Proof please Dr Jess for literally any of your allegations you utter wierd fantasist?
Good god that horror of a woman needs stopping.Proof please Dr Jess for literally any of your allegations you utter wierd fantasist?
View attachment 3888357
What an appalling individual.Proof please Dr Jess for literally any of your allegations you utter wierd fantasist?
View attachment 3888357
How does that even work when we’re all anonymous? They must think the site is run like the FreemasonsProof please Dr Jess for literally any of your allegations you utter wierd fantasist?
View attachment 3888357
She's such a massive dangerous liar.What an appalling individual.
You can't even DM on tattle.
Morally corrupt doesn't even start to scratch the surface of her.
That's a new low even by her standardsAccording to her there will be videos and photos of the deceased child on the threads taken by a Tattle stalker.
Unfortunately nothing can be done about anything said in parliament, it's completely legally immune, and that has to be the case to allow MPs to do their jobs.For context I have also posted this in the private support thread as well for the mods to see.
I completely understand that I just wish that they had done their research beforehand and looked at the facts before jumping to conclusions and saying "Oh it's Tattle's fault they were the cause of this girl's death" when clearly that isn't the case at all.Unfortunately nothing can be done about anything said in parliament, it's completely legally immune, and that has to be the case to allow MPs to do their jobs.
Is it just me or does this send off a message that Ofcom have heard Apsana's concerns but are not really addressing it.
It's also essentially saying "it's not really the government's job, talk to OFCOM".Is it just me or does this send off a message that Ofcom have heard her concerns but are not really addressing it.
That's what I was thinking as well it comes across that the Government are not really interested in this as it's nothing to do with them and that they need to speak with Ofcom instead.It's also essentially saying "it's not really the government's job, talk to OFCOM".
And the thing is, even if individual posters or threads are a problem, then OFCOM will just tell the admins to get rid of those specific people or threads. There are a lot of things that need to happen before they can take any action beyond that. This idea that Jess and others seem to have that they can just instantly block or shut down a website is effectively wishful thinking, and if they tried they would lose in court.Nobody will “do” anything about tattlelife because it’s not doing anything wrong.
At some point hopefully everyone will realise that the emperor isn’t wearing any clothes
Well, we now know that nothing was done after the Parliamentary Meeting last September so more than likely nothing will be done about it again unless I'm wrong.Nobody will “do” anything about tattlelife because it’s not doing anything wrong.
It was a meeting with an MP in a room on the Parliamentary estate.Well, we now know that nothing was done after the Parliamentary Meeting last September so more than likely nothing will be done about it again unless I'm wrong.
Yes but as Man Behaving Dadly pointed out to the police when he reported to them that people were taking the piss, if Tattle posed a threat to national security, they'd be "able" to shut the site downAnd the thing is, even if individual posters or threads are a problem, then OFCOM will just tell the admins to get rid of those specific people or threads. There are a lot of things that need to happen before they can take any action beyond that. This idea that Jess and others seem to have that they can just instantly block or shut down a website is effectively wishful thinking, and if they tried they would lose in court.
Tbh even in that case they would probably just block access to it from the UK until the offending post(s) were removed.Yes but as Man Behaving Dadly pointed out to the police when he reported to them that people were taking the piss, if Tattle posed a threat to national security, they'd be "able" to shut the site down
(Don't try and think through the logic of his point folks. There is none)