FF…a fertility business?

As from last night I have the dubious honour of being banned from the infertility/fertility forum Fertility Friends.  My crime is not that of flaming at another poster but that from time to time I give information about DC Network membership and services.  Most often I am simply offering support or insights from my own experience.

Following an enquiry as to why two of my posts had been removed from the boards I received a terse email from Mel in management saying that if DCN wished to advertise on their site they would be happy to send their rates for doing so, but that I could no longer ‘advertise’ DCN services in my posts.  One of the removed posts was replaced, the other, containing information about DCN’s forum that had been the subject of some discussion on the board, was not.

When I responded to a rather anguished post from a single woman looking for a book to read to her embryo donation twins conceived in Spain, by saying I would send a private message giving information to her because I was not allowed to post it, the post was removed and I was banned.

My response to Mel’s original email was to say how shocked and saddened I was that information from me about DCN was not welcome on FF.  DCN is a charity and as far as I am concerned is in exactly the same business as FF – that of supporting those facing fertility difficulties and providing information and guidance.  I said I saw the two organisations as being complementary to each other rather than rivals and added that DCN would not be taking retaliatory action because it believes in providing the very best information and support to everyone and that sometimes includes referring people to FF.  I also mentioned that I often receive(d) private messages from FF members asking me for information or guidance and that I had been happy to give this, only mentioning DCN membership or services if it was relevant to do so.  It made no difference.

I can see now how naive I may have been.  Fertility Friends have long distanced themselves from the fertility support community.  They declined membership of the Association of Fertility Patient Organisations which meets in London twice a year (this coming week as it happens).  They do not seem to take the view that the rest of us do that this is mutual support work.

Tony and Mel have certainly worked hard over the years to build up the forum, putting in the personal time, effort and money that is needed to build up…a successful business.  And I guess that is what it is these days.  They now have significant advertising on the site and do not see why anyone should get away with free advertising, small charities like DCN included.

Being banned does not hurt me personally.  I have more than enough to do, particularly with the writing of the Friends and Family booklets.  But it is sad for those who have very much appreciated information about DCN services and the up to date news that I have been able to bring from HFEA, Department of Health and around the world.  Mel made it clear that others, who do not represent DCN, can mention the organisation in posts.  Anyone else feel like taking up the banner?

Advertisements

About oliviasview

Co-founder and now Practice Consultant at Donor Conception Network. Mother to two donor conceived adults and a son conceived without help in my first marriage.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

50 Responses to FF…a fertility business?

  1. Tracey Sainsbury says:

    What a great shame Olivia

  2. Maddymoo says:

    As someone who as contacted you through FF I am thoroughly disappointed and slightly disgusted by this.

    • Gillian Handyside says:

      I also learned of the DCN through FF and am more than glad I did because the DCN has been so helpful, and in ways that FF cannot be. It’s very sad that that FF feels the need to deprive people with this vital channel of information and support.

  3. oliviasview says:

    Thanks for your support, much appreciated.

  4. We would be more than happy to have you as an expert within the field on Pride Angels forum. We fully support your charity and the very important work you undertake.
    Keep up the good work
    Erika

    • oliviasview says:

      Thank you Erika. Interestingly, one of my posts that FF removed was supporting Pride Angels as an ethical organisation. Someone had contacted a potential egg donor via your site who after a few positive email exchanges, made it clear that she wanted a huge sum of money for donating. I said it was likely you would ban her from the site if you knew about this.
      Thank you for inviting me on to your forum. I’m flattered but for the moment I’m so busy that I think a rest from forums is a good thing, but when I’ve finished all my writing I’ll have a look and sign up.

  5. Sorry to hear this Olivia. I certainly found reading your posts on Fertility Friends very helpful when I was having treatment.

  6. Diane Allen says:

    FWIW, I’ve been treated similarly by various forums and websites here in Canada, as well as in the USA, when trying to post info about the resources and programs offered by our small, volunteer-run charity which – unlike those same forums and websites – receives absolutely NO funding from the fertility pharmas and clinics. It sems to me that this is all about money, as well as about the desire and determination of the ART industry to control what is said about it. Diane Allen, Infertility Network, Toronto, Canada

  7. Alana Newman says:

    if it makes you feel better Wendy Kramer won’t publish a single thread or comment of mine in the Donor Sibling Registry group/forum.

  8. marilynn says:

    Alana, that’s lame. Its hard I want to admire her so much for putting that website together but then I find the fact that she draws a salary from it, especially that people are charged to post and retrieve information reprehensible. One sibling group I helped in a search for their father is is among the worlds most televised and reported upon in connection with the DSR. That sibling group is very loyal to her and publically support donor conception and the idea that donors are not the fathers of their offspring. Like most they will not ever go public with the fact that they believe their father is theri father or that they even found him. I even had to phrase the statment above in a way that obscures them from being pinpointed because it would be perceived as a betrayal to them. I love her for her innovation and what she created as a resource for all of you but don’t like the fact that everyone has to feel like they need to hide finding their parents or hide the fact that they call their fathers their fathers to remain on good terms with the DSR. Many people who I’ve run searches for are careful not to be perceived as activists by the DSR for fear of I guess being banned. I’m always telling Olivia here to build that into her lesson you can get people so comfortable with these creation myths that they simply tell the people raising them exactly what they want to hear just to keep the peace and you wind up not being nearly as close with the child as a result because they just learn not to discuss how they really feel. Even when pressured “is that how you really feel or are you just saying that to make us happy’ they freaking bald face lie and go no that is how I really feel you are not someones child just because you are their offspring”

    Olivia
    That is a bummer. I went round with you before on the fact that I did not think DCN was a charity and you were able to show me that in fact in England you are even though you charge the people you are helping. To an American it looks like you are running a business, not a charity but I admit that is not the case according to your laws there. So in fairness to you as odd as it seems to me, you can’t rightly call efforts to get the word out about a charity advertising because the people you’re trying to reach are not customers but are the beneficiaries of your charity work I guess.

    I guess people don’t pay a fee for a service they donate to the charity and getting to attend one of the seminars is like a thank you gift from DCN or they donate to DCN and get a book as a thank you. That must be how it works otherwise you’d be selling services and books which is a business. anyway, sorry you got banned.

  9. Maddymoo says:

    Olivia as I said earlier I’m extremely disappointed in ff, I have been part of their online community for many years and found the fact that you posted comforting. My husband and I hope we are as successful with our child as you were with yours. Is there an alternative way ou can be contacted directly? Through the DCN website maybe. Kind regards

  10. Betty says:

    Well you were not always the most helpful person at FF and sometime like to cause mischief 😉

    • oliviasview says:

      I’m sorry you feel that way Betty. My first postings on FF many years ago were too strident I agree, but I was always trying to put the case for openness about donor conception and advocate that parents put the interests of the child first, NEVER with the intention to cause mischief.

  11. emmag says:

    I am really disappointed and shocked by this. I think FF is becoming more and more ‘big brother’ by the day. I think the majority of members on FF found your comments helpful and the information your organisation provide very useful. I can’t believe they can be so short-sighted not to see how mutually beneficial you can be to each other. I feel a bit torn as I would love to take them on about this but don’t want to get banned as, being a solo mum, and in a minority, I do get a lot of support from other singlies on there 😦 I think it’s outrageous….

    • oliviasview says:

      Thanks Emma (GG on FF?). I completely understand your reluctance to take them on, It is possible to get fantastic support on FF…but increasingly only within their accepted, and narrowing, parameters.

      • emmag says:

        Hi Olivia, yes it’s GG. I feel quite angry that I feel my hands are tied if I want to still use the site. It does seem to be coming down harder and harder on anyone who doesn’t totally toe the line and dares to question any of their decisions. Perhaps people will start voting with their feet if it continues.

  12. Anna says:

    Alanna: Why won’t Wendy Kramer let you post on the discussion boards? What particular part of what you do does she take exception with? (I really like your site by the way).

    Also, Marilynn: I”m a bit unclear re your post. Is it that you feel that the DSR does not go far enough in acknowledging that for some donor offspring the donors ARE regarded in a fatherly way and not just as donor’s towards whom they may or may not feel fond? I got the impression from a lot of stories I’d read about uniting famlies – and some united through the DSR and posting on the web board (the donors) – that some donors and their offspring do indeed regard each other as father and son/daughter.

    Olivia: That seems a big pity. Did the FF management really believe you were pushing to sell books and membership????? Putting forward a point of view is not the same as flogging that view for profit. Seems an extremely cynical way to look at the world if they believe that.

    • oliviasview says:

      FF have seen me as a thorn in their side for years. Recently I posted in the single women’s section asking what people there felt about a video that had been put on the site by Tony, the founder. It was of a leery and unpleasant woman, who implied she was single, threatening to take her (private) donor for all she could get now that she had the baby she wanted. I gather it was intended to warn donors about donating privately. Several people agreed that it was misleading to say the least and discriminatory about single women at worst. The thread was eventually taken down. I suspect my banning is retaliation for this wrapped in the guise of an advertising ban. Exposing them on the boards as having tried to prevent me from ‘advertising’ was their last straw.
      The single woman who works in the DCN office and who is a long standing member of FF has also tangled with Tony in the past for giving straightforward information (not related to DCN). They tend to really only want nice fuzzy warm posts and to avoid the difficult questions around DC if at all possible.

      • Betty says:

        That’s the problem you asked the question in my view to provoke trouble and I have seen you doing this several time through out the site, but no point dwelling on the past time to move on!

      • emmag says:

        I didn’t see it as provoking trouble, I saw it as asking single women their views on it seeing as it was a single woman in the video and wondering whether, as women in exactly that situation, how we felt about how it was done/how single women were portrayed. The majority of single women on there thought it was in poor taste and very misleading and made their views known and lo and behold the thread gets pulled….. freedom of speech? differences of opinion? not on FF at times it seems

    • marilynn says:

      The DSR is fantastic. They are just moderate in their stance and I get the impression that people prefer to stay on Wendy’s good side by not getting to radical or outspoken. The site is successful making sibling matches for young children which is unheard of for any other reunion website that has to stick to over 18. She was able to accomplish that by having the people raising these kids not feel threatened as being thought of as real parents, so I guess if I look at it that way it kind of has to be geared toward the social parent user more than the kid or the estranged parent or his/her relatives. There are children who are getting to know their siblings their whole lives because she made a place where people raising donor offspring would feel OK about reuniting with their familes. That is huge. I think reunions with parents are maybe downplayed but I don’t know except with the handfull that I’ve been involved with were totally not disclosed.

  13. Anna says:

    Sorry, Marilynn, that was a bit unclear. I got the impression that the DSR DID acknowledge that some donors are regarded as fathers by their offspring, as certainly some of the regular posters on the discussion boards, including donors who work with the DSR, acknowledge this.

    • marilynn says:

      No they do definately and they leave room for that. It’s difficult to explain really but some of the folks I’ve assisted are a little timid of Wendy. I have only spoken to her through emails a couple of times through a mutual aquaint. who is an advocate and a blogger. The title of the site is Donor Sibling Registry so maybe sibling reunions are more heavily marketed. I am in awe of what she has accomplished and who am I to argue with that kind of massive success? I mark success being how many people she’s been able to get sign up because the chances are greater of finding someone the more people sign up. That may be in part to her moderate stance on wanting the practice to continue only non-anonymously. Everyone whose listened to me ramble knows I think telling is not enough – lots of people I’ve assisted feel telling is not enough but fear alienating themselves from her. Heck they feel that way about the people that raised them too. Everything hush hush behind their backs. There are some kids with parents/intended parents who have whole careers riding on fertility donor issues so they have to say they support donation but are against anonymity – its mantra by now.

      Thank you for asking I’m totally in awe of Wendy Kramer she’s my idol of family reuniting the gold standard she must be making the right decisions, I am just one small person who does not get paid who often uses her site. I go around the site though typically gleaning info from it and getting contact info elsewhere. I don’t pay, can’t afford to. I’m so grateful to her how she’s helped so many people. it just is hard to know she lets people use the site to trade viles of sperm an stuff. I guess it makes people comfortable but it makes me sad.

  14. Caroc says:

    Olivia, I’m really saddened that you have been banned by FF. I have found your input to be interesting/thought provoking and I think that FF will be worse off without it. I feel very much as EmmaG, and having ‘tangled’ with their management myself a few times (most recently over the video you mention – to no avail) I am now also wary of earning myself a ban – it seems a sorry state of affairs for a support organisation to have created 😦

  15. oliviasview says:

    Appreciate your support Caroc. And as with Emma completely understand why it is impossible to take on FF management about this. Of course, this is what they count on, but understood nevertheless.

  16. Carla says:

    I haven’t found your input to be insightful in fact the opposite. I have been an occasional FF user for about 7 years and in that time I saw plenty of you mischief making as someone here said. When I needed support with donor eggs I found your “my way or no way” view on telling the child totally inappropriate for a support organization. We had our own personal reasons for not telling. Cultural reasons that you do not understand. You said once “We support parents so that they are able to make decisions that are in the very best interests of their children” trust me when I say it would not be in my childrens best interests to know of their genetic origin. But as that does not fit with your ideal I was made to feel small and low and practically accused of “lying” to my child by you. Yes, you did actually use that term on the FF forums. How hurtful! Moderators removed that comment I later noted. I wonder how many more of your comments you made that got removed for being just as unsupportive. You probably don’t remember the incident because you did that kind of thing all the time and all in the name of good debate going… never mind our feelings, never mind that we are already undergoing the pain on infertility and just want to be supported in our paths, just browbeat your self righteousness onto others. Sorry thats what it felt like at times and why I opted not to join DCN in the end. I tried with your organisation I really did. Its not for me. Ironically on FF is the one place on the web I found a place where I could be able to explore my reasons for taking the decision not to tell, and where I received the appropriate support and guidance in making that decision totally without judgement from others. And even then one of the moderators had to tell you not to post in that area the other week .
    It is a shame you can’t post there anymore. A little more tolerance of others choices and your support would have been so valuable. I think this blog entry speaks for itself. It certainly doesn’t make me symapthize with you People tend to reap what they sow in life. I am sure your DCN is extremely helpful for many using donor conception but it seems to be contingent on agreeing with your ethos and if you don’t then your not really supported at all. At least on FF I know I will get the support I need without being judged for it.
    Actually, so what if they are a business and make money? They don’t charge their members to join. You make money through memberships and publications that makes your money. Failing to see the difference.
    Sorry this is reply is probably going to upset your supporters. I just think its important to add some balance to this debate. If your posts on Ff were anything to go by you should be used to controversy.

    • oliviasview says:

      Carla – You are right, the posts I used to make were too strong sometimes. The result of the passion I feel about openness, never intended to hurt or cause mischief. I am sorry if I caused you distress. More recently I have supported personally an FF poster who feels it will be impossible to ‘tell’ her child – although she would like to do so – because of her husband’s faith and culture and the family’s heavy involvement in that culture. This was in fact my only reason for posting in the Not Telling section the other day as the person I had had private contact with posted publicly about her contact with DCN. If you look I think you will see that she thanked me for my support.

      Just a point on making money. DCN is a charity so all the money made from membership, publications etc. goes back into the organisation to keep day to day functions of responding to members and running workshops etc. going. I can assure you that none of us is paid very much!

      • Carla says:

        Thank you for your reply. It took so long I didnt think you were going to bother putting it up, especially as I saw that you posted others comments!!!
        I am sure that your stance of telling the child is admirable and well meaning and I have read all the reports that say it is the best thing but in the real world it does not always apply. There are some cultures where this information would have a detrimental effect on the child and the family within the society in which they exist. The DCN’s agenda on this is clear; you support telling the child and you support those who do or those you think you can persuade to come around to your way of thinking. You claim to represent the whole donor community on your website but you are not. You do not represent the entire donor community by the very nature of your stance on telling and the treatment I – and others – got when we sought support in not telling is evidence of that. You exclude large portions of the donor community. That is a shame because theres no way to warn people of this before they too are made to feel like dreadful people for making the right choice for their families. It is extremely shortsighted not to recognise the multicultural nature of UK society and allow for that.

        I saw your posts on the not telling thread, and the ones from the other person. I saw the ones that were removed before they gotten taken down (perhaps you didn’t?) I can read between the lines. As head of this organization I would think it your place to discourage hardliners from engaging in such behaviour when it has been brought to your attention.

        Interesting that you should point out that all the money goes back into the organization and that you are not paid very much. Especially interesting in light of Tonys post below which indicates none of his team are paid at all! You charge your members for your services, pay yourself and call yourself a charity. FF charges its members nothing, pays its staff nothing and offers unbiased support for all totally free to its members. Which is more charitable?

    • marilynn says:

      The children you are raising will find out and they will be mad you did not tell them. But they would have been mad if you told them too. You paid their mother to abandon them so that you could experience what it would have been like to be a mother. Can’t say its just an egg she gave up when her whole contract is entirely about her relinquishing her parent child relationship. Luckily there is FTDNA. Pretty soon every person whose mother was over 35 when they were born is going to send their DNA into those websites on general principal just in case they were lied to about who their mother or father is. With any luck they will find her or some of their other relatives. I’m sure you do take good care of them though, just kind of a bird in a golden cage thing.

      • emmag says:

        Wow, Marilynn, think you’re going to set the cat amongst the pigeons with that one! I’m not sure every donor child who is told will be ‘mad’ when they’re told. If it’s something they’ve known about forever and it’s just part of who they are and they have been told in a sensitive and honest way there are many for whom it’s actually no big deal. I didn’t adopt a baby that had been abandoned, that’s a totally different situation. A kind lady abroad was generous enough to donate some eggs, when they were just that, eggs. A number of cells, that if I hadn’t come along would have stayed that way or perished. ‘It’ then had my blood coursing through its veins, my DNA, my vitamins, my minerals feeding it and growing it. I don’t have a ‘bird in a golden cage’ I have a gorgeous, happy, healthy, cheeky little one year old boy that I’m still breastfeeding sitting in his cot right now chatting and playing and I’m certainly not wrapping him in cotton wool or putting him on some kind of pedastal, I’m going to be telling from as early as he can remember and there may be issues he has with it but I hope he will understand how much he was/is wanted, how loved he is and won’t be ‘mad’ with me. If I can achieve him feeling loved and cherished and being happy that’s more than many genetic kids feel. Hope he’s not ‘mad’ about that.

        • oliviasview says:

          Hi Emma
          In response to your response to Marilynn – she is indeed someone with radical views. I am happy for her to post here as I deplore censorship (although I have removed one or two of her most extreme posts in the past) but her perspective to me is a skewed one. Certainly our own children and all those I have met via DCN have not been mad at their parents when ‘told’ about their donor conception…ours are 29 and 26 and still feel fine about how they came into the family and more importantly who they are. Now M and one or two others might say that they are hiding their true feelings from their dad and me because they want to protect us etc. etc. I have asked them about this and both were astonished at the idea. Take her with a pinch of salt.

  17. Tony says:

    Thought I would clarify a few points.

    Is FF a business? Yes, it has to be.

    For many years I have been asked why FF isn’t a charity, and my answer has always been – because charities already exist – INUK, DCN, NGDT, PET etc covering each of the various sectors within the IF sphere.

    If FF was to become a charity, then we would be gunning for the same grants and funding that the existing charities already receive(DCN not excluded from that). And that would mean charities competing against each other to survive. Which in my opinion is *not* a charitable act. So we will not do it. To remain free and not charge our members, we have to obtain funding through other ways – such as advertising, freelance work and my own pocket.

    FF isn’t a small place, we have 200,000 unique visitors on our site each month – reading and searching millions of times- and the server infrastructure to keep it going is hefty (3 physical servers and two virtual servers). Currently I am looking at updating our infrastructure and the costs of doing that triple our current expenses.

    So yes – to survive, FF is a business. It is a business that offers support without charge and is run by 60 volunteers.

    Oliva, for many years we have had regular complaints about your behaviour and your extreme stance. You have confessed that your interaction with our members could have been worded better. You may have even been able to obtain more members for DCN had you been a little more diplomatic. Instead you scare them away.

    Its not easy to deal with some of the situations either. If it was just one person you annoyed, then it would be simpler – but you seem to have the skill to annoy 20 or 30 people at a time! and that leaves us with a multitude of complaints to deal with via email and pm. That ties up the FF team for quite some time I can assure you – and some of these ladies will not let go when they want to know why we haven’t banned you.

    Normally we would ban someone after a few issues like that – but we have amended the threads, had words with you and let you carry on for years. This was to support DCN. If we had left the posts/threads in place – perhaps the picture of DCN would not be so rosy on FF?

    You have mentioned that we declined to attend any more of the ‘Association of Fertility Patient Organisations’ meetings in London. Yes that is correct. Quite simply – it was because of you. At the last meeting we attended Clare(INUK) the current chair at the time suggested you chair the meetings going forward. I simply couldn’t face sitting in that room with you for hours – after dealing with so many complaints.

    Its a shame, but that isolation was caused by you – not me.

    Your observation about us not allowing advertising is clearly wrong – we do support public service advertising via Google adsense, and this has led to us display 4559 charity advertisements since Jan 1st this year. Charities include NSPCC, Red Cross, WWF, TigerTime and many more. Perhaps DCN’s marketing department is missing a trick when it comes to utilising PSA from google?

    We have always allowed DCN to post support, and indeed link in context. Had you have contacted me directly then maybe this would have still been the case. Instead you attempt mud slinging in public.

    Your comment, regarding the Pride post is misleading. It was removed in error when cleaning out other posts, and when you noticed this you let us know. We apologised and put it back. At that time – you were still a member. I would like to add that to date – the pride post is still is still there in public view.

    Some people here have mentioned that we have been quite forceful in managing some issues on the site. I don’t know what to say about that – other than to manage a site the size of FF sometimes means that we have to make quicker decisions. And sometimes they may be the wrong decision ans sometimes not. I am always open to feedback – just PM me via FF.

    I’m not going to go into this issue any more, I’ve already spent too much time on it and do not enjoy mud slinging.

    All the best with DCN, your booklets etc.

    Tony

    • oliviasview says:

      Tony
      I’ve had my say and you’ve had yours. Quite how we managed to fall out so badly and who (if either) is to blame is probably of little interest to others, so I’m not going to take issue with you. I do not set out to upset people but posting on sensitive topics can always attract discomfort. I have had my fair share of undeserved unpleasantness as a result. I have also had a very large amount of positive feedback. I recognise that an open access forum can attract people who will abuse it by flaming and ranting, and that ultimately you may have to restrict some people’s access. You might care to think of instituting some form of due process before doing so, because peremptorily banning people without notice looks and feels like censorship on a whim.
      FF is a huge and valuable resource for many people and I am sure that DCN will continue to encourage people to access it and will maintain the link to it on our website. All those involved in helping individuals and families looking for fertility support should find ways of working together.

  18. Betty says:

    I thought I was ‘aimed’ at male donors?

  19. Suemagoo says:

    All I can say – as a member who is a member of both DCN and FF – and has been grateful for the support and services of both, is please sort this out and stop this infighting! – I see you as mutually supportive and that FF should encourage its members to be able to access DCN’s unique services while DCN should encourage its members to make use of FF’s unique support network.

  20. oliviasview says:

    DCN has always given information about FF and will continue to do so. Any constructive suggestions for a way forward ladies?

    • emmag says:

      Well….. i really hope you don’t take offence at this Olivia but I was wondering if there is another spokesperson from DCN that hasn’t got ‘history’ with FF that could join the site if Tony was amenable? To me that seems like it might be a diplomatic way forward as you are known on FF and not everyone agreed with your, by your own admission, often very strident views, and however unintentional were either upset or angered by them. And I would suggest, given the DCN’s views on ‘telling’ that they don’t post AT ALL on the ‘not telling’ thread and just agree to disagree on that point. I don’t think anyone would take the decision NOT to tell lightly and I am in the ‘telling’ camp, but it’s their choice and it’s not for anyone else to try and change their minds and push their own doctrine. Just throwing that out there as a suggestion…..

      • marilynn says:

        No but it is for others to do something about! This is not like a person making a decision about whether to co sleep or put a baby in a crib! This is about robbing another human being of their identity. Here is a rule of thumb on information and privacy: if the information pertains to people other than yourself, its not yours to keep private or to control. It belongs to all of the people it relates to. In the case of donor offspring, every member of the donors family needs to know that the donor’s offspring exists or they cannot avoid dating them and cannot exchange medical information with them and can’t send them christmas cards if they feel like it. The fact that a person has offspring impacts way more than just them so it is not just their information to keep private. It’s certainly not for someone entirely from the outside to keep private just because they paid to have it that way. With intended parents not only is it not their own information that they are trying to conceal, its not even their own offspring’s information that they are trying to control. They are only the parents of the child because they paid to have it that way. So they bought this level of control over other people’s information which just makes the ugliness of it get worse and worse.

  21. oliviasview says:

    I’m not offended at all Emma. I think a fresh perspective would be excellent, but from what I understand it would not be possible for anyone ‘representing DCN’ to post information about the organisation’s services. OK for those who are using them to do so, but not someone employed by DCN, even if they have personal experience themselves. That was certainly the impression I gained from Mel’s email to me. I was actually told that if it was thought I was ‘coaching’ someone to ‘advertise’ DCN then that would be a reason for banning them. I had no such thought in mind, but it doesn’t sound encouraging for a way forward.

    • emmag says:

      Ok, well maybe Tony will have a view when he sees my suggestion or can come up with something himself? Or others?

  22. Penny says:

    Olivia – I very much doubt it is the information you share which is a problem but the way in which you do it. You have upset a lot of people on FF over many, many years. You seem to think that you are the only one who can be right, anyone who doesn’t agree with you is wrong, and you force your views on others. I have personally found some of your posts from years ago VERY offensive and I doubt the content is any better now than they were then. I am glad you have been banned. People will find the DCN if they want it.

    • oliviasview says:

      I’m sorry you found some of the things I said on FF offensive Penny. Others found them very helpful and I had many PMs over my years on that board applauding my posts. We are all different.

      • Penny says:

        Not just me, Olivia. Admin had many, many complaints about some of your posts over a very long period of time. You certainly weren’t deleted due to sharing info about DCN as you have been doing that for many years with no problems. It is the way you do it.

Comments are closed.