And thanks again, and night-night on this thread at least.

*************************

You rot pot!!!!

Thanks for everything, darling.

(Babe was a response to honey, my dear).

I do think it would be rather a pity if the option of (occasionally) ‘playing a different part’ or using a different mask (like my ‘Uncle Tommy’ teasing Garth) ceased to be available, except through delayed Moderation, which quite changes the dynamic of interaction (as an extreme case, the BBC’s moderation makes the site just about unusable for anything resembling dialogue).

Could you perhaps consider allowing some ‘trusted’ IP addresses free to post, um, immoderately (of course I’m not necessarily assuming I’d qualify, but I could at least then live in hope).

88888888888888888888888888888888888888

M&A

Well you are through here now as Moider (luv the Brooklyn pronunciation the best) and V the I.Its actuallythe teccie side stopping you. But I note your email etc and shall let you through when I see you queueing impatiently.

Not too sure about the Babe bit,not anymore, not for a while, maybe we should move on a bit in the seven stages,sweetie will do……

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

Murder /Vlad/ honey. once we all settle it’ll be the same. I just fervently hope Cherie doesn’t read Anorak or we are in it…………

Murder!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! eek I have replied to Vlad,it explains the current situation.

Presently there are 2 of us registered as Mods, agw and me (June) but very soon there will be two more

Maybe that’s a response to the posters who feel threatened by a bit of satirical theatre (who’s that guy on the stage pretending to be Prince Hamlet - we all know he’s really Laurence Olivier… goodbye theatre, goodbye Shaespeare)…

Still don’t understand , though, why my posts last night as Vladimir Putin (whoops, I mean, Uncle Vlad the Impaler) were finally rejected…

Again, never mind, I don’t make the rules. I just think it’s a pity - as with the disaster-prone web redesign a month ago - that people should feel they need to fix something that wasn’t broke, and which I thought functioned better (for most users, at least) before it was ‘fixed’.

Vlad the Impaler Says: Your comment is awaiting moderation.

December 15th, 2007 at 7:58 pm
June / ‘Mods & Admin’

Sorry if this has already been answered… but as I can’t understand the rules of the new - to me rather paranoid and arbitrary - ‘moderation’ filter, following the move to a UK server, can someone explain the (on the face of it) rather strange decision to switch from an ‘offshore’ to a domestic host?

Given the very blurred and subjective line between satire and defamation, offshore location seemed like a very clever choice. And it was wonderful to find (a couple of months ago) a free-flowing and irreverent chat site untrammeled by the delays and self-consciousness that hampers exchange on so many other sites.

Can someone please explain the rationale for the move?

PS: it’s your site, of course, not mine or the ‘community’s’, but all the same…

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Mods and Admin

Murder, grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr just written a lengthy reply to you as Vlad…………..

Sorry if this has already been answered… but as I can’t understand the rules of the new - to me rather paranoid and arbitrary - ‘moderation’ filter, following the move to a UK server, can someone explain the (on the face of it) rather strange decision to switch from an ‘offshore’ to a domestic host?

Given the very blurred and subjective line between satire and defamation, offshore location seemed like a very clever choice. And it was wonderful to find (a couple of months ago) a free-flowing and irreverent chat site untrammeled by the delays and self-consciousness that hampers exchange on so many other sites.

Can someone please explain the rationale for the move?

PS: it’s your site, of course, not mine or the ‘community’s’, but all the same…

——————-

Mods and Admin

The rationale for the move? we needed a host server who could cope with the high demand of postings and not constantly ‘crash’ with a high of 1500 posting per day, the average for any site is normally about 100,frequently less, all very teccie and beyond my remit.
The former host /server was in the US, where in law the poster is wholly liable for any slights, libels etc they choose to make. The current host/server is here in the UK where the site owner is ,liable for any untrue remark which could be deemed libellous.
These are not the reasons you were in limbo, just a change of user name, even one letter will put you in Moderation.

But, if any posts do appear to contain whatcould appear tobe seen as a libellous statement, then youshall be put in Moderation when we or I for now see anything untoward.
Free speech is one thing, but why should Anorak pay for anothers ‘privilege’ - we retain the right to edit posts

—————————————————

I don’t think that Peter O had any interest in not allowing anyone in general, and Judith C in particular, to express a view.

There is a very large gap between disagreeing with a view, and attempting to prevent someone from expressing that view.

And since this is Anorak’s blog, the only people around capable of preventing someone expressing a particular view here are the mods and admin…

++++++++++++++

Better said than I would have done. Thank you!

I also think B. o’D’s version of before the disaster is idealised. (Like in a Hollywood picture : everything was perfect, then… - when we all know everything isn’t ever perfect).

Besides, I bet The Guardian didn’t wish to print anything similar to the tabloids stuff, yet was eager to provide the readers with a slightly controversial article. The misleading title shows there was some hype behind it.

That said, the way she saw it is interesting, not meaning we have to buy it without a critical mind. I agree with the posters who say that after all, -and maybe unwillingly- she puts a huge question mark as regards the McC’s. sense of reponsibility as parents.

A Crocked Roo. gee

December 15th, 2007 at 9:30 am
Wakey, wakey, Anorak.

—————————————————

Anorak is probably still receiving istructions from his reptilian paymasters; I had to out him last night when he cynically claimed that a kangaroo had been attacked by a shark…

Then he pointed to the photocopied picture of Madeleine on the table. “Is this your daughter?” he asked.

IMO the policeman was establshing the fact that a picture had been circulated of Madeleine without the go ahead and approval of the police investigation.

Bridget O’Donnell is writing merely from her own perspective and cannot be relied upon as any relevant witness as she was merely an onlooker from a distance and is just writing her views and non of it adds anything to the investigation.