Private section?

[WankingMonkey]

I am relatively new here but have already seen many posters upset at their advice seeking thread being picked up by the mail and printed, and others recognizing themselves in the story. I do realise this is a public forum and technically anything you put out there is public, but anyone seeking advice is unlikely to think 'oh, this will end up on my sisters coffee table tomorrow' or anything.

Is there any chance of getting a private section for sensitive advice? Obviously 'journalists' could get round this too but its not as likely as them scouring the normal sections. I am thinking maybe members with over 50 posts can read/reply to the private section?

I expect this has probably been mentioned before though and rejected...but just incase it hasn't

[JustAnotherSadOldNumber]

Daily Mail reporters are signed up members just like everyone else.

[WankingMonkey]

Actually posting members though? I was contacted by a reporter about a thread I made and it was a member with no posts who just PMed me asking if they could run a story. Obviously not the mail though as they don't ask :S

[SirChenjin]

I do see where you're coming from OP, but whilst I am as fed up as the rest of MN with the DM running these stories I do think it's a salutary lesson for us all.

[JustAnotherSadOldNumber]

yeah, you just have to name change when asking for permission to publish.

[DramaInPyjamas]

There's a private section called 'off the beaten track' which is invisible on google and in active convos, but anyone can post there.


Journalists could easily rack up 50posts in order to get around that rule, I don't think that would work

[Manumission]

Best not to name it Drama?

[Saucery]

It's a false sense of security to see that section as Safe. It is still accessible to all, just not searchable. If journalists wanted to lift something from there they would know it exists by looking through the Topics List and they would right ahead.

[meditrina]

MN is an open website, and what you are suggesting is incompatible with that, as there just aren't the structures to vet or validate posters.

Anyone can join and post anodyne bollocks for a while and be 'accepted' as a normal MNetter. Doesn't stop them being either a troll or a harvesting journo.

If you want a safe space, you need to seek out more closed sites which validate their membership and whose forums are not browsable by non-members.

[WankingMonkey]

OK, was just a thought. I am not concerned about a 'safe space' as such for myself, as things I post I don't mind being public otherwise I wouldn't post them. I mainly posted this because of a thread I was posting on today that I have a horrible feeling could end up being published as its 'that shocking'. The person posted for support and advice and I doubt they have considered their husband may well read it tomorrow in his morning paper :S

[Manumission]

The thread about sleeping?

[ErrolTheDragon]

I believe one of the objections to something like the 50 post rule is that the threads which are liable to be picked up by scummy 'journalists' and/or contain identifying information are very likely to come from people who may have lurked but not posted before, because they are desperate for help.

[WankingMonkey]

Yes the sleeping thread. I realize now she has apparently shown her husband the thread, but its still going to be awful to potentially have that splashed all over the paper. And I do think there's a chance she did not show her husband it either..I know I wouldn't have.

[CockacidalManiac]

There are already journalists here; I saw one admit it on a thread earlier. Best just to assume that nowhere is safe.
Especially OTBT.

[Manumission]

@ I saw one admit it on a thread earlier.

There's journalists and then there's journalists.

I know a LOT of journos. I even married one. I don't know any who do this weird forum-dredging stuff.