WEBCHAT GUIDELINES 1. One question per member plus one follow-up once you've had a response. 2. Keep your question brief 3. Don't moan if your question doesn't get answered. 4. Do be civil/polite. See full guidelines here.

Meet the MNHQ moderators. Live chat Friday 8th Nov, 1-2pm

(325 Posts)
JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Thu 07-Nov-13 11:09:00

Hi all,
We promised you a webchat to discuss all things moderation (and anything else you fancy really). So, tomorrow lunchtime RebeccaMumsnet, RowanMumsnet and I (and possibly a few other team members - suspect that OliviaMumsnet might be lurking) will be on hand at 1pm to answer your questions. If you can't make it along, then do post your questions here in advance. Mind the guidelines at the top of the page now - only one question each and be nice wink.

ItsAllGoingToBeFine Thu 07-Nov-13 11:15:36

Often the moderators seem very slow, no doubt due to high volumes of reports.

If the volunteer night time moderation is successful do you have any plans to introduce volunteer mods full time?

NatashaBee Thu 07-Nov-13 11:35:31

Do you have non-mumsnet-moderator logins so you can post in AIBU about annoying colleagues? smile

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 12:36:29

Well, I really fancy discussing why - despite many pleas, begging, wishing and hoping - there is still no gin emoticon. shock just why?
it can't be hard!

I think that issue is an urgent one.
we need [gin]. really, we do.

and today would be the best for introducing it, since it my 1st MNiversary and I would love a special gift.
just saying.

[gin]

thanks for listenGIN.wink

LineRunner Thu 07-Nov-13 12:57:19

I am wondering, do you all have an agreed definition of goading?

And how will you manage to be fair and consistent in applying it?

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 13:04:57

I'm concerned about the number of deletions for "personal attacks" where really I don't believe it's an attack but part of an argument.

I was deleted the other day for saying someone was "pathetic". I was trying to make the point that passive-aggressive "poor me everyone is being horrible to me" posts aren't actually proof of bullying, but are possibly proof that the poster was wrong.

It seems to be that if a post is reported it is deleted, with no account taken of the discussion that is going on.

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 13:05:12

Or what Liney said, more succinctly grin

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 13:06:51

And have you given any thought to my suggestion of solving the overnight problem by having a "this thread has been reported by X number of individual posters, so we will automatically lock it until we can look at it" idea?

It would stop overnight stirrers and trolls.

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 13:07:43

Oops that's more than one. Sorry. Feel free to ignore.

though I'll probably come up with a few more

LovesBeingHereAgain Thu 07-Nov-13 14:34:07

Has the night mods gone live ? why wasn't it me

How are you going to get tge balance right, it's a fine line most of tge time and subjective.

Suddengeekgirl Thu 07-Nov-13 14:47:26

I don't fancy being a Mod! You just can't win sometimes! confused

My question is...
What is your preferred method of dealing with the grief spammers/ trolls and naughty MNers have caused you?
Chocolate, biscuits, gin or rocking in a corner? smile

Why would anyone want to volunteer to moderate MN overnight? Talk about a thankless task!

InkleWinkle Thu 07-Nov-13 16:17:31

What is the thing that posters do that annoys you most of all? (Apart from the obvious trolling)

mollythetortoise Thu 07-Nov-13 16:24:09

Overnight/ after hours does seem to be a weak spot.

I guess because everyone at mnhq is quite rightly in bed.
Would you consider paid and well trained over night mods?
A small team of 4 working in pairs could manage 14 shifts a week (7 nights x 2 mods each night)

I must declare an interest here as it is a job I would loveto do but that aside, the overnight mods could generally keep on top of the nightly shenanigans , freeing up Rowan's / Rebecca's time every morning, which must currently be spent deleting overnight threads and posts.

How long is Tech's to-do list, and what proportion of it is compatibility issues across standard site/mobile site/app?

moldingsunbeams Thu 07-Nov-13 17:21:06

As a local editor I can confirm tech's to do list is very very long!

BoreOfWhabylon Thu 07-Nov-13 17:55:46

I know the 'block poster' issue has been brought up many times before and is not considered a good idea (don't want it myself) BUT could there be the option to colour specified poster/s on a thread, as we can OPs posts? Would make it easier to just skip past the coloured posts as NFI.
red would be good

Hullygully Thu 07-Nov-13 18:23:29

These are the problems/flaws as I see them:

1. As human beings, mods, despite good intentions, will inevitably a) read things in different spirits b) apply the rules differently therefore.

2. A lot of threads bumble along full of people mucking about, being rude to each other etc etc and no one minds so no one reports so nothing happens. THEN on some threads, others take exception and report like mad, so that things seen as normally acceptable, are then deleted. Thus it looks like reporting=deletion

3. If people take a dislike/exception to someone, they deliberately report report report in a concerted attempt to get that person "in trouble" (I can't believe I'm having to type this), whereas said individual would never use such behaviour and thus has little defence against it.

I don't know the answers to any of it.

Hullygully Thu 07-Nov-13 18:25:47

Oh soz, I don't appear to have actually put the question. It is: What oh what can we do about the above.

And also, that it is really really really annoying that new people come on to MN, moan about it, get told to stop moaning and give it all a try, complain about being bullied and wanting it all to be different, complain more and report and then people here since fossils get told off for being unwelcoming etc. <gnashes teeth>

Hullygully Thu 07-Nov-13 18:26:08

? < forgot that

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 18:53:12

^ Yup, totes agree.

BoreOfWhabylon Thu 07-Nov-13 18:59:29

And what Hully said

Hopasholic Thu 07-Nov-13 19:00:29

I would like to know the 'stats'

Is there really an influx of trolls at the moment and are you having to delete far more threads/posts than you usually do?
I've not been here long, 9 months <and have been made welcome but I'm not here for a gunfight (< bunfight! Auto correct!)

Does the trolling frequently happen in waves as some say or is it particularly bad now? Would preventing newbies from name changing within their first year help prevent trolls? Is it too easy to get back on even if you are banned?

Newbies who have a problem with the site being cliquey IMO seem to be ones who goad and troll. People have formed friendships over years, they are built over time just like RL ones are.

Maybe instead of the biscuit we should have a catsbumface grin < awaits my award from MNHQ for solving the trolling issue.

ShreddedHoops Thu 07-Nov-13 19:48:46

Every chat forum has mouldy (ahem) types who think they own a piece of the site and how it should work. The 'tone' of the site is IMO good and pretty standard. The nature of an anonymous forum is that all are equal. I don't like it when threads get derailed, and disagree with Hully that newbies are the problem, or over-reporting. I think MN's rules are fine as they are, but some posters who act as though they are some sort of 'old guard' (when there are thousands of us who've been here for donkeys) get very huffy when they break site rules and end up deleted or whatever. There shouldn't be an 'us and them' approach to old /new posters, plus to frequent namechangers like me it all reads very tedious. Read the thread and post accordingly - pretty simple, non? Hully seems confused on what the acceptable tone is - it's down to HQ, ultimately, so if you are 'larking around' on a thread with like minded posters and rules are broken but no-one reports, that doesn't mean you're not breaking them. If a bear shits in the woods... you're advocating a very 'don't snitch' attitude which helps no-one.

ShreddedHoops Thu 07-Nov-13 19:51:43

So my question to HQ would be - does it annoy you when some posters ask for special treatment (being allowed to break rules) because they've been members for a long time, and do you treat old / new posters differently when they are reported?

HoneyDragon Thu 07-Nov-13 19:52:52

If we post on here are we going to get told off?

<<Schrödinger's post>>

trish5000 Thu 07-Nov-13 19:53:13

Would it be possible to have a long list, perhaps incorporated in the Talk Guidelines, of examples of what is a personal attack and what isnt.
[I do see examples quoted by mumsnet from time to time, but they are dotted all over the forum]. Then new posters wouldnt get so confused, and it would clarify the situation a lot better for everyone else, who couldnt then say they dont know if something is a pa or not, as they could refer to the Talk Guidelines before posting!
Hopefully then there would be less pas! Which would then hopefully decrease your workload!

An example at the moment is that a lot of posters dont seem to know if calling someone a racist is a pa or not.

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 19:53:41

Oh, yes, what Hully said and what can be done about it?

Goatmint Thu 07-Nov-13 20:16:44

Can we have access to info? Eg

Number of joiners per month/ number of members to date

Number of unique users per month

Number of posts/ month

Number of posts reported/ deleted/ month

Actually seeing the numbers would put things into context, & might even neutralise the ' it's gone to hell in a handcart' perception.

Also I was wondering if the inconsistencies in format and capability between MN versions for different devices could be ironed out. I have worked out that people post thanks type icons, but I can't see them so it makes posts difficult to interpret. Communicating seems to be hard enough, without us not talking the same emoticon language on different devices.

Thank you.

DoItTooJulia Thu 07-Nov-13 20:27:54

I would like to know if the mumsnet mod teams looks at threads generally to police them, or do you wait for reports before you look at things?

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 20:31:19

Hully

I think new people should go through an initiation process/quarantine period.

like only lurking for a week. and no posting on AIBU for a month.
and there should be a MNers guide to newbies they would have to read and sign.
not rules, but things like:
- use fucking paragraphs
- don't expect people to agree with you
- we swear & talk about sex
- we can be lovely, helpful and supportive
- banter is allowed and it's not bullying
- if you feel ignored don't take it to heart, post again or rephrase your question
- MN is fun
etc.

I think that would eliminate a lot of moaning...over and over and fucking over again!

Hullygully Thu 07-Nov-13 20:45:42

No one wants "special treatment" Shredded, what I want is consistent treatment, the point I am making is that posts are deleted because SOME people object to them whereas if no objection is raised, there is no problem with them.

It is not that some posts by some people deserve "special treatment," it is that posts should not be deleted just because SOME people NEW OR OLD, don't like them.

The newbie point is a separate one. Any newcomer to any form of social interaction should not be surprised if present incumbents object to being told to change to suit the new person.

I do hope I have clarified sufficiently. It would be awful to go over and over the same old ground, wouldn't it?

ChippingInBatshitArse Thu 07-Nov-13 21:08:58

I have been suggesting (for quite some time now) that MNHQ does not permit namechanging for the first year (without going through MNHQ and having you do it for them if there is a really good reason for it).

(I know people can sign up multiple accounts but surely there is a limit to how many one person is able to do?)

Can you please tell me why you don't think this would help? Or if you agree it would help - why you don't want to or can't do it?

I won't be around for the web chat tomorrow, so just wanted to add my opinion now.

I like the tone of the site and the way it is moderated.

I do think it needs investment to iron out speed of response issues.

I think all the mods tread a fine line very well. When they screw up they admit it and apologise. This I respect.

I believe that if you don't like a thread, as long as that thread is within the rules of the site then you should shut up and not read it rather than whine.

All whingers should have their posting rights revoked for a week and then a large whiney emotion permanently placed next to their posting name.

OK, maybe not the last one, but the problem with the very open nature of MNHQ moderation is that people see it as carte blanche to try and get the mods to do what they want. Give people an inch and they'll try and run off with the map. I personally think a few reminders that it's their site and they'll do what they want to wouldn't go amiss. After all, they've done it pretty well up to now.

JaquelineHyde Thu 07-Nov-13 21:52:37

Can you explain why PAs are deleted straight away and yet attacks that are aimed at groups of people are allowed to stand?

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 21:59:40

Chipping
I think some NC is fine - like your current one - coz it's fun and you are still recognizable.
and some people have to completely NC if they have been "found" out in real life etc.
that should be fine to do without HQ.

it's the NCs for malicious intentions that we all wish could be a better monitored/culled.
I don't know how though.

I really think deleting posts just doesn't work. maybe highlighting them so people know that MNHQ consider the post inappropriate, but with deletions it can be impossible to know what on earth a thread is about, and so the deletions derail it, or spawn a flurry of pms. I think it would be so much better to just let everyone make their own minds up,but to be aware of MNHQ ruling on them.

In a sense this also applies to deleting threads. If there is a bunfight on a thread, I would like the chance to go back in a calmer frame of mind, and see what really happened, evaluate my own contributions, and even apologise if I feel I need to.

Another problem with deletions is when posts and posters are subject to abuse about bunfights that are no longer visible. I know the thread about a thread should in theory sort that out, but we all know it is a tool to use lightly. I really the feel the fundamental 'unspoken rule' that you leave a fight on a thread. You should be able to disagree on one thread, and agree heartily on another. There is a worrying emergence of a culture of grudge bearing that I feel is not in the spirit of the site.

And as a last point of the general deletion thing, I think on extremely contentious threads, of which there are relatively few and far between, I do believe that hard cases make bad law. But here I believe MNHQ have to be really proactive in laying their cards on the table about what they consider appropriate or not. It would save a lot of fighting and name calling.

And if posters want to hound other posters off threads and MN itself they need to dealt with very firmly.

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 22:02:09

A personal attack would be against a single person.
Racist, homophobic, disablist and sexist attacks are also deleted.
Is that the sort of groups you mean?

ok so an add on. Would MN HQ like us to report but then not say we have reported? Clarity of that would be good too.

SatinSandals Thu 07-Nov-13 22:28:12

I am another who would like to know if MN mods look at threads generally to police or wait for reports. Sometimes it takes ages to respond e.g last week many people expected a thread to go and it took over 12 hours after being reported to go.
I agree with Goatmint that statistics would be interesting. I get the impression the sheer number of posters make policing it consistently difficult.

marriedinwhiteisback Thu 07-Nov-13 22:37:13

What about stalking posters who never quite cross the line but pop up within a few posts of a poster and are generally damning and rude and bring up previous posts they have disagreed with. Have never reported one because it doesn't quite cross the line but it is disconcerting.

Do you flit around the site looking at threads and topics and generally keeping an eye on things, or are you too busy responding to individual posts that are reported? Or a combination?

How many posts that should be deleted actually are deleted, and vice versa (in your opinion) - is this something you think can even be measured or tracked?

I guess what I am really asking is - what is the objective of your moderation: is it to delete every offensive post, to have a site that is 100% "clean" - or is it to remove only the bare minimum, only the ones that are reported or that you notice, and let the boards be open and free-form?

MarshmallowGuzzler Thu 07-Nov-13 22:43:24

How do you track posters? Bullying behaviour might only be witnessed by looking at tons of threads and posts, often with no reports, but leaving a hurt reporter. What might have been reported could be quite small- a slap on the wrist type thing- but it could add up to a very large, upsetting series of incidents. Could there be an option to report poster (which might also be useful for the variety of troll threads, started in a short space of time)?

bsc Thu 07-Nov-13 22:48:58

Following on from Satin- I have previously reported posts, then searched the other posts by that poster to find that they're spamming the boards... but until I report the other posts too, it seems that HQ haven't done that other bit, and mopped up spammers before posters notice they're there (IYSWIM).

Just wondering what the protocol/process is for mods when they act upon posts that need deletion.

Thanks HQ- I do really like it here smile When it's good, it's very very good!

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 22:50:59

Well the trolling is now getting silly.

Is ignoring really working?

Trills Thu 07-Nov-13 22:55:32

Do you have a shared list of "this person reports at the drop of a hat" and "this person skirts the edge of allowable behaviour"?

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 22:56:33

MaryZ

it has to work.

especially when they are trying to ruin my fun!angry

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 22:57:57

And a list of who constantly reports the same person?

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 22:58:32

It's hard to ignore when people follow others around trying to wind them up.

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 22:59:49

They rte register, reeling. Those of us who don't name change ave all our deletions added up. Those who have multiple registrations get away with murder, in comparison.

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 23:00:34

Argh, re-register.

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 23:21:07

it is MaryZ just had a taste of that tonight.

mocking me, mocking my kids, bloody nasty to everyone.
I had to report.
some people are just nasty fuckers.

kudos to all who knew exactly what to do about it.
thanks thanks

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 23:22:34

as in it's hard to ignore.

did the best we could.

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 23:23:55

Who mocked you Zing?

Fucking hell.

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 23:27:12

Did you report, you should have.

ChippingInBatshitArse Thu 07-Nov-13 23:28:45

Justine have you read this HERE?

It is a link to a site where the Goady Fuckers are laughing at how easy MNers are to wind up...

ChippingInBatshitArse Thu 07-Nov-13 23:31:46

Zing the only way to do it (IMO) is not to permit namechanging for a year. If people want to namechange for a good reason in that year they can request a change through MN, name changing 'for fun' can wait a year.

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 23:33:16

Yassin was one of the posters on the 'I've been booted from the other place' thread the other night.
It was nasty and got deleted.~

Hard to know what can be done to stop it happening though.

reelingintheyears Thu 07-Nov-13 23:37:17

I'd agree with the name changing Chipping.

bloodyhatefireworks Thu 07-Nov-13 23:40:46

Would the mods like to get rid of AIBU?

Maryz Thu 07-Nov-13 23:46:30

Does anyone think Justine might be regretting the timing of this webchat?

grin

The trouble, Chipping, is that they aren't mostly name changing any more, just multiple registering, I think.

ZingWantsCake Thu 07-Nov-13 23:47:53

Chipping

shock shock @ that link! no words.

PetiteRaleuse Thu 07-Nov-13 23:55:11

I think as long as MN wants to be a popular forum they will be open to trolling. The particular type of media attention we get from papers like the Fail and the Torygraph plays right into trolls' hairy hands.

Would you consider suggestions as above ie limiting name changes (which I think is the case on Gransnet) and paying closer attention to new members with outrageous problems? Maybe giving people the chance to have one regular name and one name they use for more anonymous posts? Which would fuck up the name change competitions but hey, that could be reworked, ie a thread where users suggest spooky or xmas namechanges for themselves.

I think the mods do a good job with what they have to be fair. The site is bigger than mnhq with their resources can handle though. I think the trolls are something to be expected (albeit reported) on a site like this.

Last webchat Justine said something along the lines of don't call a cunt a cunt, but saying their posts make them sound like a cunt would be ok. I think this has been rethought, could we have some clarification on that?

(More than one question i know but rules are there to be broken, right?)

Personally this year I have had zero problem with the site. Couldn't care less about deletions or bannings. Just want the fun and supportive parts to shine through so that the press give us a break.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 00:04:19

Zing - if you google you will find loads more like that. I don't know why people seem unable or unwilling to accept there are Goady Fuckers.

ZingWantsCake Fri 08-Nov-13 00:07:57

you should be a mod Chipping, not joking.

you and some others have an excellent bullshit - radar.

I don't know why people don't accept facts.
weird

PetiteRaleuse Fri 08-Nov-13 00:36:06

Just realised am a bit hypocritical when I say the press shoukd give us a break. I love to have a go at some of them, but they set thousands against us with every story. They bully us, because they feel threatened in some way, and along come the trolls. Is any publicity good publicity?

RoxanneReidsChafingFishnets Fri 08-Nov-13 00:42:05

I just want to know when MN will welcome windows phone compatible or at least an app. The site does not like my phone it appears.

SpecialAgentFreyPie Fri 08-Nov-13 04:20:26

Can you explain why PAs are deleted straight away and yet attacks that are aimed at groups of people are allowed to stand?

Yes this!! I can report someone for calling a specific poster a cunt, but what about 'you bunch of idiots/morons/bitches/cunts/etc?' That's just as offensive.
Where do you draw the line on goady posters who are very careful not to technically break guidelines? Because if I ask, I get told that poster is being 'watched very closely' but they're still here months later hurting people's feelings.

SatinSandals Fri 08-Nov-13 06:49:51

I agree with PetiteRaleuse, in one way it is good that the national press have picked up the site and given it a voice but at the same time it gives it publicity to people who have no intention of using it the way it is intended. Each new story, especially if detrimental, brings in new posters and more if the ones who want to be a 'pit of vipers', not to mention the spate of teenagers who want to play.
Is it now bigger than MNHQ can handle with present resources? Do you feel it is out of control or that you are rushing around doing limitation damage and nothing much else?
Last week people were 'outing' an ex poster, not to mention discussing her, and the first person to do it actually said that it would be deleted. There was no doubt the thread would go because an very similar one was deleted the week before. It took until 11am the next morning for it to be deleted, by which time anyone who wanted to know the true identity had ample time to read. Are there enough moderators at night, or do trolls etc have free rein until staff come in at normal working hours?

ZingWantsCake Fri 08-Nov-13 08:08:45

ok, I know I shouldn't ask another question but apart from reporting and ignoring what exactly am I supposed to do about one poster who has started following me from thread to thread, saying nasty shit to me and about me?

I've actually got some things I'd like to post on my regular threads today but there's no way I can share now - so that's not very nice for me, is it?
this poster could easily stalk me and try and ruin things for me but I can't even answer back or I'll risk deletion/suspension etc.
so I won't.
I have to bear the nasty fucker bugging me.
and even if their posts get deleted eventually, the damage has been done.

so sod the [gin], my question I'd like an answer to is:

How on earth can these people be stopped from carry on posting if it's clear that they add nothing to the thread/topic apart from playing their own sick little twisted games of personally attacking others?!

thanks

Maryz Fri 08-Nov-13 08:17:23

Justine, I might not be here at 1 <hears all of mnhq breathe mahoosive sigh of relief>

Can I just say that despite my numerous moans and groans, I still love it here. I get so much more out of the site than I give. as most of the ads are irrelevant to me, I don't even click on them. This is my greatest free form of entertainment and has been for many years.

So even though weeks like the last couple drive me bonkers, and are doing terrible things to my blood pressure and vocabulary, there are still many more good than bad threads, and many, many more good than bad posters.

So apologies for the whinging no promises to stop though

flowers and [gin] to you all.

BrightSunshineyDay Fri 08-Nov-13 08:22:42

I don't think any posts or threads should be deleted.
More than once I have read a poster retell what a post said or how a thread went - I have had that thread open on another tab and realised the "regular" was misremembering or shit stirring. Deletable posts should stay up with a comment from MNHQ and deletable threads should be locked. That way we can all see who the cunts are.
However, rightly or wrongly, if a regular smells bullshit on a thread then I do tend to listen. Do MNHQ do the same? Do you look more deeply if something is reported by a regular rather than a newbie who has only posted a couple of times?

BrightSunshineyDay Fri 08-Nov-13 08:25:15

Oh and a second question, sorry.
Is TheSecondComing going to be allowed back?

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 08:43:08

I also think that threads should be locked, but not deleted.

Also agree with no name change for a year - except in extreme cases, sanctioned by MNHQ.

LittleBearPad Fri 08-Nov-13 08:47:17

Can there be something noted next to a poster's name that shows when they joined - maybe a month and year or even just a year. It wouldn't break anonymity and people could still name change but having November 2013 next to a username might help other posters. It could be linked to a poster's email address so that goady fuckers who were banned when reregistering would never appear to be long term posters unless they played a really long game and registered names months before using them. In light of Chipping's posts above I doubt any I them would have the patience or intelligence to do so.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 08:49:12

I understand that you have to give Olivia 24 hours or so off so she can have these twins, but could you not have glued Helen to her chair? She wouldn't have put up with all this penis nonsense sad.

LittleBearPad Fri 08-Nov-13 08:49:25

I'm sure this info is on people's profiles but many aren't public and those of the hairy handed certainly won't be.

Hullygully Fri 08-Nov-13 08:49:55

I won't be here at 1 either <cheers and dancing at MNHQ> but second Maryz. MN is my water cooler from the lonely wastelands of working alone and I love it too and have loads of friends.

That's why people trying to spoil it give me rhinitis.

BewitchedBotheredandBewildered Fri 08-Nov-13 08:51:09

BTW the thread that Chippingin linked to is now deleted!

LittleBearPad Fri 08-Nov-13 08:52:26

Blimey. It was there ten minutes ago!

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 08:57:29

Most of the deleted posts seem to be along the lines of 'Fuck off you cunt'.
Who cares, I don't.
Unless the posts are particularly vitriolic or 'outing' let them stand.
It annoys me when posts like that are directed at me and they get deleted when I haven't asked for them to be.

ZingWantsCake Fri 08-Nov-13 08:59:24

Hully

I feel your pain. I'm glad you're still here!wink

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 09:00:47

I'm out too this morning, might get back for about 1.30, can you not keep it going a little longer than 2pm?

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 09:29:48

I am also agreeing with LittleBear about everyone having to show the month & year they joined - it won't give you away at all, FFS. Or if you've been here forever, maybe a 'more than 2 years' or something like that.

I am always a bit hmm when I see strange posts & can't see a profile.

SecretNutellaFix Fri 08-Nov-13 09:42:00

I've said it before and I will say it again.

Relationships and Feminism need a full time dedicated mod.

AIBU should be removed. A lot of the issues start on there- there are a number of posters who only ever seem to post on AIBU, there are also a number of posters who will use it as a fight club.

There is a section called What Would You Do? People could use that if they were looking for genuine advice/feedback and then chat for the rest of the non AIBU threads that get posted.

If you are not considering shutting down aIBU, then that also needs a full time mod.

As a relatively new MN poster, I would ask the Mods if they could make the FAQ's and rules about what can and cannot be posted easier to understand. I've read them and re-read them and I genuinely can't make head nor tail of what I am allowed to post and what I can't.

I also think that if the Mods are serious about moderating, they should allow posters to have a 5 minute delay in order to edit their posts (in order to correct any spelling errors or even to remove the text completely themselves). I've seen so many posts followed by others where the follow-up post is to correct a typo. Being allowed to edit a post up to 5 minutes after posting would be very very helpful.

Would MN consider updating the site to allow either or both of these things to happen?

Maryz Fri 08-Nov-13 09:49:40

I agree about AIBU.

And about deletions. I think before "you are a cunt" is deleted, it would to investigate whether a poster is, in fact, a cunt.

And I've been deleted for calling someone pathetic - which they were. Pathetic and precious.

Maryz Fri 08-Nov-13 09:53:27

We've talked about editing before, Whatcha. The trouble is that the site moves so fast that an op could have a dozen replies before it is edited. It would also let the trolls have a field day (post, then edit and be all disingenuous about what they actually said).

I think the rules are confusing because they have been changed in bits and pieces over the years., in reaction to various invasions.

I preferred it when it was all left for us to see, and judge, and make up our own minds.

Pan Fri 08-Nov-13 09:58:38

I'd disagree Maryz..whether someone is a nether-region <coy> is a matter of perspective (which the mods will differ on individually), and even if the genuine qualifiers remain identified as such, it sets a culture and tone that it's okay to fling abuse around, and that HQ think it's okay.

Question: can we slow down on the gratuitous swearing please? A vital issue compared with others, I know.hmm

kim147 Fri 08-Nov-13 10:07:29

Has Tech got a new server grin

Maryz Fri 08-Nov-13 10:14:56

I know, Pan. It isn't realistic, but I'd still like it to happen grin

MrsMargoLeadbetter Fri 08-Nov-13 10:44:52

Are your MN names your real ones? I appreciate Justine's is.

Just wondered if you want to obscure the identities of your mods in real life....

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 10:45:38

But AIBU is a tricky one re personal attack. My own actual eyeballs have witnessed an op before saying, am I being a cow?

She got replies saying that yes, she was being a cow and then got fucked off and offended. People were deleted for a bar she had set herself.

Also, I don't get this exchange at present.

Poster 1. It's shit here, it really is. Everyone is awful and I hate it.

Poster 2. You don't HAVE to stay here you know?

Poster 1. You absolute bully, how dare you tell me to leave. You don't own Mumsnet, how dare you. I'm crying now.

<<segue into pointless bunfight with much frenzied stabbing of the report button>>

And these seem to occurring every 48 hours and I'm tired of it sad

LtEveDallas Fri 08-Nov-13 10:56:51

Honey, did you see that your 'hair on fire' thread made it to the trolly site above (pieandbovril, posted by Chipping). Famous love, famous smile

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 11:31:38

Oh bless them. They found the most hopelessly fucked and inept poster in the history of Mumsnet and figured she must be one of theirs.

<<sheds a little happy tear>>

If they think I've gone into deep and try and "rescue" me, will you send search parties?

ButThereAgain Fri 08-Nov-13 11:32:59

Do you sometimes feel that expectations of what moderation can achieve are too high, especially on a mass site in the public eye, and especially given that you have to maintain a fairly arms-length status in order to control your liability in relation to libel?

You often put yourselves in the position of apologising for outcomes that seem at least partly a function of certain impossibilities involved in moderating a site like MN, rather than being a function of failings on your part. It is lovely to apologise so frankly but I wonder if it creates a false impression of incompetence. Would it be better to just say that some of what is expected can't be achieved?

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 11:35:43

Could you please give one, named member of MNHQ responsibility for reducing bullying on the site – an Anti-Bullying Czar?

They could be trained by one of the many anti-bullying organisations to distinguish bullying from “bunfights” and “banter”. They’d need to be able to spend time sorting the sheep from the goats wink and looking in remote spots for threads where bullying attacks are being orchestrated.

Most schools and organisations have Anti-Bullying Policies – can Mumsnet have one please?

I am thinking, for example, of the Gok Wan Webchat here.

It's a good example, pointed up by Gok Wan himself.

Grennie Fri 08-Nov-13 11:39:45

Could you allow an editing function that allows you to edit your comment within 5-10 seconds? Netmums have this and it works well. There are so many comments posted here saying things like:

Sorry I meant win, not when. .

bassetfeet Fri 08-Nov-13 11:41:08

Would it wrk if posting rights were deferred for 48 hours after first joining mumsnet? This could deter some trolling I think.

Pan Fri 08-Nov-13 11:44:15

ah yes bassetfeet, or even for longer? It would prevent a lot of the wind up types, and they'd get bored and have to find something else to do.

Grennie Fri 08-Nov-13 11:45:43

Except some women join to post for help when they are desperate for help with their children. They need to be able to post straight away.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 11:47:30

Zing - I'm fairly confident MNHQ will not agree with you grin

ButThereAgain Fri 08-Nov-13 11:48:10

oh yes deferring posting rights on joining would be great -- I wouldn't keep rejoining on an impulse then. I'd be cured! (And it prob would keep the trolling down too.)

Trouble is, most registrations are probably a bit impulsive, and I bet far fewer people would bother if they couldn't get stuck in straight away.

Pan Fri 08-Nov-13 11:49:07

Yes, but MN isn't the only source is it? There's lots of other groups/sites/googling capacities - if it was an 'emergency' that can't wait 48 hrs then perhaps MN isn't the optimal choice anyway for that circumstance.

ginslinger Fri 08-Nov-13 11:50:03

the trouble with stopping people posting for a limited time means it impacts on people who really need help NOW - particularly for people with new borns - time moves so slowly and so quickly then.

I would like to join the chorus of no deleting and no editing. I think it is helpful to see what has been said and if it defines anyone as a cunt then so be it. Would MN consider a week of not deleting unless it is something that would impact on MN legally?

can we ban the words "Mumsnet Royalty" said in a sneery tone please?

Its actually quite irritating.

Hullygully Fri 08-Nov-13 12:00:09

I've just read the Gok thread again to see if distance lent perspective, and I think even more so that it was NOT bullying.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 12:02:03

Precisely.

Grennie Fri 08-Nov-13 12:03:46

No it wasn't Hully.

Grennie Fri 08-Nov-13 12:04:19

In fact given how patronising and sexist Gok was, he got off lightly.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 12:09:58

I really think that sums up the need for:

a) an Anti-Bullying Policy

b) a designated MNHQ member who is trained to distinguish bullying from "a bit of fun" or what you will

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 12:15:54

People who get off on bullying will always say:

"Gok Wan deserved the kicking he got because he is/says something I disagree with."

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 12:16:36

Although Zombie was the one to ask Justine to consider holding this webchat, she's now not sure what to ask. She thinks that almost all of the points she would like to see addressed have already been raised by others on this thread:

1. Those who word their posts so carefully that they remain just within the posting guidelines but which are nonetheless upsetting and / or attempting to provoke a reaction;

2. Perceived lack of consistency in applying the guidelines and

3. Delays in responding to reports.

She appreciates that there are no easy answers to many of these points but hopes that this afternoon's discussion will help both HQ and site users move forward together to make MN an even better site than it now is.

MN has been an enormous source of support for Zombie over the past couple of years and she would like to take this opportunity to thank both HQ and her fellow Mumsnetters from the bottom of her (undead) heart.

Hullygully Fri 08-Nov-13 12:18:40

forthemods - you really think people "get off on bullying"?

goodness

Hullygully Fri 08-Nov-13 12:23:31

I have to go out now, but us disagreeing doesn't make you right, forthemods, delightfully Orwellian tho the concept is.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 12:34:58

For the record, I found the Gok thread rude and embarrassing.

However, I would like to point out to you, forthemods, that your comment, directly after a couple of posters have stated they did not think that threat was bullying, can be perceived as a personal attack on identifiable MNers. The unpleasant sneer of "people who get off on bullying" is unnecessary.

It would have been easy enough to say "Some people say that what I'd call bullying is merely disagreement; how do we work out the difference?" That would at least sound constructive.

Instead, we have a loaded comment which gets people's backs up and causes bad feeling. That, together with the fact that you are an anonymous namechanger on this thread, so posters don't "know" you and what your agenda with them might be, is part of the problem, not the solution.

It has been a bit of a theme recently: regular posters are picked and picked at. It is really spoiling the humour and goodwill: I can think of at least three well-loved warm and witty posters who have helped make MN what it is, who have deregistered because they are fed up with this kind of thing.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 12:35:51

(sorry that took me an age to post- I had a visitor at the door halfway through typing)

Fenton Fri 08-Nov-13 12:41:39

BOF can I please get you cloned and shrunk to pocket-sized so I can carry you around with me at all times?

TIA

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 12:41:43

Without wanting to sound like Teacher's Pet, MNHQ do a bloody good job, since moderating us lot is like herding a bunch of incontinent, feral cats. The kind of cats who love you one moment, and then piss in your shoes when you are not looking.

I don't think there is a way of moderating the site that keeps everyone happy, or that ensures a perfectly balanced and fair deletion policy. We'd need a robot to do that. Every MNHQler has slightly different opinions on what constituents a PA, and I guess that they might even delete or not delete depending on the kind of day they've had, and how many trolls are about the boards.

I'd like to know if the people who constantly complain about the moderation of the site are also those reporting dodgy threads and posters. MNHQ have stated many times that they don't have time to read even a fraction of threads, they only look if a thread is reported.

And I would like to know how MNHQ deal with those who know the site well, and are skilled at pushing the right buttons without launching a full PA. Whether we call them GFs, or another name, these posters are very damaging to the site.

Could we have a better way of bringing these posters to the attention of MNHQ?

moldingsunbeams Fri 08-Nov-13 12:51:34

"since moderating us lot is like herding a bunch of incontinent, feral cats. The kind of cats who love you one moment, and then piss in your shoes when you are not looking. "

grin shock
speak for yourself...

twentytoten Fri 08-Nov-13 12:51:56

Hi, I'm sorry but I may have missed this... How do you actually mod ? Do you all sit in front of screens checking every thread? Or are there trigger words that alert you to a potential problem?
I have this image of HQ being an under ground lair with mods sitting in front of banks of rolling screens.

snowshepherd Fri 08-Nov-13 12:53:37

The gok thread was just rude. It highlights how people will act when they are hidden behind a username. People from behind a screen will act outrageously

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 12:54:30

The thing is – what was done to Gok Wan is done to ordinary Mumsnetters every single day.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 12:58:09

Just had another look at the Gok webchat.

Tbh, his PR people should be ashamed of themselves. I posted the question about his insistence on spanx at 10.30ish, and I wasn't the only one asking that question. He started answering questions hours later, and obviously no one from his team had even looked at the thread, much less prepared some answers.

At the same time, it wasn't MN's finest hour. The webchat was derailed long before he arrived. It would have been fine if it were questions or comments about his work, but it was quite a lot of rambling chatter and limericks.

Bullying? No. But impolite and unnecessary. I wasn't impressed by Gok, but it was a shame for those who actually liked him and had a question that wasn't answered.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 12:59:26

"Bullying? No." But that is just your opinion, MmeLindor.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:00:18

Hello, hello,
We've just about made it on time to our own webchat (phew). Rowan is next to me, Becky is in a remote location but online and Olivia and others are hovering. So ta for all the questions and we'll get going in just a jiffy.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 13:01:19

Course it is just my opinion, JustfortheMods. That is what MN is all about. Expressing one's opinion.

How we view bullying depends a lot on personal experience, I think.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 13:02:18

Hence the need for a clear Anti-Bullying Policy.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:04:04

ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Often the moderators seem very slow, no doubt due to high volumes of reports.

If the volunteer night time moderation is successful do you have any plans to introduce volunteer mods full time?

Well, there are definitely times when we're slower on responding than we would like to be - usually after a big troll influx or a mass bunfight, when we have a big backlog of reports to respond to. But we've done some analysis on the data, and overall our response times have actually improved over the last year: this time last year we were taking an average of 0.4 of a day to respond to a report; now we take an average of 0.3 of a day.

Obviously we'd love to respond to everything the instant it lands in our inbox [land of dreams] and we're sorry for any instances in which a slowness to respond has caused anyone real difficulty, but in general our response times are pretty much as they've always been (and if anything, getting a bit quicker).

Overnight volunteers: they're not mods (our bad for using the word) - they're strictly general keepers-of-eye (we think we're going to be calling them The Night Watch/ Night Watchers). We're not going to be asking them to do anything they wouldn't do anyway: we're not going to be asking them to work specific shifts or demand that they're online for certain periods. They're purely bona fide, checked-out MNers in non-GMT timezones who, in the course of their ordinary MNing, will have access to one extra button (hide post/thread), which will temporarily remove the content of the post and replace it with a message saying that the post is going to be looked at by MNHQ.

Obviously we will be keeping an eye on it, and if any of the Night Watch seem to be hiding posts for odd reasons we will take action.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:04:06

NatashaBee

Do you have non-mumsnet-moderator logins so you can post in AIBU about annoying colleagues? smile

I've got loads of logins from when Mumsnet first started, way back in early 2000 and I used to answer my own questions under various pseudonyms. I also used to get my mates to ask questions. I remember a friend mailing me about her pregnancy palpitations and I told her to post it on Mumsnet and then I'd answer. Felt a bit guilty about it, so rushed on site to answer only to find someone had beaten me too it. That was a happy day when it dawned on me MN might just have a future.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 13:04:32

And there is also the question of whether the opinion of some carries more weight than the opinion of others. So if MmeLindor says "There is no bullying on this thread", does that mean that there is in fact no bullying on that thread?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:05:31

HorryIsUpduffed

How long is Tech's to-do list, and what proportion of it is compatibility issues across standard site/mobile site/app?

It's long, but getting shorter. We have pretty much doubled the size of the tech team in a year and will keep adding folks incrementally as we know it's so important and there's so much we'd love to do. One of our problems is that we're so old, our infrastructure is a bit creaky - as demonstrated aptly by penis beaker - so we're doing lots of work behind to the scenes to address that (and have been for a while) that doesn't actually result in any whizzy new functionality. So it can look like Tech are twiddling their thumbs, but really they've been hard at it.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 13:08:04

I think you've made your point, forthemods (without responding to my points, but hey ho, we can't have everything). How about you leave it there and let some other posters get answers to their questions?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:08:20

Maryz

And have you given any thought to my suggestion of solving the overnight problem by having a "this thread has been reported by X number of individual posters, so we will automatically lock it until we can look at it" idea?

It would stop overnight stirrers and trolls.

The truth is, we just don't like the idea of automated anything, because it can be too easily gamed. Put it like this - if we ever do introduce anything automated, we probably won't tell you we've done so <is infuriating>

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:10:50

Rowan what is the 'mode' average rather than the 'mean' average?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:10:52

LovesBeingHereAgain

Has the night mods gone live ? why wasn't it me

How are you going to get tge balance right, it's a fine line most of tge time and subjective.

Hope we've answered most of this in our previous post about the Night Watch. We'll be reviewing every single decision taken by the Nightwatchwomen <still unsure about terminology> and offering feedback - and if we think they've hidden a post or thread unnecessarily, we'll just reinstate it.

ThatFuckerFancyPuffin Fri 08-Nov-13 13:11:42

Hello HQ <waves>

I was wondering, with constant invasions we seem to be getting at the moment, whether anyone from the team monitors other websites using a combination of keyword and -ummmm- whatnot to pre-empt things.

Also agree with what some others have said about issues the site is having with newbies/nchangers coming on to whine about regs.

Also, this is the most important one, could this be incorporated in the site.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:13:28

Oh my eyes - naughty Puffin!

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:13:34

ChippingInBatshitArse

Rowan what is the 'mode' average rather than the 'mean' average?

Our tracking software won't let us work this out Chipping so we'd have to do a report-by-report calculation across tens of thousands of reports to find this out. (Which we're not going to do grin)

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:13:44

LineRunner

I am wondering, do you all have an agreed definition of goading?

And how will you manage to be fair and consistent in applying it?

Hi Linerunner,

Goady is a tricky one but if you look at our Talk Guidelines you will see that we say

No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour

The guidelines used to include the word goading which in hindsight was a mistake on our part and they were edited earlier this year.

Each report is a judgement call for the person who receives the report.

Generally, we will discuss between us what the best course of action is depending on many different factors like the tone of the post, the poster (length of time on site, if they've been flagged to us before etc), the subject matter and so on.

There are lots of subjects that posting about could come across at deliberately inflammatory and we do take note that there is a fine line between allowing freedom of speech about touch paper issues and posting to inflame.

We do get it wrong sometimes. We do tend to give the benefit of the doubt unless it's an out and out obvious case or the poster is known to have done this sort of thing before.

We do try and work as a team to be fair and consistent and we often have sometimes very bizarre discussions about certain posts/posters and try to strike a balance.

We rely on you to report posts to us and we do appreciate that it can sometimes seem like we aren't doing anything but we will be noting and building up a picture of posters who repeatedly post to inflame and if they continue, we do take action.

Statistically we remove around half of the posts that are reported as being 'goady'. So when folks are reported for goading, about half the time they are simply posting a controversial viewpoint.

The majority of posts reported for being goady are written by 'normal' posters (we aren’t being overrun by GFs, although it can feel that way)

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:14:08

Hullygully

These are the problems/flaws as I see them:

1. As human beings, mods, despite good intentions, will inevitably a) read things in different spirits b) apply the rules differently therefore.

2. A lot of threads bumble along full of people mucking about, being rude to each other etc etc and no one minds so no one reports so nothing happens. THEN on some threads, others take exception and report like mad, so that things seen as normally acceptable, are then deleted. Thus it looks like reporting=deletion

3. If people take a dislike/exception to someone, they deliberately report report report in a concerted attempt to get that person "in trouble" (I can't believe I'm having to type this), whereas said individual would never use such behaviour and thus has little defence against it.

I don't know the answers to any of it.

I don't disagree with any of this, but short of having a football field of moderators we have to really rely on people to bring things to our attention - legally it's also a good idea: The moment you start trying to pre-moderate (ie checking all posts) you're in danger of being seen as a publisher in the traditional sense and open yourself up to lots of potential defamation claims.

There is no neat answer beyond everyone a) trying to stick to the rules b) reporting things that break them c) mods having some flexibility to use their common sense and not sticking to completely hard and fast rules.

The last point is why we try to avoid spelling out every single eg of a personal attack - so often it's more nuanced than that.

BlackeyedSusan Fri 08-Nov-13 13:16:06

(oops I mis-read and thought that olivia was hoovering ) clearly not g and t then

does mn hq issue free flame proof suits to all those posting in g and t? and do they think it is acceptble that anyone querying whether their small child is gifted gets ridiculed?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:16:40

ZingWantsCake

Well, I really fancy discussing why - despite many pleas, begging, wishing and hoping - there is still no gin emoticon. shock just why?
it can't be hard!

I think that issue is an urgent one.
we need [gin]. really, we do.

and today would be the best for introducing it, since it my 1st MNiversary and I would love a special gift.
just saying.

[gin]

thanks for listenGIN.wink

You don't think gin and wine is overkill? I mean we could do it if folks really want. We could even try to get Gordons to sponsor, I suppose. [there's an idea]

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:16:54

Thanks for answering Rowan smile That really does make the 'average' a bit meaningless though, because if MN are on a thread and are zapping posts immediately that is going to lower the 'mean' average 'considerably'. I know when I have reported something it's usually 24hrs before I have had a reply and we all know the troll posts are there for more than .3 of a day.

SoupDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:16:56

Olivia and others are hovering

I misread this as hoovering and thought it a little mean given Olivia's advanced state of rotundness.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:17:46

mollythetortoise

Overnight/ after hours does seem to be a weak spot.

I guess because everyone at mnhq is quite rightly in bed.
Would you consider paid and well trained over night mods?
A small team of 4 working in pairs could manage 14 shifts a week (7 nights x 2 mods each night)

I must declare an interest here as it is a job I would loveto do but that aside, the overnight mods could generally keep on top of the nightly shenanigans , freeing up Rowan's / Rebecca's time every morning, which must currently be spent deleting overnight threads and posts.

We're going to wait and see how the Night Watch goes - hopefully it will resolve a lot of the problems around puerile overnight spamming/abuse sprees.

IamInvisible Fri 08-Nov-13 13:17:46

No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour

But, there are posters, some of them regular who post very misleading information about themselves and nothing is done.

<yes I have reported!>

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:18:46

Maryz

I'm concerned about the number of deletions for "personal attacks" where really I don't believe it's an attack but part of an argument.

I was deleted the other day for saying someone was "pathetic". I was trying to make the point that passive-aggressive "poor me everyone is being horrible to me" posts aren't actually proof of bullying, but are possibly proof that the poster was wrong.

It seems to be that if a post is reported it is deleted, with no account taken of the discussion that is going on.

Hi Maryz,

Personal attacks can be fairly straight forward. You can post to question what someone has posted but not to personally attack them as an individual.

RebeccaMumsnet, you are pathetic - personal attack
RebeccaMumsnet, your post was pathetic - fine

There is obviously some wibbly ground around PAs for example

RebeccaMumsnet, your post makes you sound pathetic - probably ok (we would look at the context)

Taffeta Fri 08-Nov-13 13:19:37

I would be interested to know how MNHQ view posters who appear to be kind and fair, and then namechange and are abusive and unpleasant.

So that everyone that "knows" them on MN then sticks up for them all the time, as they think they are kind and fun, but in reality a small group of people know otherwise.

I guess this isn't trolling or sock puppeting, does it have a name and is there an MNHQ view on it?

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:19:52

Zombies will have a shit fit if its Gordon's not Bombay Sapphire. We'll be reattaching limbs for weeks.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:20:03

ChippingInBatshitArse

Thanks for answering Rowan smile That really does make the 'average' a bit meaningless though, because if MN are on a thread and are zapping posts immediately that is going to lower the 'mean' average 'considerably'. I know when I have reported something it's usually 24hrs before I have had a reply and we all know the troll posts are there for more than .3 of a day.

Not quite Chipping, because when MNHQ is in a thread deleting things, that often (depending on how we're doing it) won't be generating a report - IYSWIM? So it won't be affecting these stats.

ZingWantsCake Fri 08-Nov-13 13:20:31

thanks Justine for answering that.grin

I think people really do want [gin]. how many votes do you need to make it happen?
I'll start a thread later...wink
thank you

If you can get Gordon's to sponsor the GIN emotion on a usage basis, we promise to all use it on every post! thanks

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:22:02

Goatmint

Can we have access to info? Eg

Number of joiners per month/ number of members to date

Number of unique users per month

Number of posts/ month

Number of posts reported/ deleted/ month

Actually seeing the numbers would put things into context, & might even neutralise the ' it's gone to hell in a handcart' perception.

Also I was wondering if the inconsistencies in format and capability between MN versions for different devices could be ironed out. I have worked out that people post thanks type icons, but I can't see them so it makes posts difficult to interpret. Communicating seems to be hard enough, without us not talking the same emoticon language on different devices.

Thank you.

Joiners - about 10 000 per month (last month was higher though [penisbeaker])
Unique users - 5 million per month
Posts/month - about 30 000 per day
Posts reported - about 6,000 per month
Posts deleted - about 2500 per month

Yes we are very much working on ironing out inconsistencies. Plan for 2014 is first infrastructure then consistency and UX across all platforms. It's a top priority.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 13:22:26

Can anything be done about people who me-rail threads?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:22:36

RemindMeWhatSleepIs

If you can get Gordon's to sponsor the GIN emotion on a usage basis, we promise to all use it on every post! thanks

Imagine what the Daily Mail would have to say about that grin

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:22:36

BoreOfWhabylon

I know the 'block poster' issue has been brought up many times before and is not considered a good idea (don't want it myself) BUT could there be the option to colour specified poster/s on a thread, as we can OPs posts? Would make it easier to just skip past the coloured posts as NFI.
--red would be good--

We'd be happy to consider this, if other people think it's a good idea and would be a reasonable compromise on the Hide Poster thing?

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:24:00

Suddengeekgirl

I don't fancy being a Mod! You just can't win sometimes! confused

My question is...
What is your preferred method of dealing with the grief spammers/ trolls and naughty MNers have caused you?
Chocolate, biscuits, gin or rocking in a corner? smile

Gin, always Gin grin TBH it depends on the extent of the troll and what they have done. The blatant trolling that is just stupid/silly etc is fine to deal with, if not a bit tedious.

It's the nasty stuff that can sometimes take a while to deal with but we have a lovely team and after it has passed, we talk about it together and see if we could have handled it better or if it pulled up any issues that need talking about. and then we rock gently in the corner

oh and wine and cake , natch

ShreddedHoops Fri 08-Nov-13 13:24:47

I live in fear of HQ bowing to the demands of the more, er, vocal posters. As a constant namechanger who's been here for donkeys, it scared me how much time has been devoted to reassuring a small but vocal group of posters about the AnyFucker saga. It just seems simple to me - don't break rules. And if you do break rules, hold your hands up (like I understand AF has done) rather than glare balefully around accusing people of reporting. Reporting is a good thing as it brings stuff to HQ's attention. They've made it clear they don't just delete stuff because it's been reported, but some posters insist on a 'snitch' mentality about it, which is pretty silly. I just hope HQ never bend too far to the demands of some of the people who genuinely do think they own a piece of the place cos they've been here a while and not namechanged.

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 13:24:51

<mutters Bombay Sapphire>

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:25:00

InkleWinkle

What is the thing that posters do that annoys you most of all? (Apart from the obvious trolling)

The thing that really gets to me is when people think you're being devious and/or making decisions only with regard to profit. I find that strangely hurtful, partly because we don't really think of ourselves as a regular business - profit has never been the overarching aim and for many, many years Mumsnet seemed like the worst business idea in the WORLD and I didn't get paid but it was worth it in so many other ways. But I suppose newbies wouldn't know that and there is a deep cynicism about business. Just always irks and I have to v careful sit on my hands.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 13:25:24

I agree with ShreddedHoops.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 13:25:33

Ooh, yes- red would be great. I could read them all at one just before going for a run with Rocky Balboa music thumping.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 13:26:22

Fuck the gin, can't we just try and sort out the bloody trolling.
The thread from the other night was horrible, 'Pie and shite' or something?

MaryShelley Fri 08-Nov-13 13:27:13

<<pondering names>>

Nightsoil duty - after all, they are cleaning up after the shit stirrers

ZingWantsGin Fri 08-Nov-13 13:27:57

reeling

read my post last night. I want this sorted too, trust me....

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 13:27:58

Wouldn't colouring a particular poster's posts in red just make it easier to target a particular poster?

I think if you have got to the stage of being enraged and irritated by a particular poster, you just have to skim past their posts and not engage.

Or leave the thread.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:28:00

DoItTooJulia

I would like to know if the mumsnet mod teams looks at threads generally to police them, or do you wait for reports before you look at things?

We don't actively look at the boards on the whole. We totally rely on posters reporting posts that break the Talk guidelines

We don't and have never actively moderated the boards.

Mumsnet is self-policing in that respect, so do report and we will look.
<boggle at the prospect of reading every post>

ZingWantsGin Fri 08-Nov-13 13:28:25

or was it this morning? never mind

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 13:29:10

BoreOfWhabylon , what a good idea.

Red would be just great.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:29:46

Taffeta

I would be interested to know how MNHQ view posters who appear to be kind and fair, and then namechange and are abusive and unpleasant.

So that everyone that "knows" them on MN then sticks up for them all the time, as they think they are kind and fun, but in reality a small group of people know otherwise.

I guess this isn't trolling or sock puppeting, does it have a name and is there an MNHQ view on it?

Not sure that this does have a name, but 'abusive' would definitely break Guidelines, so if they're reported they'll be racking up hmm faces and warning mails from us, and if it happens enough they'll be suspended. I can't actually think off the top of my head of anyone who is 'lovely' under their normal name and horrible under another name - but if you have info we don't have then please please do share...

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:30:14

Rowan I still don't think the 'mean' gives you a 'useful' representation of what is actually happening. ... and I think the highlighting of annoying posters' posts is somewhat batshit grin Why would you 'highlight' someones posts who annoys you?! <barking!

What do you all think of the idea of no namechanging for the first year - without going through MN to do it?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:30:37

ChippingInBatshitArse

I have been suggesting (for quite some time now) that MNHQ does not permit namechanging for the first year (without going through MNHQ and having you do it for them if there is a really good reason for it).

(I know people can sign up multiple accounts but surely there is a limit to how many one person is able to do?)

Can you please tell me why you don't think this would help? Or if you agree it would help - why you don't want to or can't do it?

We don't think namechanging is that big an issue - namechanging to deliberately inflame is actually pretty easy for us to track and doesn't happen that often. Re-regging with a new account is the trickier thing...

Pagwatch Fri 08-Nov-13 13:30:39

I am going to be horribly inarticulate but I'll do my best.
Mnhq posted after the half a dozen bullying threads about regulars being 'hung out to dry'.
That was exactly how I felt.
The use of 'well known regulars/royalty/prolific mumsnetters is often just the language of a veiled attack.
People pop up, often anonymously, make vague allegations about bullying regulars and special treatment and shit.then, in bending over backwards to be fair, all that is left to stand and exasperated responses are deleted.

Would it really hurt for mnhq, just occasionally to say 'if you see bullying then report it but endlessly complaints about members who don't name change and are therefore peculiarly exposed are a bit cowardly and not in the spirit etc etc...'

Because I could name change - we all could and then it would be poster437 talking to poster6653 which would have a very different feel.
Is that what people would prefer?

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 13:30:53

Yes, on the thread is fine, Taff wink

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 13:31:09

Any thoughts on the plea for making it mandatory to show how long you have been a Mumsnetter?

MaryShelley Fri 08-Nov-13 13:31:21

In a way I don't get the fuss. The system pretty much works:
Don't like a post - report
Don't like a thread - hide
Don't like a poster - hide thread or log off

Think recruiting some mods from down under could solve your night time issues and then all would be tickety boo.

Taffeta Fri 08-Nov-13 13:31:53

Thanks Rowan will PM you.

Pagwatch Fri 08-Nov-13 13:32:25

<roar > at the x-post

Yeah. I don't name change cos I own the place.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:34:51

MaryShelley - if you don't get The Fuss, then you clearly haven't been the 'target' - lucky you.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:34:52

marriedinwhiteisback

What about stalking posters who never quite cross the line but pop up within a few posts of a poster and are generally damning and rude and bring up previous posts they have disagreed with. Have never reported one because it doesn't quite cross the line but it is disconcerting.

Please do report them and let us know why. We may not delete that post but it will help us to build a picture of an individual and if you tell us that you have witness that kind of behaviour, we can have a look from the back-end.

Reports aren't just for clear cut personal attacks, they can just be to let us know about a situation that you think is building or a specific poster who is causing issues or they can be to flag something particularly funny or relevant.

oldmacdonaldscow Fri 08-Nov-13 13:34:53

The Mods aren't doing too badly on their Mode or Mean right now, chipping. Reported two threads and one poster and they've all been zapped within half an hour. grin

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 13:34:55

Pagwatch grin.

BoreOfWhabylon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:35:18

Ooh, am thrilled that some people are liking my colouredy-goady fucker idea!

MaryShelley Fri 08-Nov-13 13:35:31

Wouldn't colouring a particular poster's posts in red just make it easier to target a particular poster?

Agree - red rag to a bull!

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:35:45

Justine thank you for answering that. If you don't see name-changing as a problem, then I'll stop banging on about it being a possible solution smile

MaryShelley Fri 08-Nov-13 13:37:05

Chipping in, did you mean to come across so sarcastically?

moldingsunbeams Fri 08-Nov-13 13:37:10

Are the nightwatch people existing users or people at HQ who have agreed to work overnight [curious]

BoreOfWhabylon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:37:16

sad that Chipping thinks is batshit idea though

<crushed>

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:38:10

Hopasholic

I would like to know the 'stats'

Is there really an influx of trolls at the moment and are you having to delete far more threads/posts than you usually do?
I've not been here long, 9 months <and have been made welcome but I'm not here for a gunfight (< bunfight! Auto correct!)

Does the trolling frequently happen in waves as some say or is it particularly bad now? Would preventing newbies from name changing within their first year help prevent trolls? Is it too easy to get back on even if you are banned?

Newbies who have a problem with the site being cliquey IMO seem to be ones who goad and troll. People have formed friendships over years, they are built over time just like RL ones are.

Maybe instead of the biscuit we should have a catsbumface grin < awaits my award from MNHQ for solving the trolling issue.

Well - we probably have had a bit of an upsurge in slightly odd sex-trolls recently (mostly not really horrible stuff, just silly - and yes we have been banning and deleting 'em grin). Quite possibly off the back of penis beaker. But 'twas ever thus - whenever MN has featured heavily in other media for a period, we've always dealt with a slight uptick in weirdos for a couple of weeks afterwards (along with a much more welcome uptick in lovely new members).

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:38:26

oldmacdonald good to know grin

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 13:38:32

I agree with Chipping on the ncing idea, stick to the guidelines for a year then you can change about, anyone who doesn't like it and wants to NC for trolling reasons won't stick around for a year just waiting.

RandallFloyd Fri 08-Nov-13 13:39:14

Not inarticulate at all Pag, I think you summed it up perfectly well.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:39:35

BrightSunshineyDay

I don't think any posts or threads should be deleted.
More than once I have read a poster retell what a post said or how a thread went - I have had that thread open on another tab and realised the "regular" was misremembering or shit stirring. Deletable posts should stay up with a comment from MNHQ and deletable threads should be locked. That way we can all see who the cunts are.
However, rightly or wrongly, if a regular smells bullshit on a thread then I do tend to listen. Do MNHQ do the same? Do you look more deeply if something is reported by a regular rather than a newbie who has only posted a couple of times?

Whilst I see the logic in leaving posts for others to see how unpleasant a poster is, I think there's quite a lot of things we just don't want to host on our forums tbh - racist, homophobic, sexist, disablist stuff etc.

We also think that civility as a rule makes for a much better discussion/debate - once it gets personal, conversations very quickly get derailed.

RE looking more closely at posts from regulars - I'm sure this happens. I don't actively do site duty any more but it's a natural consequence of experience that you know whom to listen carefully to after a while...

ThatFuckerFancyPuffin Fri 08-Nov-13 13:40:47

I've asked before about mandatory month and year of joining being on the hoverer or profile.

I think it would really help with identifying who is a nchanger and who is a troll claiming to be a nchanger.

I don't know if that makes sense.

confused

Taffeta Fri 08-Nov-13 13:40:51

Sorry BOF!

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:41:34

moldingsunbeams

Are the nightwatch people existing users or people at HQ who have agreed to work overnight [curious]

They're existing users.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 13:41:47

I don't think it is helpful to say that those who don't name change act like the 'own the place'.

I don't namechange cause a) I am crap at it and always out myself anyway and b) I like being recognised, and having a laugh with those who I recognise from other threads.

No cliques or royalty or any of that crap, but I know that if I see eg Tee on a thread, I can pull her leg about being American. I couldn't do that under a namechange or she would tell me to fuck off.

BlackeyedSusan Fri 08-Nov-13 13:42:40

sometimes people want to name change for legitimate reasons... eg posting about something that might out their usual username.

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 13:42:40

A previous poster mentioned that although she has read and re-read the guidelines, she still isn't sure what she is allowed to say.

Zombie suspects that current guidelines are the result of amendments / additions / deletions to whatever was originally written. Could she suggest that perhaps it's time for someone to review all of the guidelines and re-write them? She's not aware of any inconsistencies between the various guidelines but wouldn't be surprised if somewhere along the line something was amended in one but not in another.

<for a bottle of Bombay Sapphire she would be more than happy to help with this>

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:42:51

Justine

So what do you really think when journalists publish factually incorrect observations of Mumsnet in the broadsheets and then whine at you on twitter because we didn't like it?

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 13:43:02

MaryShelley - I wasn't actually being at all sarcastic. I think you are lucky if you haven't been the target of the goady fuckers. I do, however, think it's rude to enter a discussion where people are trying to find a solution to a problem they are having and state that because you don't have a problem with it, it isn't a problem.

BoreofWhabylon - sorry! I just think the posters that are bloody annoying are better 'skipped over' than highlighted - highlighting them would send my blood pressure rocketing grin

BIWI Fri 08-Nov-13 13:43:59

But Justine:

"Whilst I see the logic in leaving posts for others to see how unpleasant a poster is, I think there's quite a lot of things we just don't want to host on our forums tbh - racist, homophobic, sexist, disablist stuff etc."

There is a lot of racist stuff being left up at the moment, on that immigration thread. It's revolting and deeply unpleasant. Yet you are 'just watching'.

I don't understand the logic behind allowing that thread to stand.

Anyway - to my question - please, please, please could you work up a Munsnet definition of what constitutes bullying? I'm really tired of people claiming that they have been bullied simply because someone might have disagree with them. The number of threads that we had to endure about this recently was just silly. Whereas if we had a simple Mumsnet-agreed definition, we could have all saved ourselves the bother.

LtEveDallas Fri 08-Nov-13 13:44:12

Whilst I would still like a Hide Poster option, I accept it's not going to happen any time soon (if ever). One thing that I would like to ask though - what are the chances of MNHQ emailing posters with a 'watch yourself, you are skirting into goading / bullying / PA territory' ? which may make them step back a bit.

I have been very restrained just lately (do I get brownie points) but have found that I am stepping further and further back, rather than engaging people, because I just can't be bothered with some of the arguementative posters - those that will shout black is white, even when it has been proved that black is black IYSWIM

I also agree with a suspended post function for new joiners, which may stop some of the trolling / panty raids from other forums.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:44:43

MarshmallowGuzzler

How do you track posters? Bullying behaviour might only be witnessed by looking at tons of threads and posts, often with no reports, but leaving a hurt reporter. What might have been reported could be quite small- a slap on the wrist type thing- but it could add up to a very large, upsetting series of incidents. Could there be an option to report poster (which might also be useful for the variety of troll threads, started in a short space of time)?

Hi MarshmallowGuzzler,

Just keep reporting. You can explain that this specific post may not break the guidelines but this poster does seem to be bullying/posting to inflame and it all helps us to build up a picture.

We do send mails to folks who are reported a lot but not necessarily deleted and remind them of our Talk guidelines and that our overall aim is to make parents' lives easier.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:46:33

reelingintheyears

Fuck the gin, can't we just try and sort out the bloody trolling.
The thread from the other night was horrible, 'Pie and shite' or something?

Truth is we've always suffered forum invasions from various (mostly men's) sites - Pistonheads, ShankleyGates, ARRSE, SingleTrackWorld etc. And dare I say I believe MNetters have been responsible for a few wholly unsanctioned invasions themselves <<cough, Netmums>>.

They happen, and are irritating (although sometimes can be diverting) but they don't tend to last too long.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 13:46:38

The whole point of MN is to give support. If a person in need of advice has to wait a week before she can get that advice, won't she just wander off to Netmums somewhere else?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:48:13

ShreddedHoops

So my question to HQ would be - does it annoy you when some posters ask for special treatment (being allowed to break rules) because they've been members for a long time, and do you treat old / new posters differently when they are reported?

Well, we don't think this happens very often tbh (regs thinking they should be allowed to break the rules). Obviously when we look at a report, if it's a post by someone with an established posting history/someone we at MNHQ know of, then our knowledge of them (good, bad or indifferent) may play into our decision. But ultimately we take things on a case-by-case basis and do our utmost to apply the rules consistently to everyone.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:49:33

BIWI

But Justine:

"Whilst I see the logic in leaving posts for others to see how unpleasant a poster is, I think there's quite a lot of things we just don't want to host on our forums tbh - racist, homophobic, sexist, disablist stuff etc."

There is a lot of racist stuff being left up at the moment, on that immigration thread. It's revolting and deeply unpleasant. Yet you are 'just watching'.

I don't understand the logic behind allowing that thread to stand.

Well tbh we disagree with you that it's racist - cos if we thought it was, we'd have zapped it. But we'll take another look.

BIWI Fri 08-Nov-13 13:50:05

Do people ask for special treatment? Really?!

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:51:03

magimedi

I also think that threads should be locked, but not deleted.

We do lock threads from time to time but generally if they are deleted. What do you think the benefit would be of leaving threads locked and visible as opposed to removing them?

Having the stupidity highlighted, I think would just annoy people more. Well it would annoy me more anyway.

It's bad enough that it is there in the first place.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:52:28

HoneyDragon

Justine

So what do you really think when journalists publish factually incorrect observations of Mumsnet in the broadsheets and then whine at you on twitter because we didn't like it?

It is tiresome - I thought Mumsnetters' reaction to the Telegraph media request re sextalk on Mumsnet pretty much summed up how we at MNHQ feel. Fair dues to the journo though; she took account of it and wrote a completely different story from the one she was originally asked to write. If only they all did!

moldingsunbeams Fri 08-Nov-13 13:52:32

I don't want people to wait a period before posting because its the type of site people sometimes come to at their wits end about a horrid situation.

Maybe limiting their posts for the first month might work? [dunno]

HepsibarCrinkletoes Fri 08-Nov-13 13:52:44

Why on earth would people ask for special treatment? confused They might expect it, but that would be because they're arses..

Fenton Fri 08-Nov-13 13:53:11

When a PBP makes a new account, I take it they have to be reported again in order for you to know, there's no bat-phone ringing is there? (i expect a TSSDNCOP on that)

And when it does come to your attention that they have rejoined, do you immediately ban again or give them a chance?

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 13:53:59

Re the threads locked & not deleted - I've changed my mind & agree that a lost of the stuff is better gone. I have been persuaded by the posts on this thread.

BlackeyedSusan Fri 08-Nov-13 13:54:05

leaving threads locked but readble may, to some people, feel like mnhq are supporting the bully and not allowing people to defend themselves

ZingWantsGin Fri 08-Nov-13 13:54:21

ah, and what about a bunch of posters who act nice for years and let people trust them, leading them to believe that they are welcome, then becoming extremely nasty to some newer members for no obvious reason at all?
causing some of them to be really hurt and feel cheated on, so much they feel the need to leave MN?!

I don't think there will ever be an accepted definition of bullying BOF, the trouble seems to be that if someone finds a few people disagreeing with them and the posters happen to be recognizable names, it all starts with the bullying, mumsnet royalty nonsense.

I'm not saying that no one ever feels bullied on here, it just gets thrown out their so much, it pretty much dilutes any actual bullying IYSWIM

BoreOfWhabylon Fri 08-Nov-13 13:55:28

Do you contact the admins of other sites when their members troll us? Some on the 'Pie'n'Shite' (love that!) site were saying 'oo-er, MN admin will complain and our admin will rap knuckles again'

BIWI Fri 08-Nov-13 13:55:40

Can I just say, though, that one of the things that MNHQ was seriously castigated for on the last one of these webchats we had was about how quickly posts/threads were deleted, and I do feel that this has changed - 'trigger-happpy' deletions seem to be less frequent, and I think that is a very good thing.

(Although I obviously realise that there is a fine line between leaving things to stand and not being seen to do anything quickly enough!)

And, before I have to get back to work (dammit), I think you must always be between a rock and a hard place trying to keep us all happy! Like Hully said, this place is dear to my heart and as someone who used to be at home a lot, without other adult company for much of the time, it was brilliant to have somewhere to chat to others.

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 13:56:18

There is no problem defining bullying - plenty of organisations have been set up to protect people from bullying.

Shakey1500 Fri 08-Nov-13 13:56:30

I'm interested to know why the latest (last week?) threads on Madeline McCann were "allowed" to stay when many threads previous were zapped pretty quickly.

I'm not passing comment on the content, just curious as to why these latest ones were deemed different to others.

olgaga Fri 08-Nov-13 13:57:14

Adding "registered (date)" alongside a poster's name would mean we could all see at a glance whether someone has joined to simply to goad on particular threads, or nc for that purpose.

Is that possible?

Personally I'm dismayed at the frequent misogyny directed at mums posting for help with separation and child contact issues. I don't see why it is apparently acceptable for mums to be lectured and hectored about "fathers' rights" and given inaccurate information designed to scare them half to death and submit to injustice.

The usual outcome forthe OP is that she abandons the thread. Those who attempt to challenge the MRAs and goaders are often followed around and targetted. It's not easy to keep track of it happening.

Often this behaviour is deemed to be "opinion" and unworthy of report, but I think it's deeply damaging.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:57:31

magimedi

Re the threads locked & not deleted - I've changed my mind & agree that a lost of the stuff is better gone. I have been persuaded by the posts on this thread.

hoorah! <offers cake >

HepsibarCrinkletoes Fri 08-Nov-13 13:57:53

Actually, I do have a question. A very prolific poster has recently namechanged. Under the new guise, this poster is questioning who the 'old' person is/was. This, surely, is sockpuppeting isn't it? And therefore banned under the talk guidelines. So is this a ban worthy offence, or will their prolificness precede them and it be allowed to continue, as I believe it will?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 13:58:11

Pagwatch

I am going to be horribly inarticulate but I'll do my best.
Mnhq posted after the half a dozen bullying threads about regulars being 'hung out to dry'.
That was exactly how I felt.
The use of 'well known regulars/royalty/prolific mumsnetters is often just the language of a veiled attack.
People pop up, often anonymously, make vague allegations about bullying regulars and special treatment and shit.then, in bending over backwards to be fair, all that is left to stand and exasperated responses are deleted.

Would it really hurt for mnhq, just occasionally to say 'if you see bullying then report it but endlessly complaints about members who don't name change and are therefore peculiarly exposed are a bit cowardly and not in the spirit etc etc...'

Because I could name change - we all could and then it would be poster437 talking to poster6653 which would have a very different feel.
Is that what people would prefer?

OK. As we said before we're really sorry that some of you felt personally upset by this.

The whole area of personal attacks on groups is incredibly difficult. In general, unless we think it's pretty obvious which posters are being referred to under the guise of a general sweep of language, we tend to let things stand.

In this case we just genuinely didn't feel that the attacks were on identifiable posters - we definitely weren't reading things things thinking 'well they're talking about Pag there'. We have hundreds - actually probably thousands - of posters we'd regard as regs, so when someone moans about 'the regs' we don't have a list of people we think they're talking about.

Sorry to drone on but just wanted to explain the difference in perception - it wasn't that we were thinking 'they're def having a massive go at Pag there, but because they haven't named her we'll let it stand'.

I dunno if that's answered your point really?

forthemods there is a problem defining bullying on here

like I said before, it is used so frequently, almost as soon as a well known (for want of a better word) poster disagrees with someone.

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 13:58:55

I'd rather have gin than cake but thank you.

And I agree with BIWI - you do a pretty good job here.

BOF Fri 08-Nov-13 13:59:52

I can't hear myself think above the axes grinding here.

Thanks MNHQ for doing this. I bet you think this place would be just perfect if it weren't for us lot grin.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:00:20

LittleBearPad

Can there be something noted next to a poster's name that shows when they joined - maybe a month and year or even just a year. It wouldn't break anonymity and people could still name change but having November 2013 next to a username might help other posters. It could be linked to a poster's email address so that goady fuckers who were banned when reregistering would never appear to be long term posters unless they played a really long game and registered names months before using them. In light of Chipping's posts above I doubt any I them would have the patience or intelligence to do so.

I know lots of forums do this but it's always been something we've been a wee bit nervous of. I think the best forums have less heirachy and more equality between posters. Obviously some posters will be widely known and loved - usually because of the amount of great advice they give - but in general we think posts and opinions should be taken at face value and newbies welcomed. I worry that highlighting newbies might lead to more troll-hunting and to Mumsnet being a less friendly place (though I can see the obvious attractions in reassuring folks that name-changers are legit).

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 14:00:26

Why should bullying have a different definition on MN than anywhere else in the world?

BIWI Fri 08-Nov-13 14:01:46

... it still is brilliant to have a place to chat to others, btw - sorry for slipping into the past tense! Just that I'm at work now, in a real office with real colleagues, so have lots of other people to talk to as well grin

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:01:53

There's a big old elephant in the corner and as no-one else seems to want to brave bringing him into the middle of the room, I will.

When AF was banned/suspended it was on a thread where C F D was being a goady fucker (and had previously been reported as being a GF).

Later on, after it all 'kicked off' C F D was banned - for being a goady fucker.

AF was not unduly rude - she said that the poster might want to think about the way they wrote their posts as they could come across as bullying and that their posts came across as passive aggressive.

AF was helping the OP, the GF was just derailing the thread.

The OP was very upset and didn't wish to post anymore (because of the GF not AF).

AF was banned/suspended? Irrespective of what came before/who she is/her posting history does this seem even remotely reasonable?

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:02:16

HepsibarCrinkletoes

Actually, I do have a question. A very prolific poster has recently namechanged. Under the new guise, this poster is questioning who the 'old' person is/was. This, surely, is sockpuppeting isn't it? And therefore banned under the talk guidelines. So is this a ban worthy offence, or will their prolificness precede them and it be allowed to continue, as I believe it will?

We'd have to take a look at this specific case, please report.
In general, that's really not on and we would certainly have a word at the very least.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:03:31

magimedi

I'd rather have gin than cake but thank you.

And I agree with BIWI - you do a pretty good job here.

wine ? grin

forthemods for the reason I stated in my previous post confused

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:04:31

MadameDefarge

ok so an add on. Would MN HQ like us to report but then not say we have reported? Clarity of that would be good too.

Weeeelllll aargh sorry it's just not possible to be definitive about this. In general, it's fine to say 'I've reported that post' - eg to say 'don't worry, I've reported it so that we don't all report it and end up flooding MN's inbox'. But in some circs it might be troll-hunting by proxy; in others it might be inflammatory.

So we have to do it on a case-by-case basis. Sorry.

ShreddedHoops Fri 08-Nov-13 14:04:50

JustineMN

"I think the best forums have less hierarchy and more equality between posters"

This - I'm so reassured that you think this smile thanks No to dates joined, hiding posters, hiding or highlighting posts, and any more info other than the username someone chooses to use. Simpler = better.

HepsibarCrinkletoes Fri 08-Nov-13 14:05:14

Thanks Rebecca, I have reported, with absolute proof (highlighting a classic schoolgirl error) and have a generic sort of response.

ButThereAgain Fri 08-Nov-13 14:05:38

Chipping, surely to goodness that elephant in the room is yesterday's chip paper. How many times to MNHQ have to justify the same decision?

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 14:05:41

forthemods
As I said earlier, people's perception of bullying is coloured by their experience.

I can't say that I have been proper nasty bullied in RL (although there was some unpleasant behaviour from a group of boys when I was 10yr old).

I have also never felt bullied on MN. I have had a couple of nasty comments, but I shrug them off. We are allowed to have differences of opinions.

Some people see any kind of disagreement as bullying, especially when more than one person disagrees with them. As long as the tone is civil and there isn't too much 'Oh, FFS, get a grip' kind of posting going on, I don't see that as bullying.

thepobblewhohasnotoes Fri 08-Nov-13 14:06:01

"Why should bullying have a different definition on MN than anywhere else in the world?"

Um, define bullying then, in a way everyone agrees on? Not easy! You'll find people have different views of what it means. And every time the bullying thing comes up, people disagree on what it means, particularly online.

A mumsnet definition would be very useful I think.

NoelOfLorst Fri 08-Nov-13 14:07:05

Please don't take away the nc function, or introduce 'member since' dates or any of that stuff.

When I first found MN I was AGOG that you could change your nickname just like that, I'd never known that on any other forums.

I really like the anonymity aspect of it, and that there can't be a hierarchy as such ie 'we've been here longer than you have so ner'.

And finally, for a massive site such as this, I don't think there's an awful lot wrong with the moderation as it is. I think MNHQ do a pretty good job.

Dunno why I'm on this thread really.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:07:09

I can see the 'up' side of having 'joined in xxxx' but I can see the 'down' side too, personally I think the 'down' side outweighs the 'up' side.

Maybe a 'joined this week' would be handy though wink

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 14:08:15

Looks like quite a few of us are asking for a Mumsnet definition of bullying. Makes sense.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:08:20

SecretNutellaFix

I've said it before and I will say it again.

Relationships and Feminism need a full time dedicated mod.

AIBU should be removed. A lot of the issues start on there- there are a number of posters who only ever seem to post on AIBU, there are also a number of posters who will use it as a fight club.

There is a section called What Would You Do? People could use that if they were looking for genuine advice/feedback and then chat for the rest of the non AIBU threads that get posted.

If you are not considering shutting down aIBU, then that also needs a full time mod.

Yes I think you might be right about more resource. We've only just dug out the mods response time stat for this chat, and it has increased.

The AIBU topic was started because so many threads begun AIBU - ie it's not the topic - but we may well need to encourage more reporting of AIBU threads. We did some analysis of AIBU a little while back - Becky has figs - and results showed it wasn't as fighty as you might think - post for post. It's just incredibly huge now, so it seems that it has a lot of fights... It is a bit of a mystery to me btw, as to why WWYD is so much less used but I imagine it's self perpetuating. Would be good to think of a way to promote it as it's a slightly more gentle way of asking for advice.

Hope I've made it in time. i understand why you don't want to leave posts to stand, but also why people want them to stand. Could there be a compromise where the post was edited by HQ (only in some cases, not all) and if its a long post, only the "bad" bit deleted? Or more info on each post as to why it has gone, like the info now available for poofed threads?

And re poofed threads, at the mo only people who posted/watched see the reason. Could you keep the thread on the chat list, but with just the deletion message? Because a lot of people post "to see the deletion message" on threads that are about to go (I do this myself...) which then bumps the thread...

Pan Fri 08-Nov-13 14:09:07

Any mileage in pausing the right to post for 48 hrs after joining?

Pagwatch Fri 08-Nov-13 14:09:51

Thanks Rowan

I honestly wasn't thinking you should apologise at all - I m a bit blush that it may have seemed like that.

I do understand that it seems too vague to be hurtful but when 'well known regulars' is used on a thread where there are two or three posters who don't name change and have been around a while then it usually is.

Yes, I'm sure you have loads that fit that category/description but it's when it is used in a context, in an disagreement.
I don't often feel its me (although it clearly was in a couple of the recent threads) but could you just look at how that 'you are a regular/you get special treatment/regulars are bullying...' insinuations keep being used.

Sorry - that took hours - at home with ill boy.

maillotjaune Fri 08-Nov-13 14:10:30

It's too easy for people to blame regular / royalty and say they're being bullied. They are not a homogeneous group. I don't post enough to have any particular 'friends' on here but I don't expect everyone to be the same. Reminds me of all those 'school run is so horrible because of cliquey Mum's threads.

Really interesting webchat MNHQ thanks for doing.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:10:35

ButThereAgain - it's not about justifying a decision - it's about the process of looking at a thread rather than a post and what else has been reported about the person - C F D had been reported and was 'being watched' but was still able to completely de-rail a thread then someone else (irrespective of who) bore the brunt of it.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:10:47

forthemods

Looks like quite a few of us are asking for a Mumsnet definition of bullying. Makes sense.

This is from Dept for Education's guidelines to schools and pretty much sums it up for us:

Bullying is behaviour by an individual or group, repeated over time, that intentionally hurts another individual or group either physically or emotionally.

The problem of course is when people have different interpretations of intentional, repeated hurt.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 14:10:50

Rereading that post, I should clarify - I do think that there is some bullying on MN, just I haven't personally been on the receiving end.

Here are two definitions - for the workplace, so written for adults. How do you use that on a site like MN, where difference in opinion is a main part of the site?

Definition of workplace bullying by Amicus-MSF trade union

"Persistent, offensive, abusive, intimidating or insulting behaviour, abuse of power or unfair penal sanctions which makes the recipient feel upset, threatened, humiliated or vulnerable, which undermines their self-confidence and which may cause them to suffer stress"

Those who can, do. Those who can't, bully.
"Bullying is a compulsive need to displace aggression and is achieved by the expression of inadequacy (social, personal, interpersonal, behavioural, professional) by projection of that inadequacy onto others through control and subjugation (criticism, exclusion, isolation etc). Bullying is sustained by abdication of responsibility (denial, counter-accusation, pretence of victimhood) and perpetuated by a climate of fear, ignorance, indifference, silence, denial, disbelief, deception, evasion of accountability, tolerance and reward (eg promotion) for the bully."

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:11:37

HeartsTrumpDiamonds

Do you flit around the site looking at threads and topics and generally keeping an eye on things, or are you too busy responding to individual posts that are reported? Or a combination?

How many posts that should be deleted actually are deleted, and vice versa (in your opinion) - is this something you think can even be measured or tracked?

I guess what I am really asking is - what is the objective of your moderation: is it to delete every offensive post, to have a site that is 100% "clean" - or is it to remove only the bare minimum, only the ones that are reported or that you notice, and let the boards be open and free-form?

I think we've answered a lot of this with stats elsewhere (though we'll check afterwards and post up more stats if we've missed any), but in general, our aim is to respond to all reports as well as we possibly can. There's no way, on a board this size, we'd be able to make it completely 'clean' - although of course if every single MNer upped their reporting rate by 1000%, to the extent that every single guideline-busting post was being reported, that would be great (and we'd find a way to deal with it).

but pan a lot of people join because they need advice right now

Making them wait for 48 hours is not going to help them, and why should people not be able to ask for help when they need it? Because of a few trolls?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:12:47

Pan

Any mileage in pausing the right to post for 48 hrs after joining?

The problem with that is when folks have a legit, burning issue and need advice/support there and then. We'd be loathed to deny them that.

ShreddedHoops Fri 08-Nov-13 14:15:15

Re bullying policies - sticking with the Dept of Education version - in schools, the number one piece of advice is to tell a teacher - this prevents it spiralling into lawlessness. There is a real resistance from some posters to reporting, but it's the best defence and the best equivalent to how bullying is effectively dealt with in schools. As soon as a teacher knows, it quickly dissipates. Although sometimes on here the bullies when warned, start sucking up to the teachers mods... giving them apples gin and the like. Just like irl.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 14:15:17

I just don't know who these long standing, previously nice posters are who suddenly turn into death breath harpies at the sight of new posters and make them feel terrible and unwelcome.

Pan Fri 08-Nov-13 14:15:45

yes, but MN isn't the only source is it? Surely? But yes it's perhaps wrong to 'penalise' potential posters/others as troll-management technique,

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:16:09

Pausing the right to post could often mean the difference between an abused woman getting help and not - I'm glad that wont be happening smile

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:16:11

bsc

Following on from Satin- I have previously reported posts, then searched the other posts by that poster to find that they're spamming the boards... but until I report the other posts too, it seems that HQ haven't done that other bit, and mopped up spammers before posters notice they're there (IYSWIM).

Just wondering what the protocol/process is for mods when they act upon posts that need deletion.

Thanks HQ- I do really like it here smile When it's good, it's very very good!

thanks BSC grin

We should definitely look into a poster's posting history when they're reported for spam and delete any other spammy posts they've made. We'll send a reminder around the team

<narrows eyes, loads gun>

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 14:16:57

The question about PBP's, do you check their history if they get reported again under different names?
The ones who return to wind up old adversaries?

SecretNutellaFix Fri 08-Nov-13 14:17:13

Thank you for replying to my point Justine.

What I also meant when I said about AIBU is that posters do sometimes cross swords on AIBU and then because they're only human remember that poster and will sometimes react negatively if they bump in to each other elsewhere. So it fans out across the boards and posters will jump in.

I'm not saying it's done on purpose, but I will admit that I can keep a mental tally of who has pissed me off and why. It takes a lot for me to reply in a non aggressive way sometimes to these posters.

If the trigger point (AIBU) was removed, or access limited maybe these instances would happen far less frequently?

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:17:14

HepsibarCrinkletoes

Thanks Rebecca, I have reported, with absolute proof (highlighting a classic schoolgirl error) and have a generic sort of response.

Thanks Hepsibar. We are very much dealing with this now, apologies for another generic response blush

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:17:22

Of course it's not 'the only source' but it is a very good source and possibly the only one an abused woman feels comfortable with at that time.

magimedi Fri 08-Nov-13 14:18:47

As a compromise could we have a 'just joined' for the first week of membership thereby making it easy to spot those who have joined to be goady or to troll?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:18:50

ChippingInBatshitArse

There's a big old elephant in the corner and as no-one else seems to want to brave bringing him into the middle of the room, I will.

When AF was banned/suspended it was on a thread where C F D was being a goady fucker (and had previously been reported as being a GF).

Later on, after it all 'kicked off' C F D was banned - for being a goady fucker.

AF was not unduly rude - she said that the poster might want to think about the way they wrote their posts as they could come across as bullying and that their posts came across as passive aggressive.

AF was helping the OP, the GF was just derailing the thread.

The OP was very upset and didn't wish to post anymore (because of the GF not AF).

AF was banned/suspended? Irrespective of what came before/who she is/her posting history does this seem even remotely reasonable?

Well we don't think it is very elephant-like tbh - has felt at times over the last couple of weeks as though nobody's talking about anything else <twitch>

As far as we're concerned, the bottom line is that AF's posts broke Guidelines, and she was on a very clear warning about what would happen next if she broke Guidelines again.

RebeccaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:20:20

reelingintheyears

The question about PBP's, do you check their history if they get reported again under different names?
The ones who return to wind up old adversaries?

We sure do - it can take time but we have a good dig.

Although, if they have been banned and they appear again, we will reban unless they have mailed in and then we'll explain/ make a decision depending on the specifics of the initial ban.

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 14:21:06

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RoxanneReidsChafingFishnets Fri 08-Nov-13 14:21:08

Do you have any Windows Phone app things in progress or to make.mobile site more friendly to them?

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:21:26

Pan

I'd disagree Maryz..whether someone is a nether-region <coy> is a matter of perspective (which the mods will differ on individually), and even if the genuine qualifiers remain identified as such, it sets a culture and tone that it's okay to fling abuse around, and that HQ think it's okay.

Question: can we slow down on the gratuitous swearing please? A vital issue compared with others, I know.hmm

Interestingly I had a meeting with reps from a load of other big community sites recently. We were trying to come up with a list of universal forum guidelines. We agreed on everything - no hate speech, personal abuse etc except one. All of the others had no swearing policy. Only Mumsnet differed. I felt quite foul-mouthed [shame].

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:21:48

Shakey1500

I'm interested to know why the latest (last week?) threads on Madeline McCann were "allowed" to stay when many threads previous were zapped pretty quickly.

I'm not passing comment on the content, just curious as to why these latest ones were deemed different to others.

Our long-standing aim with threads about the McCann case is to allow one thread to run when there seems to be a 'need' for it, so that's probably the quickest answer to why these ones stayed up. Some posters do want to discuss it, and while we definitely don't want to host nasty speculation or CSI-style forensic details, we do accept that it's a massive news story and some posters do want to talk about it.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 14:21:55

Can you tell straight away if a new poster is an old banned poster?

Sunshineonsea Fri 08-Nov-13 14:22:18

When or are we ever going to have a username amnesty
I've got bloody loads I don't want that I only used for chat so have no convos under them
And maybe do the usernames in a diff colour for old posts where the username no longer exists
Tis so bloody hard trying to think if usernames when they're all used up!!

forthemods Fri 08-Nov-13 14:22:54

"universal forum guidelines" sound really good - are you adopting them, apart from the swearing?

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:23:12

RoxanneReidsChafingFishnets

Do you have any Windows Phone app things in progress or to make.mobile site more friendly to them?

Righto - we're not actually aware of this being a problem: we didn't realise Windows phones don't work well with the mobile site. If you mail in to contactus@mumsnet.com or start a thread in Site Stuff about it, we'll see if anyone else is having the same problem.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 14:23:22

I think Kotinka just answered my question.

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 14:23:32

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

RoxanneReidsChafingFishnets Fri 08-Nov-13 14:23:49

Thank you! Will do that now

TheOnlyOliviaMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:26:17

Sunshineonsea

When or are we ever going to have a username amnesty
I've got bloody loads I don't want that I only used for chat so have no convos under them
And maybe do the usernames in a diff colour for old posts where the username no longer exists
Tis so bloody hard trying to think if usernames when they're all used up!!

Am lurking (with feet up) but can fairly reliably say that this is highly unlikely.
Last time we did it for charity (pre DC1 and I'm now due DC3/4!) it was V V complicated tech wise rocks at memory

I like the "just joined" idea too. Maybe for the first month.

Thanks MNHQ for doing this web chat.

Shakey1500 Fri 08-Nov-13 14:28:07

Thanks for answering Rowan smile

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:29:03

Olivia - I thought that suggestion might get you posting cakebrewflowers It's OK sshhhshhshhshshshsh

AbsDuCroissant Fri 08-Nov-13 14:29:13

I like the ideas of universal forum guidelines - like a declaration of human rights for forums. Kind of.

Obviously when we look at a report, if it's a post by someone with an established posting history/someone we at MNHQ know of, then our knowledge of them (good, bad or indifferent) may play into our decision.

I said this last week and everyone told me I was being ridiculous. But IMO and IME it's unavoidable to think "Hmm, Horry has a habit of being a bit goady, better delete this" or "Weird, Horry doesn't turn up in our Reports often, the person reporting is probably being a bit oversensitive".

There are only two ways to make sure every single post meets guidelines: every single post is moderated before it's published, or every single post is read by a moderator within a reasonable timescale. The resources required to do that are simply hilarious.

Now, I've modded on a site that was at the time very similar to AIBU - a mixture of intelligent discussion, foul PAs and derailing. There were plenty of times when the mods between us agreed that "Closing for review" was the only sensible thing to give everyone a chance to cool down. Whether we reopened or not was as often as not dependent on the general mood of the board, rather than the specifics of the thread itself.

At peak we had I think nine mods dealing with around a million unique views a month - so smaller in scale than MN but more mods per view. Theoretically we would read everything between us; realistically you can see when you log on that something has attracted 200 posts in half an hour and will need a squint sooner than a twenty-post "Which pram?" post.

There must be a middle ground between reading every post and only reading reported posts/threads. I would hope that increasing the modding capacity (either staff or volunteer antipodean Nightwatchpeeps) would find that middle ground.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:32:42

So we've overrun a bit - can't believe it's almost dark outside <<wonders if winter's getting darker>> - but obviously the conversation remains very much open.

Thought it might be interesing to post our Talk values, as discussed at our latest community management team awayday and which have been pretty much there since we started, but honed and refined over the years by users.

So, in no particular order here's what we are trying our best to promote when moderating:

Tolerance
Debate
Pragmatism
Transparency
Civility

Hopefully you agree they're are the right things (vaguely). Thanks to all for the great questions and lots of lovely supportive messages. Any more thoughts/ suggestions please feel free to post. We're not going away smile.

kim147 Fri 08-Nov-13 14:33:01

I was surprised that 2 threads last week - one outing and discussing an ex MNEr and one discussing the real time antics of a celebrity lasted for so long.

I know it was at night but these were pretty serious threads that should have been deleted a lot earlier.

How do you prioritise reports?

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 14:33:18

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

reelingintheyears Fri 08-Nov-13 14:34:19

And WIT Justine, where would we be without the WIT and the humour and the banter? grin

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:35:28

reelingintheyears

And WIT Justine, where would we be without the WIT and the humour and the banter? grin

Ha yes but that's your job, not ours.

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 14:36:30

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Mmelindor Fri 08-Nov-13 14:37:25

Horry
I think that is a given, tbh.

If I were to launch a racist attack on another poster, I would hope that MNHQ would send me a Tee-style ::headtilt:: email after deleting the post, because they would realise that it was totally out of character.

Not saying that my post wouldn't or shouldn't be deleted, but think it is normal to react differently when you recognise a poster. And MNHQ know who we are, even when we namechange.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:41:09

kotinka

Justine, are there plans to implement blocking by IP for bans / suspension?

We do this sometimes, where we think there's a need. Obviously it's not failsafe [says no more].

garlicbutter Fri 08-Nov-13 14:41:46

Similar to the 'new poster' thingy, I was wondering about a post count? MN could give a count of posts by that user under any nickname, without revealing the previous names, and maybe their time on MN. You could stop it after 1,000 or so, that wouldn't matter. But if a poster's making me feel edgy, and they only have 20 posts, I am more cautious than when replying to a regular.

Actually, giving us count/time data would save namechangers having to prove their Mumsnettery at great length!

Prove their Mumsnettery? They write "cube of poo, dragon butter, etc" and that is supposed to do it.

TBH I find that casual "proof" more suspicious than someone just coming on and saying "NC because feeling anxious".

ButThereAgain Fri 08-Nov-13 14:45:16

Oh, I like the idea of talk values! It seems a much better way forward than comprehensive moderation rules.

Conversation is much too nuanced a thing to be moderated by strict and explicit all-purpose rules. I always wonder whether it isn't better for HQ to make a bolder statement of the fact that deletion etc is at their discretion, and will be done in pursuit of "the spirit of the site" (which might be defined in terms of talk values).

More detailed rules are of value to give guidance to posters about what is acceptable to say, but they perhaps shouldn't be used in a legalistic way to defend or challenge moderation. That way madness lies. It should be ok for staff to cite discretion and say "in our opinion that post/thread/poster was/wasn't acceptable in context."

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 14:46:16

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

youretoastmildred Fri 08-Nov-13 14:50:16

I am a bit late to the party so not sure if anyone is still here [peers around sadly at a few bits of abandoned cheese on cocktail sticks]

3 things I wanted to ask:

FIRSTLY

"Tolerance
Debate
Pragmatism
Transparency
Civility"

don't you think there is a GLARING omission here? - something about being interesting or funny?
(debate can be interesting I suppose)
I think boringness is far more unpleasant and threatening to a site being any good than a little light rudeness [sticks tongue out]

SECONDLY

Tunip was spot on about "treating webchat guests like guests in your home" - I have pretty much said the same thing before. (note tunip is not a vegetable and has no r) I think there is a real tension between hosting naicely and asking tough questions and I think Gok behaved like an arse and abused our collective intellectual hospitality (I was not on that chat so feel free to say that, no sour grapes at being told off here) - but we are not relieved of host duty no matter how obliviously our guests behave? Yes, that is true irl, but I think it's not fair on here, and important if mn does actually have political clout (which we may all have overegged through selfimportance, but still)

THIRDLY

can we run a consciousness raising session at MNHQ and get you all thoroughly feministed up?

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 14:50:59

Horry - I like it when people do that - it reminds me of the funny threads I'd kind of forgotten about - and extra smile in my day! (though completely useless, on the whole, for proving someone is a long term MNer!).

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 14:56:46

ButThereAgain

Do you sometimes feel that expectations of what moderation can achieve are too high, especially on a mass site in the public eye, and especially given that you have to maintain a fairly arms-length status in order to control your liability in relation to libel?

You often put yourselves in the position of apologising for outcomes that seem at least partly a function of certain impossibilities involved in moderating a site like MN, rather than being a function of failings on your part. It is lovely to apologise so frankly but I wonder if it creates a false impression of incompetence. Would it be better to just say that some of what is expected can't be achieved?

I think you make a good point here, but then again there's always things we can do better and just occasionally we are pretty incompetent grin.

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 15:02:01

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

ChippingInBatshitArse Fri 08-Nov-13 15:08:10

I think Olivia might still be rocking in the corner after reading the suggestion about the name amnesty! brew

WhatABeautifulPussy Fri 08-Nov-13 15:42:55

Unfortunately I spent most of the webchat in a maternity unit having an unscheduled couple of hours listening to baby's heartbeat and forgot it was happening but as an admin on a much smaller (but feels much bitchier in proportion) site I'd a) like to thank you for the mammoth and occasionally thankless task that is keeping talk running and b) suggest increasing capacity particularly for triggery areas. It does make a huge difference to the quality and responsiveness of moderation if people spend a lot of time familiarising themselves with the general tone and it makes it easier to spot trends that stats don't pick up in terms of tone and interactions.

Some sections of MN are 'fighty' - FWR springs to mind - but that's partly because sectioning them off concentrates that particular issue and associated style of posting and partly because ithey are just a huge target. I don't have an answer for that, but if you find one can you share it with me, please?!

Sunshineonsea Fri 08-Nov-13 15:54:49

Sorry Olivia wine [gordonsgin]

ZingWantsGin Fri 08-Nov-13 15:54:51

Justine

I started a thread in chat about gin. it looks promising! grin

do pop in please, when you have a minute! thanks. wink

(shame my other question didn't get answered, but maybe next time..)

kotinka Fri 08-Nov-13 15:56:19

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

I've only got to page 6 but Rebecca MN's considered explanation of what might constitute a PA made me laugh grin

I'm sure there will be other gems here too, and look forward to a good read through this evening as was out today or would have been glued to screen worse than usual

Nice idea MNHQ smile

Rowan thank you for answering my question - I agree that you had all pretty much answered it further up the thread!

The idea of going back to first principles with the Talk Values is a sound one and will always give better results than trying to apply discrete rules from a rule book. With a rule book, you always need to keep going back and adding more and more rules every time a new situation presents itself.

trish5000 Fri 08-Nov-13 18:29:42

I have only just got in, so have not had time to read this thread in any detail.

As far as I can see, having scrolled twice, my post mid evening yesterday, fairly near the beginning of the thread, has not been answered. [not sure though that you are answering everyones posts or not].

I asked whether it was possible to have examples of what constitutes a pa and what does not, and put them in the Talk Guidelines so people can refer to them, and refresh their memories from time to time. As there are many posters who seem genuinely confused[especially new posters] of what is and what isnt a pa. Thanks.
And it might save your workload!

Nagoo Fri 08-Nov-13 18:52:51

The just joined idea is a FAB one smilesmile I love it more than any other idea I have read in site stuff smile

The problem with a site like this is that no one ever knows the full story. It's a HUGE site, with history, private messages and friendships outside of the site. Being asked to 'take sides' is impossible. So I see that the black and white approach is the only one to take, even when for those of us that see the grey it might lead to an unjust outcome.

I think HQ should keep the gin, they earned it.

RowanMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 19:10:45

trish5000

I have only just got in, so have not had time to read this thread in any detail.

As far as I can see, having scrolled twice, my post mid evening yesterday, fairly near the beginning of the thread, has not been answered. [not sure though that you are answering everyones posts or not].

I asked whether it was possible to have examples of what constitutes a pa and what does not, and put them in the Talk Guidelines so people can refer to them, and refresh their memories from time to time. As there are many posters who seem genuinely confused[especially new posters] of what is and what isnt a pa. Thanks.
And it might save your workload!

Argh, sorry if we missed that one - we did mean to answer it!

We pretty deliberately keep the Guidelines general, because in the end we're trying to create the conditions that allow the values Justine talks about to flourish - rather than trying to create a space in which everyone adheres to an extremely precise set of rules.

And we really do try to consider each case on its merits, so in all honesty there are some contexts in which a post would be deleted, and other contexts in which almost exactly the same post would be left to stand.

So, to sum up... no. wink

TheDoctrineOfWho Fri 08-Nov-13 19:20:19

I really like the idea that posters can release names they don't want - no auction or publicity or anything.

But I suspect it would still be a tech nightmare.

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Fri 08-Nov-13 19:23:33

TheDoctrineOfWho

I really like the idea that posters can release names they don't want - no auction or publicity or anything.

But I suspect it would still be a tech nightmare.

Yes, every time we've brought this up in the past the Techs go quiet and start gently rocking back and forth. BUT you've given us renewed impetus to raise it again. I refuse to believe something - even a fudge - is not possible.

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 19:30:59

<Bombay Sapphire>

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 19:44:31

Zombies did you read the article Justine linked to in the Telegraph? It's lovely and positive about Mnet.

<<distracts Zombie from gin issues with something guaranteed to make her grin>>

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 19:57:14

Zombie did indeed read it and she's full of admiration for the MNer who was quoted. She also admires the journalist for listening to us and taking our points on board.

grin

< Bombay Sapphire >

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 20:00:55

Justine's really going to have to give up on the Gordens. Zombies are both tenacious and consistent.

IamtheZombie Fri 08-Nov-13 20:08:10

grin grin grin

I suggest tickers after our names in sparkles and twinkles which read

YouveCatToBeKittenMe has been a mumsnetter for 6 years 2 months and 12 days

<runs>

TheDoctrineOfWho Fri 08-Nov-13 20:35:23

It's a good article, shame the headline was written by someone who hadn't read it properly!

HoneyDragon Fri 08-Nov-13 20:37:49
SacreBlue Fri 08-Nov-13 21:59:29

I've not long joined so aside from working today didn't want to post because, well, longer term members I felt would have a better handle on what to ask and I knew newer members may well ask what I wanted to anyway.

I am most happy about two things -

a) That MNHQ is obviously doing their best to facilitate free speech & support & laughs in a very difficult environment and,

b) That a journalist can write, and have published, a reasoned, insightful piece, that may not have been the 'brief' from their paper they were given I imagine but was more truthful <looking at you Rebecca Holman> smile

Thank you to whoever suggested the web chat Zombie, was it you? if so you are a star

And to MNHQ for being one of the few public places and businesses that responds positively to users [gin, cake, wine, ££££, as you wish]

Tee2072 Fri 08-Nov-13 22:22:06

Sorry I missed this.

Good chat and thanks to Rowan, Rebecca and Justine.

I would hope, looking at those stats of numbers of posts/posters some people who seem to have no patience might find some when reporting threads.

And grin to MmeL. I didn't start ::head tilt::!!!! grin

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now