My Malignant Melanoma

For any of the What Now people who are going to attend this afternoon's chat whitewashing session, here are a few questions I think the moderators might have difficulty answering. I don't expect you to stand in for me, or particularly expect the moderators to give you a straight answer, but if you think it would be fun to ask, try these:

1. If Sean was really breaching the new conditions imposed on him by the moderators on 3rd April, why is it that every single one of the seven emails he received from the moderators after that date was to thank him for flagging content which breached the site rules?

2. If Sean has really been banned on the grounds you claim, why is it that he was told of his exclusion by George Briggs, as a result of his complaint against Mr Briggs? Why is it that Mr. Briggs told Sean that he would be requesting you to exclude him, if it was your decision as you now imply?

3. How do you feel Sean's complaint about your poor standard of moderation, and your bosses covering up for you has been handled? Do you feel it meets the principles of your charity's complaints policy?

"complaints are dealt with consistently throughout Macmillan...complaints are listened to and investigated thoroughly...complaints are acknowledged speedily and recorded...complaints are dealt with in an appropriate, fair and timely manner... we learn from the complaint"

4. Isn't it true that you are overreacting to the complaints of a vocal minority, but have ultimately only banned Sean at the request of your boss? Isn't it true that this is an attempt to discredit his complaint against your team's poor performance, and to close ranks in the face of a complaint?

5. Who is going to prevent the promotion of alternative medicine on the site in Sean's absence? Isn't it true that you do a very poor job on this? Isn't it true that you initially refused to implement the new rules on alternative medicine, and when Sean complained, told him that you would change the rules to suit your liking? Isn't it true that you could not in fact change the rules, and have consequently been very lax in applying them, because you do not personally support them?

6. Why did you require Sean to follow far stricter rules than anyone else on the site? Why did you allow people to freely personally abuse him?

7. If you can't answer these questions, what is the point of this chat session?