Talk

Advanced search

Thread about a thread

(22 Posts)
bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 14:07:40

Mnhq - do you always delete threads about threads as a matter of course?

What should a person do if they want to discuss a spin-off subject without hijacking the original thread?

Please clarify.

Maryz Sat 01-Oct-11 14:42:21

I agree with this MNHQ, it is important that people should be able to go off on a tangent on a different thread, to avoid derailing the original thread, isn't it? Bibbity's thread was very balanced for the most part.

In this case, Bibbity's thread took the heat off the original thread (which is still there). It has become impossible on some threads to post an opinion which is opposite to the majority view (or in fact, often not the majority, but the over-riding view, often pushed and pushed repeatedly by one or two vociferous posters). Anyone disagreeing is called a bully, which is unfair, and then if the whole thread is pulled it makes it look as though the cries of "bully" are justified.

And when the thread is deleted, anyone can say whatever they like about the content of it, and no-one can defend themselves.

If all that makes sense confused.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 14:44:08

It depends, bobbity.

We say in our Talk Guidelines and I quote <clears throat pompously>: "If a thread is deleted, please resist the temptation to start a new one repeating and rehashing everything that has been deleted: most Mumsnetters consider that to be very bad manners and, of course, it's highly likely that the new thread will be deleted, too."

And it's the same with threads about threads that haven't been deleted, really.

So, it's not on to start a thread about a thread purely to bitch about discuss the posts/posters on the other thread.

But it's fine to start a thread following on from another thread - and discussing a general issue that the other thread might have provoked.

The thread about a thread that was deleted last night was fine to start with, I think (though I wasn't here <gallivanting about emoticon>) but it then became so peppered with personal and specific references to the other thread and posters on the other thread that it had to be deleted.

bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 14:52:48

confused.

Some of us are sorry that the thread has gone. As I understand it, a couple of posters started arguing amongst themselves - surely if their comments breached talk guidelines, then they could have been deleted. The rest of the thread was quite worthwhile, I would have thought (though I do say so myself).

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 14:57:13

We def agree that the rest of the thread was worthwhile, bibbity.

But, as well as the poster-to-poster fisticuffs, there was quite a lot of naming of the OP of the orig thread and comments on her situation.

The (very lovely and hard-working) MNHQer on duty took the decision that deleting all the bunfight stuff and all the orig-OP comments would take an age and would only render the thread incomprehensible. So the thread was deleted.

Do please feel free to start a new thread, though. We really don't want to censor discussion.

Maryz Sat 01-Oct-11 14:59:41

But would it not have been better to issue a stern warning, and ask people not to refer directly to the other thread (I don't think it was even linked, and people were saying "the op" not naming her)?

Plus delete the private argument at the end (and maybe have a look at the origins for that elsewhere, as it seemed a little odd confused).

The thread as a whole was very informative, and even though a few of us had minor tiffs, the vast, vast majority of posters learned something from "the other side of the argument" as it were.

bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 15:00:06

No, the irony is that I think the discussion had come to a natural end with just a bit of unpleasantness at the end. Shame that that had to wipe out all the effort people had made in sharing and putting their thoughts/feelings in writing.

bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 15:01:18

My "no" was to Helen's comment about starting another thread. Obviously I agree with you Mary!

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 15:02:04

Maryz

But would it not have been better to issue a stern warning, and ask people not to refer directly to the other thread (I don't think it was even linked, and people were saying "the op" not naming her)?

That's not quite right, Maryz. There were many references to MrsX...

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 15:03:00

bibbitybobbityhat

No, the irony is that I think the discussion had come to a natural end with just a bit of unpleasantness at the end. Shame that that had to wipe out all the effort people had made in sharing and putting their thoughts/feelings in writing.

Fair enough, bibbity. And we're sorry to have upset you. That wasn't our intention at all.

We'll definitely take your comments on board.

bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 15:04:33

Hmm. Well. Thank you for replying.

Hullygully Sat 01-Oct-11 15:06:16

Bibs can be quite scary can't she?

Maryz Sat 01-Oct-11 15:06:58

Ok, sorry, I didn't notice and I didn't name her myself [preens], so assumed others hadn't.

It's a shame.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 15:14:29

bibbitybobbityhat

Hmm. Well. Thank you for replying.

A pleasure. <bit leery of the hmm. must try harder>

Hullygully Sat 01-Oct-11 15:17:48

See? Scary.

HelenMumsnet (MNHQ) Sat 01-Oct-11 15:20:06

Hullygully

See? Scary.

<quivers>

lec0rnsillk Sat 01-Oct-11 15:20:24

wot woz the thread about?

Hullygully Sat 01-Oct-11 15:22:22

you may well ask.

Maryz Sat 01-Oct-11 15:23:19

[wibbles].

lec, DON'T ask. It will be a thread about a thread then, and Helen will have to get rid of it. Her big red button finger is almost worn out, poor thing.

bibbitybobbityhat Sat 01-Oct-11 15:23:29

Don't ask! it doesn't matter, its gorn.

lec0rnsillk Sat 01-Oct-11 15:26:08

okay [sigh]

FellatioNelson Sat 01-Oct-11 21:02:05

I think I may have referenced the OP of the other thread by name. I did it because it seemed a bit impersonal and snotty to just call her the OP all the time. I wondered if she might be reading it and so I wanted it to seem like we still had her well-being in mind, rather than discussing her like a specimen, no matter what side of the divide we were on. I apologise if that contributed to the thread going. It's a shame as we were all simmering down and sharing chocolate and cigarettes, like the Germans and the and British in the trenches on Christmas Day in WWI, although I think we had naked dancing rather than football, iirc.

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