MNHQ asleep on the job again!!!

(15 Posts)
Baconyum Mon 14-Mar-16 16:21:37

I'm on a thread discussing the possible sexual abuse of a 12 year old. There have been some really shocking victim blaming and donnot believe the victim posts, I have reported these. It took several hours till I got a response at all from MNHQ which was a standard (automated) we're looking at it email. Nothing has been said on the thread and no posts deleted.

This is on the back of a situation a few weeks ago where a poster was hounded by another poster and I learnt that MNHQ don't monitor 24/7 not even a skeleton staff but rely on volunteers that don't have the power to do much.

One of the pieces of advice on the thread I'm on is for the accuser to be in the room while the accuser is confronted about the allegations!

MNHQ WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!

DawnMumsnet (MNHQ) Mon 14-Mar-16 20:16:58

So sorry for the delay here, Baconyum,

Unfortunately we've been under a hugely increased workload over the weekend and have been doing our best to get things back under control.

We have now removed a number of posts from the thread in question and have posted to explain our position.

lougle Mon 14-Mar-16 21:14:30

How rude did you intend to be Baconyum?

This is a forum. Not a court of law. Victim blaming is very unpleasant but it's not an emergency situation. Posters need to take responsibility for their own wellbeing and if something upsets them, they need to close the thread and do something in RL instead.

Sparklingbrook Mon 14-Mar-16 21:32:27

Agree Lougle.

PurpleDaisies Mon 14-Mar-16 22:28:27

Having read the thread, I agree with baconyum that some of the posts were absolutely beyond the pale. How anyone can advise someone to ignore their daughter's allegations of inappropriate touching because she has had mental issues is beyond me. There were other incredibly dangerous posts advising the op to investigate herself. Other posters basically said that if the op had no suspicions about her mother the girl was probably lying.

Would MNHQ like to clarify its position in letting posts which effectively tell people to ignore allegations of child abuse stand on the site? I know you've removed some posts but there are many others remaining which still advise the op not to involve the police.

Baconyum Tue 15-Mar-16 00:04:20

Yes I think it's a good idea to see the thread that initially prompted me to put this post. There have also been concerns raised by myself and several others regards the monitoring of the site by MNHQ particularly at nights and weekends and response times.

"Would MNHQ like to clarify its position in letting posts which effectively tell people to ignore allegations of child abuse stand on the site?"

Yes I'm interested in a response to this too.

In addition the nature of the site is such that other people reading could be in similar situations and some of the advice is genuinely dangerous both for the accuser and accused.

IPityThePontipines Tue 15-Mar-16 16:27:34

In addition the nature of the site is such that other people reading could be in similar situations and some of the advice is genuinely dangerous both for the accuser and accused.

There is a lot of very stupid and ill informed advice given on Mumsnet, regardless of the severity of the subject.

MNHQ can delete for a breach of talk guidelines, but they can't delete comments for the stupidity of their contents.

People need to be careful about having expectations of the site that cannot be met. MN is not safe space and you really don't know who is posting on it and why.

Baconyum Fri 18-Mar-16 03:11:33

They can be aware of what is happening on their site they make money from which yet again tonight they are not. Several disturbing threads posted and not removed presumably because nobody paid is watching and the night watch volunteers don't have the power.

sofato5miles Fri 18-Mar-16 04:20:29

I agree with IPitythePontipines. MN is not a safe place. It is effectively a massive anonymous gossip site. Some advice is excellent but many posters post nonsense too.

Posters can have unreasonably high expectations of this site. I find admin (MN Towers) particularly involved and approachable, especially considering the size of the site.

MattDillonsPants Fri 18-Mar-16 04:52:30

Lougle MNHQ do have a responsibility to stay on top of things. Especially when there is victim blaming going on....and the victim is a CHILD!

IPityThePontipines Fri 18-Mar-16 11:28:09

Lougle MNHQ do have a responsibility to stay on top of things.

No they don't. Mumsnet is a talk board and that's it. They do not have any responsibility for the well-being of the users of this board.

Baconyum Fri 18-Mar-16 16:11:24

They have a responsibility for what is available to read.

I've had emails from MNHQ today apologising for their lack of response claiming they're 'on the case' when they're blatantly not and I'm far from the only one concerned about this, there was a thread the other week about the nightwatch not being able to delete threads or do very much at all really yet this is what mnhq rely on.

trollopolis Fri 18-Mar-16 16:13:23

"MN is not a safe place. It is effectively a massive anonymous gossip site. Some advice is excellent but many posters post nonsense too."

I think this is a good way of putting it.

lougle Fri 18-Mar-16 16:23:58

There is the notion that they are the publisher of posts on the site, which is what caused all the hassle with SWMNBN. However, members and lurkers also have the responsibility to read with caution and step away if it causes them distress.

I was given a book for Mothers Day. A Martina Cole book. I've read and enjoyed a couple of her books and this one was 821 pages long, so I was excited. I felt repulsed within 5-6 pages. I carried on reading (probably because I don't like to waste books) but earlier I said to DH 'I'm reading this, but please don't get me any more MC books. They're too dark.' He said 'OK, but stop reading that one too. There's no point reading it if it makes you feel bad.' He's right! I have a choice.

So yes, MNHQ need to act if posts contravene their policies. But actually, victim blaming isn't against the law, and while MNHQ ran a 'we believe you' campaign, I'm not sure that victim blaming is expressly against their T&Cs. So until they delete such posts, readers need to be able to close or even hide a thread if it's too distressing for them.

SilverBirchWithout Fri 18-Mar-16 19:44:51

I felt the same as Baconym about the specific thread she mentions.It needed a much swifter response.

Also recently,, there has been a spate of CSA themed threads started in the late evening by trolls or attracting troll-like posters. Some have been pretty foul and I do feel leaving these to run for several hours, when a number of naive posters get drawn in, leaves MN's reputation very exposed indeed.

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