Buildteam thread

(6 Posts)
whatsthatcomingoverthehill Fri 29-Apr-16 13:18:39

MNHQ, you've been pretty quiet about this, but surely you need to be a bit more proactive about standing up for people's rights to post?

Daisy123abc Fri 29-Apr-16 18:45:50

Hi Wtchth,
I guess Mumsnet have to remain neutral and just follow the law with all these things which I do understand. They have corresponded with me as per their protocols alerting me to the accusations and informing me of the necessary facts. However, they can't and shouldn't take sides, even though I really and desperately feel that I want someone in my camp. By deleting the specific post in question it did mean that the thread was able to remain; battered and bruised as it might be now but at least it is still there as evidence to others which is what this is all about. Buildteam have replied to my husbands Google review criticising his use of pseudonyms (snort) and saying sternly that they don't conduct dispute resolution on forums.(tut tut) I should hope not. We are certainly not interested in that either, but we would like to hold things up to the light in the interest of the freedom of public information. Our experience in seeking resolution hit the bumpers some time ago. Hence the whole thing.
I would like to establish if there is someone to oversee the rights of the individual in this case as given all the evidence that has come to light today it is starting to feel like targeted online bullying by a person or persons unknown. Have internet police been invented yet? lol

Daisy123abc Fri 29-Apr-16 19:02:32

Btw - in case someone is wondering what on earth we are talking about here is a link to the original "high drama" discussion thread.
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/property/2533596-Buildteam-Clapham-based-company-Side-return-specialists?watched=1&msgid=60767127#60767127

whatsthatcomingoverthehill Fri 29-Apr-16 19:32:54

That's the thing though Daisy, the copyright claim was so clearly ludicrous that MNHQ should look into it and decide for themselves. That isn't taking sides but judging the situation on its merits. At some point MNHQ shouldn't just bow down to this sort of bullying.

Daisy123abc Fri 29-Apr-16 20:20:07

That's true, and think I agree. Will someone read this and take note do you think?
I did email MN two long missives hoping that as such a successful organisation they might have an independent adjudicator. However perhaps as the original accusation of libel still stands I assume that MN are being cautious in challenging the mighty Google. However I have evidence to justify all my comments and have offered to share this with anyone who cares to see it. An independent blog and Facebook also tell a tale. After the last 24 hours it is no longer just about the poor quality of the build but now about something entirely different.

sorenipples Thu 12-May-16 11:42:27

Just bumping this up and hoping MN have read it and the thread in property. They may not feel able to comment, but they should be aware of the practice of DMCA abuse. This could get used against all aspects of the website, not just negative reviews.

Aside I think it is lazy journalism that the daily mail is picking up about emails from brides but not this. I guess they don't expect anything juicy in the property forum!

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