Username Policing....

(42 Posts)
IKnowIAmButWhatAreYou Tue 02-Jun-15 23:33:39

Hi MNHQ,

Given the hoo-haa about a username that's being discussed in This Thread what are the thoughts on introducing consistent, across the board guidelines for usernames?

Not everyone wants offensive names all over their screen, the definition of "offensive" in the first place would be a useful point, but what's the general MNHQ view?

Ta!!

AnyoneForTennis Tue 02-Jun-15 23:46:33

They wouldn't enforce it with anyfucker so don't rate your chances!

Millipedewithherfeetup Tue 02-Jun-15 23:56:27

Agree that offensive nn should not be allowed.

Lweji Wed 03-Jun-15 00:03:14

It seems to me that there are post guidelines that also applies to names.

No spam, advertising, no personally offensive posts/nns.

I'm sure Lwejiisacunt (unless it was me name changing) wouldn't be allowed.

As for swear words, MN is full of them and it's allowed, so they shouldn't be banned from NN either.

Fanjango Wed 03-Jun-15 00:07:03

This is a site for adults. If you find something unpleasant when it is not aimed at you ignore it. I would hate MN to start moderating names and swearing. There's netmums for that.

PotatoesNotProzac Wed 03-Jun-15 00:14:34

Fanjango - the point is they already do monitor usernames.

Their rules, as always, are random, unpredictable and hurtful to the affected person. But also, crucially, have a political (?) / judgemental slant to them which they shouldn't.

In the linked thread MNHQ are making a judgement call on abortions. Which they shouldn't.

GiddyOnZackHunt Wed 03-Jun-15 00:15:37

MN have responded to users' reports that they found it distressing. It would seem odd to be able to post fuck but not have it in a username.
There are many combinations of words that individually aren't offensive but when combined and popping up in the wrong context can be emotive.

RedRugNoniMouldiesEtc Wed 03-Jun-15 00:16:21

I thought it was already clear? Swearing is fine, personal attacks or offensive/upsetting names aren't. If you see anything that upsets you report and hq will take a look. Seems simple enough to me?

meglet Wed 03-Jun-15 00:17:37

I'm not offended by usernames. I've seen the other thread and knowing the back story changes things.

Fanjango Wed 03-Jun-15 00:18:44

To be fair on the thread people are saying about swear words as usernames. They have requested she change the name but she has not been forced to. Some on the thread would like to change that. If MNHQ acted upon that then they would have to do the same with names like anyfucker. I can't see the justification. Posters are suggesting a rule change by wanting the name withdrawn. I disagree

AtomicDog Wed 03-Jun-15 00:20:22

One person's hilarious is another's offensive though. And vice versa.

IgnoreMeEveryOtherReindeerDoes Wed 03-Jun-15 00:24:28

I think a hide user button would be more helpful

Mintyy Wed 03-Jun-15 00:24:42

HQ don't need to introduce guidelines.

They respond to reports from other Mumsnetters. System works fine just as it is.

PotatoesNotProzac Wed 03-Jun-15 00:26:16

Some people being offended isn't a good enough reason to censor.

Because on every issue some people will be offended. But it might be 0.001% of the population offended with 95% being very pleased to see the topic talked about in the open.

Do the people who benefit from the username (ie the topic being talked about) not also matter?

LilyBobtail Wed 03-Jun-15 00:27:00

I am not offended by them - just a little bored and disappointed. It is easy to try and be shocking using swear or trigger words in usernames. Would "rape" be allowed or "paedophile"? I hope not but it is always a tricky area where judgements of taste come into play. I do think if you have to explain why your name is ok and not offensive, it is probably not appropriate.

HeresMyBrightIdea Wed 03-Jun-15 00:28:37

If you're offended by AnyFucker's username, you should probably leave MN. You're probably going to find the contents of most posts offensive.

The name in the other thread was complained about, and requires explanation to prevent it being offensive. It's also advertising, which the OP of that thread has admitted.

Two different scenarios. We don't need to ban usernames with cunt or fuck in. Usernames that are getting complaints should be looked into.

Similarly to you not needing a list of acceptable behaviour for everyday life, but you can be damn sure the police will investigate what you've been up too if people complain. It self polices.

AnyoneForTennis Wed 03-Jun-15 00:29:26

If they start policing our usernames it will all turn pink/fluffy/sparkly

Who wants that??

RedRugNoniMouldiesEtc Wed 03-Jun-15 00:31:32

Yes, everyone has different views on what is or is not offensive or beyond the pale - hence hq having the report policy. They get final say after taking on board what people say. In this case they explained the situation to the poster and asked if she'd change. They didn't demand it. It is very different though to have several people saying "I am really uncomfortable with the name because i feel it makes light of an emotive subject" or similar than several people saying "I don't like the word fuck" one is far more valid than the other and has been treated that way.

theroundball Wed 03-Jun-15 00:43:23

When Anyfucker backs down and namechanges then others might. Until that time when hell freezes over nothing shall, or should, change. This is a site for adults. Adults swear.

There's a need for both sides of the fence, sure. There's MN for the more robust and for the more delicate, Netmums.

wannaBe Wed 03-Jun-15 00:45:31

there is a vast difference between a username which merely contains swearwords and one which is offensive/goady/provocative.

e.g. usernames with offensive disablist/racist language wouldn't be tolerated because they are offensive to some, regardless of whether they might not be to others iyswim. This is why usernames aren't policed as such but there would be an accepted code of where a line would be drawn. given that line doesn't need to be drawn often it wouldn't be something which mn hq needed to talk about unless it arose - which it has in the thread linked to above.

That username is vile and shouldn't be allowed IMO. It could be seen as being deliberately goady/offensive, so yes, I think it shouldn't be allowed.

SurlyCue Wed 03-Jun-15 00:50:20

Oh please stop! This place is being policed to death.

Want2bSupermum Wed 03-Jun-15 00:54:57

A username gives you a clue about the person behind the handle. If someone chooses something goady then so be it. They are the fools and anything they post won't be taken seriously.

Select a username that's discriminatory (I.e. Racist, disableist or otherwise) then I would prefer they are directed to another parenting website!

Want2bSupermum Wed 03-Jun-15 00:57:18

Oh and leave AF alone. Nothing wrong with that username at all. If someone selected AFisacunt then yeah I don't want that person part of our group. They can join in when they have found their brain cells and throught up a better username.

Gilrack Wed 03-Jun-15 01:14:10

This thread's giving me an almost irresistible urge to give myself a series of truly, revoltingly offensive usernames blush The only thing stopping me is the knowledge they'd stay in my nickname history for ever!

There's a Sunday Sport (or Oz, RIP) subeditor living in a corner of my brain somewhere ... he tends to wake up and get busy when faced with bosom-hoiking Outrageds of Orpington and their disgusted pals from Tunbridge Wells. "Offensive?" he sniggers; "I'll show them offensive! Stick something up their prissy arses, I will ..." and unleashes a volcano of Seriously Offensive Usernames into my bewildered mind.

So - yes. Please stop grin

ToastedOrFresh Wed 03-Jun-15 02:27:27

AnyFucker's name is offensive. I won't be leaving Mumsnet because of it or her posts.

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