Should Wendy Welch remain on this site

[Wendy Welch]

Tell us your opinion. Should she be knocked off or asked to leave? or do you want to hear what she has to say?

[chriskisn]

Originally Posted by Wendy Welch

Tell us your opinion. Should she be knocked off or asked to leave? or do you want to hear what she has to say?

Interesting question about yourself. What prompted it?

[HomerMcvie]

She posted a "public" article link about another former FM member(who semi-regularly posts in this forum), and their "apparent" former...."associations".

She says she was banned forever.

[ThePenguin]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

She posted a "public" article link about another former FM member(who semi-regularly posts in this forum), and their "apparent" former...."associations".

She says she was banned forever.

She did not post a public article link. Her inflammatory attack contained no link at all. Other people have posted public article links frequently. She posted a lengthy personal attack of her own, accusing criminal conduct that has never been charged and is defamatory. It was removed and then she engaged in threats and accusations about the removal. She was told she can do what she wants on her Facebook page, but she can't do what she wants here. She then posted this thread and yes she has been banned.

[HomerMcvie]

I was only saying that I have searched the allegations(years ago), and found pretty much the same articles.

Being the internet, of course it doesn't mean that they're true, but they're certainly out there, for anyone to read.

[ThePenguin]

Originally Posted by HomerMcvie

I was only saying that I have searched the allegations(years ago), and found pretty much the same articles.

She did not post a public link. She posted a personal attack which contained no link at all. However, she was not banned for the post. It was removed and that could have been the end of that. She decided she wasn't going to take no for an answer.

[EWilner13]

I want Wendy to stay! She is very well informed and only posts the truth!!!!

[nicepace]

Banning Wendy altogether seems too harsh. Given her special status as the spouse of a deceased band member, she has a point of view and insight that is unique, and should be valued by our fan community. I'm not sure that she always posts "the truth," but I am sure she always states her opinion.

If there is a way to do this, maybe her posts could be screened by a moderator before they go public on the board. This would be like putting her "on probation." That seems like a more appropriate response than banning her altogether.

[chriskisn]

Originally Posted by nicepace

Banning Wendy altogether seems too harsh. Given her special status as the spouse of a deceased band member, she has a point of view and insight that is unique, and should be valued by our fan community. I'm not sure that she always posts "the truth," but I am sure she always states her opinion.

If there is a way to do this, maybe her posts could be screened by a moderator before they go public on the board. This would be like putting her "on probation." That seems like a more appropriate response than banning her altogether.

There are two points to be considered. Yes we have to give her respect because she's grieving and has lost her husband, band member or not. However, the same rules do apply to everyone on this board, and to allow one person to have special privileges simply because she's a link to the band isn't really acceptable.

Plus when her attacks are aimed at a former FM member who is also a member on here where do we draw the line?

[seekerj]

Originally Posted by chriskisn

There are two points to be considered. Yes we have to give her respect because she's grieving and has lost her husband, band member or not. However, the same rules do apply to everyone on this board, and to allow one person to have special privileges simply because she's a link to the band isn't really acceptable.

Plus when her attacks are aimed at a former FM member who is also a member on here where do we draw the line?

And it's sad that anybody's right to express himself or herself is limited at all. The idea of allowing special privileges shouldn't be an issue, not because everyone's freedom should be limited, but because no one's freedom should be limited. There are times when an expressed point of view will not be popular. That's life. But is that really any reason to stop a person from expressing it? Why does a line need to be drawn?

[WildHearted]

Originally Posted by seekerj

And it's sad that anybody's right to express himself or herself is limited at all. The idea of allowing special privileges shouldn't be an issue, not because everyone's freedom should be limited, but because no one's freedom should be limited. There are times when an expressed point of view will not be popular. That's life. But is that really any reason to stop a person from expressing it? Why does a line need to be drawn?

A line has to be drawn when issues of legality come into play.

[louielouie2000]

Originally Posted by nicepace

If there is a way to do this, maybe her posts could be screened by a moderator before they go public on the board. This would be like putting her "on probation." That seems like a more appropriate response than banning her altogether.

Unfortunately this is not something our board software is capable of. Even if it were, we have over 4,600 members now. So screening people individually like this would not be an option, even if we did have the software capability (which we do not).

It is worth noting we have several Ledge members who fall under the "insider" umbrella. These include past & present band members, producers, their spouses/relatives, etc. None receive special treatment, and our board rules are applicable to all members- regardless of their stature.

[Mr Scarrott]

I'm really saddened by what's happened, but from what I can make out, and with a great deal of regret, I think the right decision has been taken. There's a legal question at stake and you can't leave yourself or the site owners open to possible action. There's been quite enough of that sort of thing happening in the UK.

I'm sure none of this will stop us having Bob and Wendy very much in our thoughts.

[dansven]

I think everybody here feel sorry for Wendy Welch and wish her all the best.

I am really glad that the administrator and several moderators are involved in this case (ThePenguin, WildHearted, louielouie2000 and perhaps others too)
So let's trust that this case is being handeled the right way.

[mylittledemon]

Originally Posted by nicepace

Banning Wendy altogether seems too harsh. Given her special status as the spouse of a deceased band member, she has a point of view and insight that is unique, and should be valued by our fan community. I'm not sure that she always posts "the truth," but I am sure she always states her opinion.

Originally Posted by Patrick

So I would say that her information and viewpoint should not only be tolerated, it should be welcomed. And given the RRHOF situation, one could say that she has more of a bona fide reason to post than all of us. The banning seems excessive. I am sure that Wendy would be approachable and reasonable enough to post within the guidelines and parameters of this board if asked to do so.

This all would be totally accurate and welcomed, if Wendy had acted like a rational human being whilst here on The Ledge. Every post was borderline slanderous (if not fully) and negative in nearly every sense of the word. Everyone should understand that we gave Wendy plenty of opportunity to amend things; to slow down, to take it easy, whatever. When people get banned, we realize it's a shock to everyone. It's a shock to us half the time. You all should know that banning is not an easy decision to come to, but when someone is given three, four, five (or more) strikes... we can't allow that to continue. Especially when the law is being broken.