I'm afraid I do not commed you, and I do not agree it is diplomatic. May I respectfully suggest you are wrong to take this approach.
Whilst I respect anyone's right to post or not post what they want, but your original post sought both sympathy from your mates here on FT and you sought their expertise and experience about what compensation you should expect.
You've then said you've resolved it, received some compensation but you're not going to post the outcome here but instead are going to tell some other people in Belfast who might not even be involved in the thread how it was resolved.
May I respectfully (genuinely) suggest you reconsider this approach and post the results.
I cannot agree with that. Just because somebody recounts a negative experience with bmi and seeks advice on a public bulletin board does not mean that the whole world has an entitlement to know the contents or private dealings between the poster and bmi.
Anybody in the world with access to the internet can read posts in this forum. Describing it as a discussion between the poster and his "FT mates" is a misrepresentation of reality. I cannot see anything wrong in the OP not wanting to divulge private information to the world at large.
Even without knowing the detailed outcome, this thread contains valuable information for me. For one thing, I would have assumed that a DC Gold member on a C fare would be pretty safe from downgrading. I have now learnt that this is not the case. I have also learnt that it seems possible to get a positive outcome from CR on this. I do not need to know the precise form and amount of compensation the OP got.
It is a fine balance between being excessively secretive and a dangerous blabbermouth. Transparency is not always a good thing. In fact, I think that some people are sometimes a little careless with the information they put in some posts on FT, and that this can be detrimental to all of us.
In this specific case, I would rather have CR retain a degree of flexibility in awarding compensation rather than having a set inflexible rule, which is what you tend to get when things become public (as Joe will complain that Jack got such, etc...) and usually ends up at the bottom end of the compensation range.
In my view, the OP has behaved in an entirely appropriate manner in and I do not think that it is right to try to pressurise him in divulging information that he does not want (with reason) to divulge.