I am taking a voluntary break from the Miscarriage of Justice Forum for a month, so I will not be covering any developments in the Madeleine McCann case that might be discussed on MoJ during my absence.
How did this situation arise?
I got warning points for NOT disclosing personal information about another user. Let me repeat that. I did NOT disclose personal information about this user, but I got warning points as if I had.
To clarify this confusion, the user in question was Erngath. The sequence went as follows. User Sadie published two pieces of personal information about Erngath on MoJ. Since these remained on the forum, I would assume these have been divulged by Erngath in the past, though I don’t actually know where Sadie got them from.
Then I posted a news story about a car crash on the Algarve, in the MoJ thread for news from the Algarve. Erngath objected to this. There was a bit of a to and fro on whether my post was appropriate.
Shortly afterwards, Erngath self-published as a ‘supporter’ of the McCanns. I politely requested permission from Erngath that I might therefore in future use the term supporter to describe him/her. Erngath agreed to this.
Another ‘supporter’ queried why I was requesting permission. I explained that I consider ‘supporter’ and ‘sceptic’ to be connotative terms, not to be used lightly, just as I would not use any other personal information about Erngath. Please note, to date I had not disclosed any personal information whatsoever. I simply had an agreement that I was now OK to classify Erngath as a supporter.
It was at this point that Erngath complained formally to the MoJ that I had gleaned further personal information. That further personal information was/is posted by Sadie in open forum on MoJ, and I have NEVER repeated it.
So I have been punished for Sadie’s sins. But the story gets even better.
Having decided to make a formal complaint about my post, Erngath decided to dump into open forum a large slab of personal details, and AFAIK that pen-portrait is still there, should anyone care to know about Erngath.
I don’t suffer fools gladly. Moaning about NON-publication of personal details, then posting up a string of personal interests is one thing and one thing only. It is blatant cheating. It is akin to a football player who tries to con the referee with a dive in the penalty area.
Just add a final twist to the tale, Erngath had been moaning about deletion of posts. The thread is in an open forum in the admin section, so anyone can check it. What you will find is how I weighed in on behalf of the mods. It was literally as I hit send on that post that the forum told me I had been awarded warning points.
Shades of Diego Maradona and the hand of mods!
Please note that to date, the only personal detail I have published re Erngath is that for which I was given explicit permission by Erngath.
What difference does my month off from the MoJ make? Very little, in reality.
There is very little of interest happening re Madeleine McCann in the MSM. The date for an appeal to the ECHR is approaching, but I assume it will simply come and go. The date for a further tranche of funding is approaching, and I dare say we will learn what Operation Grange has got for the next slog.
MoJ will get less on the thread for news from the Algarve. There is another news story from the Algarve today, but who cares? People who can read Portuguese will find it. Those who can’t wont. It happens to have no relevance to the McCann case, and I have no intention of acting as a substitute for an MoJ thread.
That leaves local activity. There are 3 people I would like to meet in and around Luz in the next month or so. Perhaps I will get to speak to them. Perhaps I won’t. But anything I do get will be published on this blog rather than MoJ, which is exactly what would have happened if I was not having a break from MoJ.