Posters changing names just to be goady...(11 Posts)
MNHQ have commented on this thread.
MNHQ, this site seems completely peppered with people who post threads on inflammatory subjects, couching their posts in such terms so as not to be immediately obvious, but the intent is there and it's obvious. It's really putting me off this site as a waste of time as the balance of people who are 'real' seems to be tipped in favour of trolls.
I understand why there is a need to be able to change a username BUT, if somebody does that just to be trollish and they're a regular, it might actually pull them up short if they realised that they ran the risk of their regular username being posted on the thread by MNHQ. Any chance?
If you think that's going on, report the post.
MNHQ will investigate, and then can warn or ban (which ought to be enough of a deterrent).
I don't like the idea of a public pillorying at all.
I do. I think the name-changing is out of control and is bringing the site down. If everybody was warned that name-changing just for 'kicks' will/could result in being named, it would just stop. That's hardly public pillorying.
If MNHQ see that the trollish behaviour is a regular, they are more likely to let the thread stand.
If you report you will get a 'the OP is a regular poster on MN so we see no problems our end'
Agreed, Usual, that seems to be exactly what happens. Also the 'We'll keep an eye on this, thanks for reporting'. I'm fed up of it.
They deserve a public pillorying IMO. They are quick enough to name change and pillory others or start threads designed to upset others.
Hi folks. This does come up a lot. We know that the facility to name-change at will has its pros and cons but by and large it isn't something that is often abused.
When we do see it, please don't think we just let it go. Yes, we tend to not just zap on sight if we can see the poster has been around a while - we do think there is a difference between a regular having a bad day, or maybe just an opinion they know won't be popular and someone joining up simply to wind everyone up. When we do spot regulars being deliberately inflammatory, repeatedly, under various name changes and using the facility to goad or inflame, we always make a note and if it seems to be a pattern rather than a one-off, we will have a word, and sometimes we go on to ban them.
We're sorry we can't always fill everyone in on exactly what goes on behind the scenes, but often when we say 'thanks we'll keep an eye or take a look' a lot more goes on in the hours and days afterwards that we obviously can't follow up with every reporter so please don't think your reports aren't having an effect - they are very much appreciated.
By publicly naming and shaming we run the risk that we'll get it wrong sometimes and upset someone who for whatever reason wanted a bit of anonymity. We don't, after all, know what goes on it any poster's real life from day to day, so it does seem a little like using a mallet to crack peanut when there is already the deterrent of being temporarily banned or (much worse) a terse email from the terrifying RebeccaMumsnet.
Please do continue to report any of these posts you have in mind. We might well just say 'thanks we'll have a gander' but that doesn't mean we won't appreciate another report ten seconds later saying 'look they're at it again!' It all helps us build up a clear picture and make better decisions.
Hello IonaMumsnet, thanks for your reply.
It's not my job or within my gift to tell you how to run your own site and I hope it didn't come across that way.
I'm a bit puzzled by some of the points that you've made because I cannot see the difference between somebody who is a) new who joins to be goady and b) a regular who name changes to be goady. I know there are both a) and b) on this site and quite frankly, I have more 'respect' for a) because it's far worse to post alongside somebody who is a 'regular' on issues, whatever they are and for them then to change name JUST to goad is cowardly and, to coin the MNHQ phrase, 'beyond the pale'.
A regular having an 'off day' is just that, having an 'off day'. Why do they need to change to post threads just to inflame and upset? Can't they just post in their normal name, be told to stop being a dick, apologise and carry on posting with perhaps a bit more measure? Why do they need this 'protection' from MNHQ when it comes at such a cost to others who have to ready the purposely posted goady threads - and not realise that it's possibly their day to day alongside fellow posters who are doing it? That makes no sense to me at all. It doesn't matter what is going on behind the scenes and I'm not going to even ask but I don't see why this pervasive cowardice is tolerated and even expected.
For all the negativity and wanting to shy away from 'naming and shaming', I would expect any regular worth their salt to hold their hands up if they're called on goady name-changing. If it were me, far from being angry or sad about it, I'd be embarrassed and wouldn't do it again.
If it were clearly stated that goady name-changing will be revealed, the practice would stop, I'm convinced of that.
Thanks anyway for taking the time, Iona. I think that HelenMumsnet is more scarey than RebeccaMumsnet anyway... >>> runs
I read a thread the other day where some posters mentioned there are regulars who have two different personas on here, a nice one and a nasty one and found the concept utterly bizarre.
Surely your posts on something just give your genuine opinion, why the need to create a different persona to inflame people.
I can understand the need to post in a different name about some subjects because you would rather people didn't associate you with that experience or opinion. Having a different username just to be a goady fucker is not on really and I agree with LyingWitchInTheWardr
I don't think posting on thread is going to happen and I don't agree with outing another posting name on thread anyway. But I think an email from MNHQ asking for an explanation if there is a pattern of goady behaviour from a regular in a different name would be good.
How about a 'Russian Roulette' then? You goad, you run the risk of being outed.
Or how about MNHQ just be entirely consistent and take action with goady post(er)s that leaves no wiggle room and is entirely fair. You don't need to be goady just because you're having a bad day. Punch a pillow (thanks, Worra for that one) or eat chocolate (myriad posters) - don't post to be offensive. That's really quite straightforward, I would have thought.
MNHQ: you're developing/already have a reputation for not treating posters the same. That's in nobody's interests and it's unfair. Ultimately, posters will either leave or stay but if they stay they'll engage less on the things that you want them to be interested in and/or they'll tail off altogether.
It needs to be fair across the board, whatever your policy is. FAIR.
Thanks for all the thoughts here.
Please be assured that no matter how long someone's posting history - we take action as needed if someone is being a goady fucker.
And it's very hard for MNHQ to be "entirely consistent" as we are not one person- but a collective of folk. Added to which the decisions to delete or ban someone are worked on a case by case basis, looking at the context of the thread and whether someone has genuinely name changed to crowd check an opinion or whether they've joined to stir.
We know we don't always get it right, but we do try bloody hard to do so and we're always ready to apologise and fix it when we don't.
Thanks again, please please please do keep the reports coming in - we can't ban the feckers if y'all don't let us know they're goading
Join the discussion
Please login first.