To Think HQ Need To Change Their Deletion Policy

[Waltermittythesequel]

Unless I've missed something, which is possible.

The party line was always that they wouldn't delete threads just because OP wants them to.

But that's exactly what they do now. Every single time OP gets in a snit, the thread is gone.

If that's their new policy, fine. Their site, they can do what they want.

But, the deletion message still reads that they don't usually delete threads, but will when a poster's privacy is at risk (or whatever).

So, AIBU to think they should either change their deletion message to "OP wanted the thread deleted" or stop doing it?!

[SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius]

I agree, Walter. Frankly, I think there is a place for this message, on some occasions:

"Thread hasn't gone as the OP wanted, so they are throwing a hissy fit, and we have decided to delete it to stop the tantrum"!

[LikeDylanInTheMovies]

Yep. Make it clear that the op is having a tantrum rather than privacy concerns. Either that or be clear that privacy concerns are limited to a)disclosure of address, full name, children's full names,
b)bank details or exact place of work
c) there's a threat to life or limb,
d) an ongoing court case

not I've made myself look a complete bellpiece on the internet and I want to kick over the tracks '

[HarryPottersMagicWand]

I agree.

I have stupidly put more info than I wanted before after posters kept asking questions and I answered, unfortunately my way is to be very honest, then I panicked and realised it was there forever more. I have had these deleted. I am since more careful and if in doubt, I don't post it.

Now I either NC or stick to chat where it will go.

I wonder if you are talking about the thread I was on. I've seen it was deleted. I know the OP got slaughtered and I'm not sure why they expected different tbh. I was very disappointed to see the deletion as there was nothing outing on there at all.

[AnyFucker]

Privacy reasons ?

Pull the other one....

[LagunaBubbles]

YANBU.

[ilovesooty]

Don't know which thread it was but it seems clear that MNHQ do delete because the OP has a hissy fit. I agree that they might as well post that they've deleted to stop the tantrum. If they have to do that I reckon they should consider a temporary ban if the same poster wastes their time by doing it again

[moomoo222]

Absolutely agree YANBU.

For example

Thread deletion becuase: "selfish, delusional attention seeking OP has thrown her toys out of the pram because the majority of posters quite rightly thought she was being a self-centred thoughtless amoral twunt and told her so"

doesn't seem like a fair enough reason for deletion MNHQ?

Y'know, not in any way talking about a specific thread here of course, just in general that kind of justification from an stroppy OP doesn't seem like a good reason, if every OP who didn't get their views entirely validated and just got ((hugs)) then this place would turn into nuthuns surely?

[tofutti]

Oooh how could I have missed these threads...

can someone give me a hint?

I agree btw

[LikeDylanInTheMovies]

I don't think it is any particular thread, but a trend that's happened over the past year or so.

[Soubriquet]

[[http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/site_stuff/2726295-Oh-come-on-MNHQ I actually started this a while ago] and MNHQ promised they would start to change their deletion message

[Soubriquet]

ah let's try again

[Waltermittythesequel]

Yes, it's not just that one thread, they are constantly doing it now.

TBH, I think they do it because it's just easier/less time-consuming to delete rather than investigate.

But it's so very annoying that they still post the same deletion message! When everyone on the thread (like one today for example) knows there is jack shit identifying about it, and it is a poster tantrum.

I don't like how disingenuous it is. Surely it can't be that hard to change their deletion message?!

"OP wanted this deleted, so it's gone." Simple.

The problem, I think, is that they still want to maintain the illusion that they don't delete threads on a poster's whim. And that's dishonest.

[Waltermittythesequel]

I remember your thread, Soub.

You were completely fobbed off, obviously, as it's still going on.

[Soubriquet]

Yep.

[crashdoll]

YANBU it should be something like "OP didn't like the responses and threw a tantrum, so for an easy life, we have deleted this".

[Waltermittythesequel]

I've reported my OP so hopefully there'll be an answer.

And not a non-answer like the last time!

[ThoraGruntwhistle]

Is that why the thread about packed lunches disappeared?

[Waltermittythesequel]

I don't know Thora but I do know that this is absolutely not a TAAT and therefore should not be deleted.

[ThoraGruntwhistle]

Perish the thought, this is clearly definitely not a TAAT at all

[Redglitter]

I've just seen the deletion message on a thread where the op gave no identifying features and admitted she couldn't discuss the situation with rl friends. Thread didn't go her way and suddenly there's privacy issues. Uhuh

[Waltermittythesequel]

Arf that's perfect!

The privacy issue thing is what really gets me. So very lazy. Just bloody change the message!

Or, at least, be honest and say "we couldn't really be arsed with the hassle of keeping threads anymore so from now on, OPs can have their threads deleted."

Perhaps people wouldn't be happy about that, but at least we'd all know where we stand!

[RortyCrankle]

Couldn't agree more. It's so obvious when an OP has given more private details than wise and its totally reasonable for MNHQ to close the thread.

It is NOT right that they close threads where the OP doesn't get the response they expected, drip feeds in desperation and then throws a tantrum if people still say they are U.

[Waltermittythesequel]

I've reported a couple of posts on this thread asking them to clarify their position.

Wonder will we hear from them.