news' and how to react to it. Likewise any other CSA based topic. Just stick to facts.

Anyway, all the best, and thanks for 'listening'

Does the forum software permit a poll?

Otherwise we can go around in circles for ever on this type of thing!

oioioi wrote:
So this?

Verlander wrote:
It does. I'm clueless atm as to what poll options would cover everyone's wishes.

electricdreams wrote:

Yes. This wouldn't and never has been a problem so post away.

And thankyou for your post.

feather wrote:
The 'best stuff' is usually gone - that's the whole point.

Not sure I'll check this thread again.

oioioi wrote:


I have no issue with that as its what we do anyhow.

psketti wrote:
So what do you/others have an issue with other than this?(I'm asking you as you and others as others btw!) I am honestly missing something here.

feather wrote:
Jaffas, but that would irritate dubs :p

oioioi wrote:

The sub forum... or forum within a forum and an area dedicated to this subject alone.

Nah, fuck this.
The kids got fucked over already for someone's sick amusement.

The responses demonstrate clearly that posters egos come way before any child welfare concerns.