ZOMBIE THREAD ALERT: This thread hasn't been posted on for a while.
Please can you clarify what you at MNHQ construe to be a goady post?(19 Posts)
MNHQ have commented on this thread.
I reported a thread yesterday because I thought the OP was being deliberately inflammatory, aka 'goady'. My suspicions were also aroused because it was a one-time only poster (or a name-changer), and then you also advised me that the OP had since de-regged.
To me, that confirms that the post had been intended to be inflammatory.
Yet the thread itself still remains. The view has been taken, I presume, that because it provoked 'interesting' debate, that the thread has been allowed to stay?
Yet the post itself seemed designed to stir up homophobic reactions.
I went to read the Talk Guidelines, to check for myself what MNHQ say about this, and I was really horrified to see that homophobic posts are not even mentioned:
"Swearwords and offensive language
It's not our policy to delete swearwords (we're all adults, after all) but we do draw the line at obscenity, racist, ageist and disablist language, and wording that is truly beyond the pale.
So a first time, now deregged poster can post something goady and homophobic and this doesn't seem to qualify as against MNHQ guidelines?
Given the way that some of HullyGully's posts were deleted for being goady I'm really shocked that you would have construed this one as being acceptable, and thus allowed it to stay.
(And I'm not linking to the thread because MNHQ know which one it is)
I asked on the thread in question whether it would stand or go, no reply. But of course didn't ask here in site stuff
good call biwi
No mention of sexism either.
I reported a thread the other week which made quite (ridiculous claims) derogatory remarks about the Estuary accent.
As it wasn't Jamaican / Chinese / northern it was ok to claim it sounded thick, tarty, cheap, stupid, meant lower class and wouldn't amount to much. Stuff that if it was said about anyone else would be taken seriously and removed.
But it's ok, coz it's Essex /east end.
I think they like goady fuckers.
They up the click rate.
I mean, anyone who can make a discussion about poo (including graphic on-thread pictures, not even links) the DOTD has lost the plot somewhat.
It is very bad lately - i'd never noticed it as bad as this before.
But it is very very hard to discriminate deliberate form accidental Goadiness and they DO up the click rate
Some people like being Goaded. They get it all out here and are are able to turn back to RL cleansed and patient
You mean, the poo bit Anya - yes, [[http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2110556-OMG-Im-so-grossed-out-TMI-warning this] has been DOTD for the last 48 hours.
And the gf = hits assumption, well, that's just my opinion.
There's a tattoo thread full of racist and sexist insults that's still standing too
Thanks for the link MaryZ but I'll give it a miss.
OP - Can you not just not read the threads that bother you? They may well be goady. Anything I come across like that (including all threads mentioned on this thread) I have given a miss because I cannot be bothered with that kind of thing.
I am relatively new to MN and am obviously in a minority here, but I strongly dislike the swearing that happens here. As a regular forum user elsewhere, the language and swearing allowed here shocks me. But I am not about to make a big fuss about it. I just rise above and ignore it.
Urgh, that thread worm one is grim. I clicked on it yesterday and have regretted it ever since. Strongly advise against it
especially if you are about to eat tagliatelle I do find it odd what has been chosen for DOTD over the last week or two. Some eclectic mixes, some truly repulsive (as above) and some incredibly dull done to death. Where has the humour gone?
I wish I had Anya [bleurgh]
tbf, I suspect decisions about DOTD are difficult - they have to avoid most of the
funny sweary ones. And the serious ones, so they are left with the inane and disgusting.
WaffleWiffle - there are two reasons for my OP.
First, MMHQ have been inconsistent about how they deal with goady
fuckers posts/posters. They have deleted posts that were funny/a joke, because they were deemed goady, yet leave ones standing where the OP was clearly inflammatory.
Second, the post I'm talking about was evidently designed to provoke homophobic responses.
And why should we ignore that? Would you say that we should also ignore racist posts? I think not. I think that they have to be challenged.
Oh, and if you don't like swearing, you've come to the wrong forum .
I get that I've just got to accept the swearing here. Likewise I can see a goading post for what it is. So much like the trolls and attention seekers all across the internet - I think the best way to deal with then is to not respond and don't give them the satisfaction. Hence me just ignoring such threads.
That said if I was especially offended by something, I would report.
Thanks for raising this with us. We try not to get too bogged down in what exactly constitutes a goady post, as so often things depend on context. Our Guidelines do prohibit "deliberately inflammatory behaviour".
Whilst we're talking about the Guidelines, we feel we should point out that homophobia and sexism are mentioned: "we'll remove posts we consider to contain personal attacks, to break the law and/or to be obscene, racist, sexist, disablist, ageist or homophobic."
In regards to the thread, we didn't remove it because we felt it wasn't homophobic, but rather a discussion about whether the word fag is homophobic. However, if there are homophobic posts, please do report them to us and we'll take a look.
Sometimes it's obvious that someone has started a thread to inflame, in which case we remove it, and others less so. In this case, we have no way of knowing if the poster was trying to cause trouble, or if they took a battering in AIBU and fled. We can't know their motivation, and the subsequent discussion seemed to us broadly valid and interesting (we can see that as a result of the discussion, a poster has changed their mind about homophobic language) so we've left.
We hope this makes our actions a little clearer - if there's anything else we can answer do shout, and as ever please do report any posts that you would like us to look at.
I think you should add 'homophobic' and 'sexist' the section I highlighted, Kate.
And I'm about the reasons for leaving it, when you have deleted humorous posts before.
And I still stand by my assertion that the OP of that thread was being deliberately inflammatory.
Hi Biwi, we'd hope as homophia and sexism are mentioned so close by that section, people wouldn't miss it. We assume you all refresh your memories on the TGs at least once a week and recite them before prayers and cocoa each night! You DO, don't you? But it's a good point and one we'll make sure is raised at MNHQ.
WRT making calls on whether something is inflammatory or not, it really can be just that - a judgement call. We try to get it right and think most of the time we do, but as well as depending on tone, history and context, it's often a subjective thing, which is why we welcome reports as they can help give us a flavour of how Mumsnetters generally feel about a particular thread or post.
Hope that helps?
Join the discussion
Please login first.