[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by hijaxers

Well i'm not obsessed but if they want 'quiet' why bleedin announce it ?

Why not just quietly' leave ?

Where have they "announced" it?

"The couple are understood to..."

"A source close to the couple said..."

According to the article, they haven't even "left", the Archewell organisation is simply not using social media platforms.

[The Slim Reaper]

MLK was famous, so maybe he shouldn't have read his own words?

[Parmy]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

What? You're saying Jet is spouting off about something he hasn't watched, read or listened to simply because he doesn't like them?

Colour me shocked.

No. I'm saying you are saying people watch their stuff even though they cant stand their nonsense ..

I ****ing doubt that's correct.

people just know what sickly bollox is getting spouted out by a pair of flakey flakes so dint watch but can also confidently comment.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by parmnion

No. I'm saying you are saying people watch their stuff even though they cant stand their nonsense ..

I ****ing doubt that's correct.

people just know what sickly bollox is getting spouted out by a pair of flakey flakes so dint watch but can also confidently comment.

Confidently comment on something they know nothing about and have never watched? Yep, sounds like tibb.

[The Slim Reaper]

Originally Posted by jet

Exactly. It's worth reading the opinions of royal commentators and reporters on the pairs latest sickly bollox though....or piers morgan's take....it can be amusing.

What I don't understand, and maybe you can help me out by explaining, if you don't like them that much, why read what others have to say about them? They're not world leaders or people of any consequence, so why?

If Johnson wasn't PM, I'd happily never see his name in print, or listen to anyone talk about him.

[jet]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

What I don't understand, and maybe you can help me out by explaining, if you don't like them that much, why read what others have to say about them? They're not world leaders or people of any consequence, so why?

If Johnson wasn't PM, I'd happily never see his name in print, or listen to anyone talk about him.

I've answered this dozens of times....I have always had an interest in the Royals, going way back to Alfred. I'm on a forum where all the Henrys and Georges and Williams etc etc are discussed, along with the current lot. The only Royals that are of interest here in threads are Prince Harry and Meghan so here I am.

[jet]

Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper

What I don't understand, and maybe you can help me out by explaining, if you don't like them that much, why read what others have to say about them? They're not world leaders or people of any consequence, so why?

Sorry, my perfectly acceptable answer to your question was deleted for some reason and I'm not typing it all out again. Perhaps Niamh can explain why.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Sorry, my perfectly acceptable answer to your question was deleted for some reason and I'm not typing it all out again. Perhaps Niamh can explain why.

Just got caught in the middle of other posts I was deleting

[jet]

What the hell is this "Archewell" about anyway? Preachy money making BS.

Harry "I am my mothers son" (shamelessly using Diana again, big pic of her)
Meghan "I am my son's mother".

No mention of fathers anywhere.

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

What the hell is this "Archewell" about anyway? Preachy money making BS.

"Archewell focuses on non-profit activities"

Yep.

[jet]

Originally Posted by Marsh.

"Archewell focuses on non-profit activities"

Yep.

Reportedly with big 'administrative costs'...

[Marsh.]

Originally Posted by jet

Reportedly with big 'administrative costs'...

Omg a charity "reportedly" has outgoings. Whatever next.

[Ammi]

...we all know the toxicity of social media, we mention it almost daily in many different topics and how there is very little if any positives with much of it, so it would follow that we would be supportive of any decision from anyone to step out of it...as Meghan and Harry appear to be doing...why should they pander to their abusers and their bullies...these threads that escalate so quickly in their negativity to the point that they’re more often closed down are just the very small tip of what social media is...so it’s not difficult to imagine why social media is so mentally unhealthy a place to be...they get it, their decisions and their very beings are disapproved of every day in every which way, they don’t need that print in front of them and to absorb other people’s negative and abusive/bullying keyboards...

[jet]

Harry and Meghan have the huge support of their fans - the Sugars - well known to be the most abusive and bullying fans currently on the internet. H&M have praised and thanked them. For all their talk about the evils of social media, they let THEM run rampant without saying a word.
There is a lot of overt and sly bullying going on in threads here, not just H&M ones either, coming from posters to other posters whose opinions or outlooks just happen to differ from their own. But then who cares about that, we aren't famous or influential, we are just people who are actually here, while those who they want to protect are not and will probably never lay eyes on a word written on SD.

[Ammi]

... ‘well known to be the most abusive and bullying fans currently on the internet.’ ...Would have to be quantified because I’m sure to many, that’s not well known at all...or that they’re running rampant on the internet while in some way being condoned by Meghan and Harry...and any ‘sly or overt bullying’ that might be happening in this thread or any other Meghan thread, does not appear to be from one side only, if that’s what’s happening...no one can really claim any higher ground...which is why the threads rarely remain open...