Bob - Did you ever read the posts on the other forum? You are a reasonable person and you have presently your views cogently and clearly and without personal insults. The Lamberton forum contained the most disgusting bullying and offensive material. What is on this thread does not come anywhere close. I can sympathise with those who want to let off a bit of steam following the closure of the other forum. Having said that, this forum will remain one where all views are welcomed, provided that they are expressed in a respectful manner.
Yes Neil I saw some of the posts over there - I think there were a lot of disgruntled ex-posters from here who went there to express their views, and that meant the forum was unduly focused on attacking this one rather than exploring the case itself. But I do think that the long-term members of this forum need to ask why some of the long-term posters from here became disgruntled.
I believe I can pinpoint almost to the day when the trouble started on here, and it began with two people who joined around the same time and brought their existing internet war with them. There was one from each side of the Bamber case, and they both posted some pretty disgusting stuff, but only the anti-Bamber member was banned (I wasn't previously familiar with either poster, so think I'm pretty impartial on what happened, but others will doubtless disagree). At the time I was surprised - I assumed both would be banned - the community on here was united against all forms of disruption at the time (HorseyDave, for example, had previously received short-shrift from most antis as well as pros when he posted stuff about Mike), and I think we were a pretty happy bunch, with pros and antis getting along, and having a laugh late into the night in the off-topic threads as well as contributing some really good analysis to the main topic.
Something changed after that initial war - people started to get more entrenched in their positions. I guess perceiving yourself as under attack tends to do that - and I don't think things have ever been the same since. I find it most peculiar, for example, that one of the great divides between people on this forum and the other seems to be the "our MoJ is better than your MoJ" (i.e. JB vs Simon Hall) - it's all very tribal! I think it was Grahame who asked why would you be bothered to comment at all on a conviction that you believed was safe? I think the answer is that you probably wouldn't - it just becomes a point to fight about once you've had a falling out with someone.
Anyway, I'm starting to ramble. Suffice to say I know that I've certainly not been immune to the polarising effects of what's happened, and find that now it's best for me to just not post (especially after an evening in the pub)!
