I have had a post automatically hidden and flagged by BOT on behalf of “The Community”. This is the Age we live in. I shall contribute no more.
I don’t understand this, Jack, but maybe ask the moderators for their perspective? If it is deliberate, or intentional, that’s quite another matter, but I’d be surprised, unless someone has started sniping at you.
You have the right to disengage, of course, but I for one have valued your erudite and occasionally provocative views, expressed in a colourful manner. Nothing has upset me thus far.
Whilst commenting I also want to pay tribute to Malcom Finney and Paul Saunders, both of whom I have had the pleasure of meeting, many, many years ago. The forum would be a lesser plaice without any one of you, let alone all 3.
Please stay, Jack!
Regards
Terry
6 Likes
Thank you for those kind words. I have learned a great deal on this Forum especially in Private Client areas like probate, which I was unable to practice in as it is a reserved activity. and LPAs. Only qualifying as a chartered accountant, solicitor and and Fellow of the CIOT was not sufficient. I plan to continue reading posts of others.
I am a firm opponent of cancel culture and FSU member. Paraphrasing a past Archbishop of Canterbury I believe technology should be our servant not our master. I think my post was pulled as I was unkind to some will writers. I believe that if you dish it out you must be able to take it but not from a BOT or Algorithm. My robust exchanges with the Editor of the Law Society’s Gazette mean I no longer post there. This Thing invited me to edit my post. Although my response was not prompted by a dream of my wife’s, it is “Quod scripsi, scripsi”
Jack Harper
3 Likes
Jack
So sorry to read this. I am sure that I [and Terry] are far from the only ones who will greatly miss your contributions, always both instructive and entertaining.
I am grateful to have been on the receiving end from you only once, and hope that in time I may hear from you again whether here or elsewhere.
With kind regards, Kevin
I am astounded! Surely this can’t happen? I have learned so much from and enjoyed so many of your posts. This forum will be all the poorer as a result. Can anything be done?
Patrick, Moroney.
Ok, so I had to look up the Latin, but I can’t do anything now other than respectfully accept your decision, although I still regret it. I certainly agree technology should not be our master and I may have said rude things about certain Will writers, but only those I was sure deserved it, and fortunately not in public.
I’m glad you’ll be benefiting from the forum and forgive me for hoping you will be unable to resist jumping in sometime.
Regards
Terry
An Ode to Jack Harper: The Unfiltered Voice of Wisdom
Dear TDF Community,
In the vast realm of online discussions, where opinions clash like titans and perspectives collide in a cacophony of ideas, one voice has consistently stood out amidst the digital tumult—Jack Harper. A sage in a sea of voices, a provocateur with a pen, Jack has graced our forum with his presence, leaving an indelible mark on the tapestry of our discussions.
Jack, the wordsmith extraordinaire, has a unique talent for weaving narratives that are not only informative but also peppered with a dash of wit and a sprinkle of mild sarcasm. His posts, like scrolls of wisdom, have guided us through the maze of trusts and wills, shedding light on intricacies that many dared not tread. In his eloquent prose, Jack Harper has brought clarity to the complex, unraveling legal jargon with the finesse of a seasoned orator.
Yet, Jack is more than just a font of legal knowledge. He is the unabashed truth-seeker, the voice unafraid to challenge the status quo. Even when faced with the daunting task of editing a post deemed offensive, Jack chose to stand firm, defending his right to express his thoughts in the unfiltered manner that has become his signature. And while we may not always agree with his viewpoints, we can’t deny the intellectual feast that his dissenting opinions provide.
But now, as the shadows threaten to claim Jack from our community, let us pause and reflect on the void that would be left in his absence. Jack’s departure would not only be a loss to the forum but to each member who has benefited from his insights, however cutting they may have been. In his departure, we risk losing a mentor, a guide, and a friend who has, in his own way, enriched our understanding of trusts and wills.
So, dear Jack Harper, as you stand at this crossroads, contemplating whether to continue gracing us with your presence, know that your contribution has not gone unnoticed. Your posts have been a beacon of knowledge, a source of inspiration, and a testament to the power of unapologetic authenticity.
The Trusts Discussion Forum awaits your return, Jack. Your wisdom is a tapestry, and we would be remiss without the threads you bring to it.
6 Likes
Jack, this is entirely unacceptable. It is not the end of an era, it is the calculated political removal of professional precise language.
Can you kindly identify the BOT, if you are able, and the self designated “Community” and send me the details privately?
I echo the other members support.
Peter Harris
2 Likes
Does the Bot have the Latin for judging? Be rude in Latin Jack and carry on. Calmly or otherwise.
1 Like
I have investigated this. Users can flag “inappropriate” posts and sometimes this results in a post being hidden automatically until reviewed by the moderators. That is what happened here. In other words, the process starts with a complaint by a user and the hiding is a temporary measure. Unfortunately, because moderation is now quite light touch, we did not see what had happened at the time.
I have now released Jack’s post and if it happens again would invite anyone concerned to raise the issue with the moderators / admins.
Richard Vallat
TDF Moderator
Wonderful, welcome back Jack. I have missed reading your contributions.
Mark
I wholly support the words, above, of Terry Hill.
Neville
Another post, here, in support of Jack. He does not post answers to be “liked”, he posts answers which give opinion based on the facts and evidence presented by the person asking the question. I have never found Jack’s tone to be rude or controversial - blunt yes, but I have no issue with that.
1 Like
Good, or for some perhaps, bad news. I have received an explanation for my recent attack of Bot-ulism. You may now see my very nearly posthumous post revealed at:
https://trustsdiscussionforum.co.uk/t/ademption-and-negligence/20446
My favourite method of dispute resolution used to be physical violence until I retired from the pursuit of the oval ball with my fellow mindless hearties and topers of legend. As Yeats said “Now must I wither into the truth” and be gracious in response as befits my years. As Falstaff said “Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world”.
Jack Harper
Another post, here, in support of Jack. He does not post answers to be “liked”, he posts answers which give opinion based on the facts and evidence presented by the person asking the question. I have never found Jack’s tone to be rude or controversial - blunt yes, but I have no issue with that.
–
Previous Replies
TPH295a:
but I for one have valued your erudite and occasionally provocative views, expressed in a colourful manner.
I wholly support the words, above, of Terry Hill.
Neville
Wonderful, welcome back Jack. I have missed reading your contributions.
Mark
I have investigated this. Users can flag “inappropriate” posts and sometimes this results in a post being hidden automatically until reviewed by the moderators. That is what happened here. In other words, the process starts with a complaint by a user and the hiding is a temporary measure. Unfortunately, because moderation is now quite light touch, we did not see what had happened at the time.
I have now released Jack’s post and if it happens again would invite anyone concerned to raise the issue with the moderators / admins.
Richard Vallat
TDF Moderator
Jack’s moderated post - Wow. Someone complained about this. I am speechless (for once).
Just because someone disagrees with something doesn’t mean it should be silenced. People should stand up and be counted and say why they think it is wrong. They never know, they might win the argument. But then censorship generally seems to be the in thing (although thankfully receding). If someone feels they can’t argue their point and prefer to secretly object then maybe their point is not worth arguing I would say.
Sara
1 Like
I too was saddended at the thought of the Forum losing Jack’s posts; that have always been erudite, informative and amusing. Now we have been exposed to the ‘objectional’ post that was rejected, clearly one at least of the will writers scorned must have a very thin skin.
My PhD was in Gratuitous Offence so I do operate a little self-censorship on public fora where I can’t publish anonymously. As a barely reconstructed incorrigible old Fenian and Free Stater I have vestigial for authority and when I became a partner in two national firms, one law and one accounting, I immediately set up an escape committee and a black ops insurgency. Any of my former partners will confirm.
But while I keep it private the explanation I have been given is very reasonable and I do sympathise with the Moderator in what is an essential task which only ever attracts criticism and never encomia for what is, we surely all agree, a valuable and lively group. No system is foolproof and the Forum is almost so. I did not expect the kind reactions to my temporary demise for which I am humbly grateful (and richly deserved, says Falstaff).
Jack Harper
Jack’s moderated post - Wow. Someone complained about this. I am speechless (for once).
Just because someone disagrees with something doesn’t mean it should be silenced. People should stand up and be counted and say why they think it is wrong. They never know, they might win the argument. But then censorship generally seems to be the in thing (although thankfully receding). If someone feels they can’t argue their point and prefer to secretly object then maybe their point is not worth arguing I would say.
Sara
–
Previous Replies
Good, or for some perhaps, bad news. I have received an explanation for my recent attack of Bot-ulism. You may now see my very nearly posthumous post revealed at:
https://trustsdiscussionforum.co.uk/t/ademption-and-negligence/20446
My favourite method of dispute resolution used to be physical violence until I retired from the pursuit of the oval ball with my fellow mindless hearties and topers of legend. As Yeats said “Now must I wither into the truth” and be gracious in response as befits my years. As Falstaff said “Banish plump Jack, and banish all the world”.
Jack Harper
Another post, here, in support of Jack. He does not post answers to be “liked”, he posts answers which give opinion based on the facts and evidence presented by the person asking the question. I have never found Jack’s tone to be rude or controversial - blunt yes, but I have no issue with that.
–
Previous Replies
but I for one have valued your erudite and occasionally provocative views, expressed in a colourful manner.
I wholly support the words, above, of Terry Hill.
Neville
Wonderful, welcome back Jack. I have missed reading your contributions.
Mark
I have investigated this. Users can flag “inappropriate” posts and sometimes this results in a post being hidden automatically until reviewed by the moderators. That is what happened here. In other words, the process starts with a complaint by a user and the hiding is a temporary measure. Unfortunately, because moderation is now quite light touch, we did not see what had happened at the time.
I have now released Jack’s post and if it happens again would invite anyone concerned to raise the issue with the moderators / admins.
Richard Vallat
TDF Moderator
Another post, here, in support of Jack. He does not post answers to be “liked”, he posts answers which give opinion based on the facts and evidence presented by the person asking the question. I have never found Jack’s tone to be rude or controversial - blunt yes, but I have no issue with that.
Ah, said with your customary elegance – With my customary brevity, does that mean we can say “jack’s back!”. I do hope so.
Regards
Terry (past beneficiary of Jack’s wisdom on the forum)
1 Like
I have no knowledge of latin Jack Harper, so I can only quote Lord Blackadder: (estate planning) life without you is like a broken pencil.
Pointless.
But with him it is quite propelling …