Losing Your Home, Crawford Style

[NYGman]

As I said to a family member this week while discussing a political legal issue which I wont go into here. You may not like it, you may not agree with it, and you may be morally opposed to it, however, what you are proposing is against the law.

So while you may not like the moderator position on SMH, you may not agree with it, you may feel a moral obligation to continue discussion on it, don't, it is against the law

There may be more meat on the bone here with the house, but "Management" views the issue as not ripe yet for discussion, so let's leave it at that.

[longdog]

I don't think SMH should be out of bounds I just think people digging up the address and details of the will or probate are going way too far and are a bit creepy to be honest. Doing so would only add to the Crawfords' persecution complex.

[daveBeeston]

Personally I think that anything to do with the Crawfords should be exposed, after all they set up a facebook page and posted a picture of my house, calling me a troll etc, plus Tom even got my phone number off of Ceylon and phoned me and abused me.

What they did to you was wrong no doubt about that, but advocating similar tactics here is a little hypocritical isn't it?.

There may be people who read this thread(and other threads)that may use the information posted to do the same thing to the Crawford's that they did to you and that could bring unwanted attention to the forum, its clear that Tom and others from GoodF visit here on a regular basis to see whats being said about them so lets keep it to facts and not speculation or what seems a personal vendetta to pry into their personal life as much as possible.

Anything they discuss or make claims about in public or is related to their actions/case/eviction is fair game but everything else should be treated with the privacy anyone of us would expect.

[letissier14]

What they did to you was wrong no doubt about that, but advocating similar tactics here is a little hypocritical isn't it?.

Not once have I ever advocated similar tactics or used them myself. I simply said that the Crawfords deserve everything they get and I can't see why the subject of SMH is suddenly a banned topic when it has been discussed numerous times on here previously.

I'm noticing a pattern here that when I say something it gets jumped upon, but when a longer standing members says a similar thing it goes unnoticed, which no doubt I'm pretty sure has something to do with me being a past admin member on goodf.

I'm getting pretty well fed up of it to be honest, so I might as well just leave you to it and not bother posting anything in future.

[NYGman]

Now now, let's take a 5 minute break, and breath.

Moderators have asked for discussion about SMH to cease, so lets be respectful, and stop.

Again, I don't think anyone is saying it is out of scope forever, it just isn't the right time to discuss it. To be honest, I couldn't care either way, I see both sides. However, in the interest of respect and if a Moderator asks, I feel it is appropriate to stop discussion, for now. They aren't saying don't follow it up, and find out more, just that at the moment they don't think it adds to the topic, but I think this will be changing soon

[TheNewSaint]

I'm getting pretty well fed up of it to be honest, so I might as well just leave you to it and not bother posting anything in future.

Please don't. Since you formerly lived in that world, your insight is invaluable.

(edit: rewording for clarity)

[Pox]

My own view, for what it's worth -

The fact that the mod posted just after letissier doesn't mean that his/her post was directed at letissier. I took it to be directed at ALL who advocated that the details should be published.
The Crawford's want publicity, but only one way.
From what letissier says they behaved despicably by publishing his address, forcing him to install cameras IIRC.
Two wrongs don't make a right.
Keep your powder dry letissier, your time will come.
We should all resist the temptation to behave as badly as the Crawford's.
Publishing an address at this time would be wrong.
It will be in the public domain at some point I am sure, but hopefully not a 'breaking exclusive' from this site.

[Hercule Parrot]

Now now, let's take a 5 minute break, and breath.

Moderators have asked for discussion about SMH to cease, so lets be respectful, and stop.

Again, I don't think anyone is saying it is out of scope forever, it just isn't the right time to discuss it. To be honest, I couldn't care either way, I see both sides. However, in the interest of respect and if a Moderator asks, I feel it is appropriate to stop discussion, for now. They aren't saying don't follow it up, and find out more, just that at the moment they don't think it adds to the topic, but I think this will be changing soon

Well said. I'm perfectly happy to abide by the guidance of our wise mods, and I don't want to see anyone here feeling offended about this storm-in-a-teacup.

[Fearnchase]

I was the one that has been doing the digging however I have at no point said I am going to publish any old address. If it can be proved that Crawford now owns this place and I pass this on to UKAR then this is a different. Until then and only then

[Pox]

I'm getting pretty well fed up of it to be honest, so I might as well just leave you to it and not bother posting anything in future.

Please don't. Since you formerly lived in that world, your insight is invaluable.

(edit: rewording for clarity)

Seconded, but not the 'formerly lived in' bit, just the 'valuable insight' bit!

[ArthurWankspittle]

Well, I get back from a long partly frustrating day's work and it's all been sorted out, how nice.
Seriously, SMH may play a part in this saga in the future. For now, if someone wants to spend time and resources looking up publicly available information that is up to them. I would not like it to be published on here though unless is becomes part of the story. With that in mind, let's all drop SMH speculation and leave it that we re-address the situation if it becomes public knowledge that there is a further debt recovery chapter to add to the history.

[Burnaby49]

Well, I get back from a long partly frustrating day's work and it's all been sorted out, how nice.
Seriously, SMH may play a part in this saga in the future. For now, if someone wants to spend time and resources looking up publicly available information that is up to them. I would not like it to be published on here though unless is becomes part of the story. With that in mind, let's all drop SMH speculation and leave it that we re-address the situation if it becomes public knowledge that there is a further debt recovery chapter to add to the history.

I just kept out and waited to see where it was going. It was getting to the point of intervention when posters apparently self-corrected. Always the prefered outcome.

[The Observer]

Forum rules:
1) No Politics
2) No Religion
3) Cite all sources
4) No talking about Sue's Mother's House

You left out the most important rule:

5) No cooking Betty the chicken.

[The Observer]

I simply said that the Crawfords deserve everything they get and I can't see why the subject of SMH is suddenly a banned topic when it has been discussed numerous times on here previously

I agree with that concept 100%. However, the rub of the issue is deciding what the Crawfords should be getting as their just desserts and who gets to make that decision. I daresay there is a lot of gray area in that simple statement.

Please don't feel that you are being singled out by the moderators. We are making a call to limit the conversation without reference to you or anybody else.

[grixit]

perhaps it is time to close this topic and start new one. Call it The Further Adventures of Tom Crawford.

[Firthy2002]

He's coming to Leeds to speak at a Real Change event. Colon is also on the bill along with some other familiar names.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater

I'd pop down but got something better to go to this weekend.

[notorial dissent]

As I said previously, I don't disagree with Letissier at all about his opinion of the Crawfrauds, and I don't have ANY problem with that.

What I, and other mods, do have a problem with is what amounts to tittle tattle. And be honest now, that is exactly what it is. If, in the fullness of time, to borrow a favorite line from a favorite show, it comes to pass, then by all means have at it, but until then leave it lie. If you want to speculate amongst yourselves, that is what email and pm's are for, but PLEASE leave it there, til if and when. Please. So let's just drop discussion of SMH and discussion of not discussing SMH. I'm sure there are many much more interesting things to discuss, and if there aren't, then let blessed silence reign. Or, as someone up line suggested, we can just close this thread til something new comes along. Your choice.

[daveBeeston]

What they did to you was wrong no doubt about that, but advocating similar tactics here is a little hypocritical isn't it?.

Not once have I ever advocated similar tactics or used them myself. I simply said that the Crawfords deserve everything they get and I can't see why the subject of SMH is suddenly a banned topic when it has been discussed numerous times on here previously.

I'm noticing a pattern here that when I say something it gets jumped upon, but when a longer standing members says a similar thing it goes unnoticed, which no doubt I'm pretty sure has something to do with me being a past admin member on goodf.

I'm getting pretty well fed up of it to be honest, so I might as well just leave you to it and not bother posting anything in future.

I think your reading to much into what i posted and taking it as a personal attack when its clearly not, i just find it a little hypocritical that you want to expose everything about them all while complaining they and Ceylon exposed some of your personal details online(and to others), but hey maybe its just me.

Your input is very much appreciated here and personally i've learned alot about GoodF and their antics from your posts which has helped me and family members stop some of our friends and acquaintances falling foul of the woo.

[letissier14]

I think your reading to much into what i posted and taking it as a personal attack when its clearly not, i just find it a little hypocritical that you want to expose everything about them all while complaining they and Ceylon exposed some of your personal details online(and to others), but hey maybe its just me.

Your input is very much appreciated here and personally i've learned alot about GoodF and their antics from your posts which has helped me and family members stop some of our friends and acquaintances falling foul of the woo.

Of course it's not personal when you clearly state that you find it a little hypocritical that I want to expose everything about them all while complaining they and Ceylon exposed some of my personal details online(and to others).

Like I said on numerous occasions I have never exposed anything that they haven't exposed themselves publicly. I have never posted personal details about any of them.

I'm done here and totally fucking pissed off with the constant digs at me. Just fucking delete my profile admin.

*Admin asked for the discussion to stop about SMH, so I stopped, yet today you have to bring me up once more!

[longdog]