Closed Threads!!

[EESDL]

Just a bit miffed that, due to one thing and another, I've only just settled down in front of PC to comment on the further 'appenings in PPRUNE.
Imagine my reaction when I discovered that a couple of threads have been closed to me?

The threads were going along nicely, it's an effing RUMOUR network after all, when Heap Big Mod from sky closes thread.

So who can I now share my thoughts, and one that is surely shared by the majority, that 'she' must have been as drunk as a lord to have snogged him in the first place!!

Tabloids love it large.
Remember that gifted Grimrod pilot who sued for damages because her selfless efforts to become Air Marshal were thwarted by the opposite sex?

[MrBernoulli]

Bravo EESDL! Bravo!

[Canary Boy]

Yes, Bravo indeed....









.... I think :confused:

[Fg Off Max Stout]

It is getting tiresome to read the drivel from posters who, in the face of a NOT GUILTY verdict, continue to peddle their own theories and uninformed versions of events. To the amateur judges out there, trying to discredit the result because it doesn't fit in with your opinion is childish. To suggest that he was only acquitted because he is male, or an officer is rubbish. He was acquitted because the charges brought against him were untrue. The CM showed Stu genuinely and reasonably (thanks to her behaviour) considered himself to be welcome. As soon as he realised that he wasn't, he did the decent thing, by leaving immediately and apologizing the next day.

I have known her longer than I have known him and can honestly say that her conduct has been consistently 'unbecoming'. She should be named if only to warn other chaps to steer well clear of her. I would love to see her named and her 'history' made public but the law continues to protect her anonymity and her previous behaviour seems to be inadmissable. She should have a long hard think about how she interacts with men in the future. There are other details that totally discredit her, but I believe that they too must remain confidential.

Just remember. Not guilty. Correct verdict.

[Safeware]

FOMS,

It is getting tiresome to read the drivel from posters who, in the face of a NOT GUILTY verdict, continue to peddle their own theories and uninformed versions of events

It was/is getting equally tiresome reading from those trying to have her 'named and shamed'. For both their sakes, lets drop it - I think, despite what some may see as an affront to free speech, the mods are doing there best to preserve the integrity of this site by not encouraging those wishing to see confidentiality broken.

There is enough about our work that the 'masses' would like to know about, but we are sensible enough not to broadcast here, why not apply that level of common sense here?

sw

[Fg Off Max Stout]

Safe,

I agree entirely. If I didn't I would have named her myself. I will comply with the ruling on anonymity even though it is not applied fairly and equally to both parties. I am sure Stu would not want this discussion to roll on ad infinitum and so having said my bit you will read nothing more from me on this subject.

I could not allow suggestions that this was a flawed verdict to go unchallenged. This was the right verdict.

Nuff said. Endex. Goodnight.

[effortless]

Sorry but really can't find anyone who said that:

he was only acquitted because he is male

As far as any comment I made I think that they stand up. I only comment on the articles linked by his supporters. If he was a local chav who got the wrong end of the stick you would be calling for the birch.

I hope that they are both able to move on. I hope that he has learned something and is grateful that he isn't somewhere really nasty now. I hope that she has learned something too and that she was lucky that it was him and not someone more forcefull.

We live in a world where men can get pissed, act the arse and make as many sexual inuendos as they like. If a woman does it she must realise that she becomes groundsheet material or the target of any immature chav who is in the area. I wonder how he would have reacted if he had woken up with a charming young man caressing his jewels. "I'm sorry but you were pissed and camping it up" wouldn't really cut it would it?

Let this be a warning to all men. Whether we like it or not, whether we think that it is PC gone mad we must be sure of our welcome before we lay on hands. Unlike the days of "groundsheets officers for the use of" a woman can say "no" right up to the moment of penetration and you can be charged with rape if you do not comply. Harsh it may be but anyone who has not heard that lesson is asking for trouble.

If you have a daughter you will be glad of this when she starts getting rat-arsed with her mates. Don't think that she won't.

[PPRuNe Pop]

Its a fair question EESDL but you ought to 'see' the answer for yourself.

In the case of the Odiham thread, to which I believe you allude, someone decided that they would start another thread after the trial came to an end. That's OK, but we usually close any others that are on the same subject. The freshest and more editorially interesting will win whilst the other gets closed. In this case it wasn't considered suitable for merging because one dealt with 'before' and the other 'after' the courts martial. Closing the thread doesn't stop you updating yourself on what went before, and can still see the most recent posts but you cannot participate. But why would you want to? The new thread effectively took over the subject and adding your voice to it is just as before.

Other reasons for closing threads is 'boring ones' - 'lost their way ones' - 'abusive ones' and libellous types. And if we are alerted, there are those which may have a bearing on security. We generally remove those to the inner sanctum where a decision is taken on whether to let them back or not.

We are not trying to wind you up or spoil your fun. Indeed, on Mil we usually take the view that you are able to control content so that it doesn't offend anyone or the principals of PPRuNe itself.

Its just that sometimes you cannot do that - like closing a thread that has run out of steam - or the like :ok:

This thread can be considered a new starter as everyone has had the chance to 'cool' down overnight, and there is no further talk about 'outing' the lady in question. That will get you barred from PPRuNe permanently.

Remember there will eyes everywhere hoping that PPRuNe will provide 'answers.'

[ChristopherRobin]

I only wanted her name so I could gallantly offer her a shoulder to cry on..."no one understands you the way I do"...the sort of thing that any decent chap would do.

She did look quite fit from behind in the telegraph picture. Is she?

uh-oh, better go, here comes Mrs CR....

[EESDL]

No need to reply Pop (but thanks), I know the reasons and appreciate your efforts in harnessing the views of this forum so they do not end up as a mere vehicle for Anon Ranters Ltd.
I'm not after her name, the law, as it stands, has been seen to be applied and let's hope that they all get on with what ever they like doing in their own time.

Have been reined in a few times myself, sometimes wrongly, sometimes rightlty but surely no one would have released her name on this forum - even if it was common knowledge down at Odious?

That's almost as bad as some skunk naming the AT co-pilot who gladly accepted the offer by some SF pax of a free night with a 'lady' whilst over in the Far East. The walk of shame after breakfast, after admitting that it was the best BJ of his life, surely was punishment enough!!!!!!!!!

[Wholigan]

Actually, I closed the "she couldn't have been that drunk" thread. Someone registered with a name that was blindingly "similar" (aka "the same") as the female officer in question and stated in the post that "the clue is in my user name". That user name was banned.

The last post on the thread was from someone stating that there are rules for officers and rules for others and also using personally abusive terms about the male officer in the case.

I deleted that post and closed the thread as I was going to work at 0615 this morning and didn't want anything possibly damaging to the site to happen while I was away.

[PPRuNe Pop]

I might add that Wholigan, my fellow senior mod, and ex senior RAF officer, acted as I would have done. It is this kind of thing we have to guard PPRuNe from and those who have an absolute right to anonymity on this site. We WILL protect that right.

Have a good weekend.

PPP