Author Topic: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna  (Read 21250 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline dmitri

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 2018
    • View Profile
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #45 on: August 22, 2007, 12:04:02 AM »
Yes a range of opinions should most definitely be recorded.

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #46 on: August 22, 2007, 01:01:57 AM »
I agree, Annie.

This site should be a safe haven for people to express their views on the topic at hand without fear of personal attack.  Perhaps the site moderator will intervene?

Kind regards
Sophie

The Forum is intended for discussion of matters of interest to our membership. It's not necessarily a "safe haven". We do have rules and standards.

I am very strict when it comes to personal attacks. I have seen none, but if you have found them, please feel free to report them to me or the FA.

I am the Moderator of the Survivor section. I had some concerns with the Survivor Section several weeks ago. I have spoken to Bob Atchison, the owner of this site and Forum, and he has asked me to remain as Moderator. I agreed. I also spoke to the FA, and he also asked me to remain. In other words, I have the complete support of both of them to moderate this part of the Forum as I see fit.

That said, you are entirely welcome to complain about how this is being moderated should you find that you are dissatisfied.

I hope this explains what you were asking about.

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #47 on: August 22, 2007, 01:27:07 AM »
There is a reasonably full account of the Grandanor corporation in Peter Kurth's book.  I can't quote you chapter and verse as I don't have the book at the moment but there is a bit of detail about who set it up and why.

"Full" account? I don't think so, because if anything made AA or her buddies look bad, I bet he wouldn't have told it.

So, have you looked this up and determined that there is nothing about Grandanor in Kurth? I found otherwise. I would be most interested in hearing about your research.

Why, yes, I have! But what I was saying is that you will never get the entire story from an avid Anderson supporter when it concerns something possibly negative about her or her supporters. In my research, and I have done quite a bit recently, I have found out a lot from other sources, especially an interview with Dr. Berenberg- Gossler who was the opposing attorney for AA. All sides need to be examined, so we need to look beyond only the defenders of AA for our information.

Your brutal crackdown of late seems to be very much in favor of AA supporters. There is another forum they can all hang out at, where those with opposing views are not welcome to even lurk. I had thought we on this forum were free to speak out about how we really feel about her claim and supporters without being censored. If things have changed, and AA and her supporters are to be protected from all possible allegations, and questions about their opinions, let us know now.

It's unfortunate that moderating this section on a daily basis is viewed as a "brutal crackdown". For whatever it's worth, Annie, this part of the Forum is the very toughest to moderate. I try very hard to be fair to everyone, but I have taken exception to the following:

1. Off topic posts
2. Repetitive posts - such as "this is boring". I'll allow that from the same poster on occasion, but endlessly, no.
3. Confusing opinions with evidence
4. Personal attacks

For the record, and those who believe in Survivors know this, I personally think that:

1. AA was not Anastasia
2. AA was most likely FS
3. The whole family died that night.

However, just because I think this does not mean that anyone who thinks differently is not welcome to post here. By now, most of the people you would label as "AA supporters" don't bother to post here, for a variety of reasons. So, there is really no need to protect them, as they don't come here and probably will not in the future.

This section of the Forum is not a free-for-all. However, if there is a topic you'd like to discuss, I would encourage you to start a new topic. As long as the posts are within our guidelines, you are welcome to put them up. If you find this to be "censorship", so be it.

There are those (not necessarily you) who say they want a variety of opinions, but in reality, what they really want to do is be agreed with. I guarantee you, if a purported "Anna Anderson supporter" tried to examine any part of her case here, that person would be sent packing - not by me - but by all those who find this discussion "boring".

By the way, what did you determine about Kurth and Granador?

Offline PrincessSophie

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 72
    • View Profile
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #48 on: August 22, 2007, 02:52:48 AM »
I agree, Annie.

This site should be a safe haven for people to express their views on the topic at hand without fear of personal attack.  Perhaps the site moderator will intervene?

Kind regards
Sophie

The Forum is intended for discussion of matters of interest to our membership. It's not necessarily a "safe haven". We do have rules and standards.

I am very strict when it comes to personal attacks. I have seen none, but if you have found them, please feel free to report them to me or the FA.

I am the Moderator of the Survivor section. I had some concerns with the Survivor Section several weeks ago. I have spoken to Bob Atchison, the owner of this site and Forum, and he has asked me to remain as Moderator. I agreed. I also spoke to the FA, and he also asked me to remain. In other words, I have the complete support of both of them to moderate this part of the Forum as I see fit.

That said, you are entirely welcome to complain about how this is being moderated should you find that you are dissatisfied.

Lisa, I personally feel you are doing a fine job as moderator.  A fine job!  No problem at all!  The only negative in my comment was that you cannot be everywhere at once.  No one can.  And perhaps "safe haven" was not quite right.  But I do feel that on occasion that there are those who belittle those who do not agree with them and I, personally, find this quite unnecessary.  But I will certainly take your advice and report them in future!

I hope this explains what you were asking about.

Offline Annie

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 4757
    • View Profile
    • Anna Anderson Exposed!
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #49 on: August 22, 2007, 07:01:45 AM »
Quote
By the way, what did you determine about Kurth and Granador?

I already told you in the above post my opinion on that matter.

And if we all have a right to our opinion why doesn't that include continuing to state that AA was FS in threads questioning her about AA's identity? Because some people are 'bored?' Some people are bored with a lot of the things AA supporters do too.

Offline LisaDavidson

  • Moderator
  • Velikye Knyaz
  • *****
  • Posts: 2665
    • View Profile
Re: 101 Reasons AA was not Anastasia Nikolaevna
« Reply #50 on: August 22, 2007, 01:05:31 PM »
Quote
By the way, what did you determine about Kurth and Granador?

I already told you in the above post my opinion on that matter.

And if we all have a right to our opinion why doesn't that include continuing to state that AA was FS in threads questioning her about AA's identity? Because some people are 'bored?' Some people are bored with a lot of the things AA supporters do too.

You did state your opinion but you did not support it. Or perhaps you don't  want to discuss it beyond stating your opinion?

As much as possible, I would like for there to be discussion of substance. Wouldn't you?

I'm not sure I understand the rest of your questions, but you are welcome to PM me if you think that would help. (or not if you think it wouldn't).