Jamez's leaving thread

[tvarksouthwest]

I can't believe it - I've actually joined Metropol. Bet you weren't expecting this - I certainly wasn't. But my hand has been forced by Jamez's libellous accusations which simply cannot go unchallenged.

Could somebody fill me in via means of PM? Or are we talking about Simon Luxton naming the below age-of-consent cast members of Grange Hill that he fancies on his own website ?

When have I ever done that? Exactly, I haven't. Nor do I ever intend to. The only "reason" you have for your suggestion is this thread on our forum - which has been completely taken out of context:

http://www.grangehillfans.co.uk/forum/v ... php?t=4630

While I didn't get to read Jamez' original comments, it's pretty clear from subsequent postings what he accused me of being. I don't think Jamez and James Martin quite realise how easily they could find themselves in legal hot water by making such wild, groundless insinuations with no means of backing them up.

I was almost sued for daring to criticise a BBC1 announcer's on-air style. So if that is enough to land people in the dock, accusing someone of being a paedophile is certainly not something to be done in jest. Especially if the only reason you have for doing so is because I run a Grange Hill website.

As johnnyboy has already mentioned, such accusations can put individuals' personal safety at risk and that of their families as well as their reputation. It can destroy peoples' lives, even if completely unfounded.

And have you thought about the damage your comments could do to GH Online? I don't like to boast but the site's popularity is increasing and we are highly regarded by Grange Hill's cast (old and new), its producers and writers. We even got a mention in the book "The Hill And Beyond". A lot of hard work has gone into GH Online and your comments, Jamez, risk permanently damaging the site's reputation and anyone linked to it.

If I had taken legal advice over your comments, I would probably have been told there was a case to answer. I hope this last comment makes you think long and hard Jamez; and many thanks to Gavin and johnnyboy for their prompt actions.

Oh, and J2 - at 32 I do NOT regard myself as middle-aged!

[Anonymous]

Oh, and J2 - at 32 I do NOT regard myself as middle-aged!

0-30 = Young
30-65 = Middle Aged
65-100 = Elderly
100+ = Anicent

[James H]

I was almost sued for daring to criticise a BBC1 announcer's on-air style.

IIRC you branded him as "notorious" on your website. That doesn't sound like you're criticising his on-air style, that's making a crude claim based on someone whom you know nothing about.

I think a stone's just broken through some glass.

[J3]

simon, you're the only person over 20 i know still leeching off their parents. it's about time you made your own way in the world. what do you actually do all day? why don't you get a job or a life and some friends?

you ARE middle aged.

[Anonymous]

simon, you're the only person over 20 i know still leeching off their parents. it's about time you made your own way in the world. what do you actually do all day? why don't you get a job or a life and some friends?

you ARE middle aged.

*snigger*

I wonder who J3 is!

[Gavin Scott]

I'm 34 and that certainly isn't "middle" anything.

[Square Eyes]

Oh, and J2 - at 32 I do NOT regard myself as middle-aged!

0-30 = Young
30-65 = Middle Aged
65-100 = Elderly
100+ = Anicent

Your definition needs some work, 'Middle Age' is generally classed as 40-60 in developed countries.

[Gavin Scott]

I'd like "J3" to send me a message telling me who he is, otherwise I may be forced to conclude he is conspiratorially linked with "J2".

Draconian moderation? Maybe.

[Pete]

i'm bored of this now

[Gavin Scott]

You're absolutely right.

Except it's "with", not "of".

Shall I close this, then?

[Pete]

might as well