Originally Posted by
orbitmic
Because it leads to a number of famous people having been already gratuitously associated with very unpleasant behaviour whilst they have, by definition, nothing to do with the case since between zero and one of the people named or hinted at will have.
I think you are conflating two acts to make your point. Act 1 was to bring to the forum's attention another instance, within the last 3 years, in which a political celebrity had also demanded seat 1A be vacated for him, in a very similar high-handed manner. Pointing out this very similar act, on the part of a politician, was entirely relevant and interesting to this matter. Act 2 is how you feel that people will draw conclusions that this person is one and the same as this instance. I am responsible for Act 1, but I do not think I am responsible for Act 2.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
You are absolutely right, we are not a court of law, I said so myself. But I find it utterly indecent and certainly in no way healthy to have a forum where we speculate on people having behaved disgracefully for exactly zero reason. And precisely, it is unfairly hinting that someone "may have been" or "is guessed to have been" guilty of the ugly behaviour the OP report.
I personally made no such hints or guesses. However, the OP's thread title is click-bait - 'Advice: Parent kicked out of seat by "celebrity" ', and people clicking on the thread may understandably be expecting to see who the celebrity was, and be disappointed. As I said before more than once, the OP has every right not to disclose the celebrity's identity, but human nature as it is, people are bound to speculate, privately or on the forum, this is normal, as I said, human beings love a mystery.
Originally Posted by
orbitmic
Being famous does not mean having to be suspected of random horrors and I find it irresponsible on our collective part to engage in that sort of thing, but also unhelpful on the part of the OP to have caused such speculation because of his hinting. In my view, if he decides, for whatever reason to keep the identity of the person secret, he should do just that, and if he feels that the person ought to be exposed, he should be clear about who he is accusing. Others have already made specific suggestions as to how this can be done easily.
When you use strong words like 'indecent' or 'irresponsible' and 'unhelpful' against members like myself, you use language which ironically is likely to cause hurt and negatively impact upon the collective forum that you purport to protect.