Goodbye to dunstonh

Quentin

From the forum faqs regarding this issue:

In the past, we tried hard not to PPR long-standing forum users. Sadly, we had so many issues taking time away from our core MoneySaving work, that protection had to go. Now, if someone's persistently causing trouble, they're PPR'd. If they are, please don't talk about them on the forum. It's unfair to do this when they aren't able to respond.

robatwork

Quentin wrote: »

From the forum faqs regarding this issue:

Now, if someone's persistently causing trouble, they're PPR'd.

This is all likely to get resolved tomorrow or shortly thereafter, when certain mods return from a break. Martin is aware and the "chief mod" is also on the case. I expect either all these threads will get pulled and any more discussion will see punishments meted out, or hopefully a reinstatement and explanation/apology.

datlex

I am not a fan of dunstonh. He took it upon himself to re-add a post I had chosen to edit. This was totally out of order. However, I would not have asked that he was removed for his behaviour. I find it surprising he was removed for the post in the LCF thread. However it did show a total lack of respect for his fellow poster and was totally dismissive of the previous poster. No one says he had to agree with any posts on the forum, however when some one has a lot of posts and states they are an IFA (I presume MSE checks these claims) then folk are like to take on board their opinion and not necessarily realise it is opinion rather than advise. I would be happy to see DunstonH back but I will just ignore anything he has to say.

bigadaj

Quentin wrote: »

From the forum faqs regarding this issue:

Yes, which makes the sites decision seem more unjustifiable.

He had got into spats with posters before, as many of us do, and would have been better not responding to obvious trolling or ignorance.

In this case he was just drawing attention to posts by one user that appeared to be lifted from other sources and may have confused uninformed potential investors should they have found the relevant thread, which many wil, do from a simple google search.

It's very unclear why he was singled out as others made similar comments with little consequence.

tgon

When subject matter expects "leave" consumer focus forums then we're left with little more than a chat shop - not a great deal of use to most who browse a balance of opinions for some of the greatest financial decisions we will make in life. Who are the Money Saving Experts if not those who's subject matter knowledge make it so...

bigadaj

datlex wrote: »

I am not a fan of dunstonh. He took it upon himself to re-add a post I had chosen to edit. This was totally out of order. However, I would not have asked that he was removed for his behaviour. I find it surprising he was removed for the post in the LCF thread. However it did show a total lack of respect for his fellow poster and was totally dismissive of the previous poster. No one says he had to agree with any posts on the forum, however when some one has a lot of posts and states they are an IFA (I presume MSE checks these claims) then folk are like to take on board their opinion and not necessarily realise it is opinion rather than advise. I would be happy to see DunstonH back but I will just ignore anything he has to say.

The site doesn't check claims made by individual posters, but it is advisable for people with particular registrations or qualifications to declare an interest to avoid accusations of bias, or at least make their perspective obvious.

With respect to advise then nothing posted on these boards constitutes financial advice, that is a specific term which means bespoke recommendations normally made after a full fact find and risk profiling. Advice comes with liabilities, not the least concern being that PI cover is only valid where a payment for a service is being made. So if advice was taken in these boards with no payment then that professional would be personally liable for any implications and potential costs.

His comments were generally good, he could be blunt but sometimes that's what is needed, snowflake millennials beware.

foreversummer

The loss of dunstonh is is a very, very great shame. He was always so generous with his time.

He pointed me in the right direction without spoon-feeding or offering actual advice. And me who knew nothing about pensions gained a lot by his experience.

He will be greatly missed here of that I've no doubt.

Foreversummer

JuicyJesus

I can honestly credit dunstonh with helping further my knowledge of investments and such, which genuinely helped me in my career. If nothing else, he helped make achieving a qualification in investments a lot easier simply through having read such a huge amount of worked-through knowledge.

Extremely sad to see him go and very tragically representative of the frankly disgraceful direction MSE has taken ever since the MoneySupermarket takeover.

DiggerUK

datlex wrote: »

....... however when someone has a lot of posts and states they are an IFA (I presume MSE checks these claims) .....

bigadaj wrote: »

The site doesn't check claims made by individual posters, .........

That is what gobsmacks me......an anonymous, and prolific, poster on the inter web gets cult status, and like Kim Jong Un must be given a 40 day standing applause because....?
As I have already said, there are dozens of posters here who provided the same guidance as did dunstonh.

Let’s not forget the stories of complicated surgery, successfully carried out by someone who turns out to be the chef from the hospital kitchen.
I claim that “I am not now, nor have I ever been, a financial advisor” when for all anyone here knows, I could be a former advisor found guilty of multiple frauds.

Banning and censorship are not something I endorse.
But it would be wise for those here to “listen to all views expressed, then hold their own counsel after DTOR”..._

Peelerfart

DiggerUK wrote: »

That is what gobsmacks me......an anonymous, and prolific, poster on the inter web gets cult status, and like Kim Jong Un must be given a 40 day standing applause because....._

Because they wanted too?