Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

MNHQ have commented on this thread

MNHQ have commented on this thread

Site stuff

Deleting disablist posts/comments.

24 replies

AliceInUnderpants · 17/02/2017 21:19

I've reported a few posts today for disablist language/ignorance, which have been dealt with - thank you.
I did wonder, though, was it not agreed that deletion messages would reinforce the message that these type of comments would not be tolerated, rather than just linking to the Talk Guidelines that no-one reads?

OP posts:

Report

AliceInUnderpants · 19/02/2017 22:52

Bumping and reporting again, as for some reason it's being ignored.

OP posts:

beanfilledfish · 19/02/2017 22:59

reporting posts that get deleted just jumble up threads. it's better to argue on thread what's annoying otherwise people have no idea what was said!

AliceInUnderpants · 19/02/2017 23:07

Huh?

OP posts:

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 13:28

MNHQ??

OP posts:

CosyNook · 20/02/2017 13:40

It really depends on what is being discussed. Threads usually descend into arguments over hidden disabilities - you can't really move on from there.

Surely its better to discuss 'language/ignorance' rather that some posters just rushing to report when they start losing the discussion.

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 13:51

I'm not disputing the need for posters to report comments, or not.

I am questioning that it had been agreed that posters would be getting told WHY their comments were breaking Talk Guidelines, with a very clear message that it was unacceptable.

Do you think these messages are being deleted because people are "losing the discussion"?

OP posts:

CosyNook · 20/02/2017 14:00

Yes, sometimes. You can have an average, run of the mill thread and then someone says 'may be they have hidden disabilities'. End of thread. If you dare to mention, consider or suggest anything different then straight away some accuses you and presses report..

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 14:39

With respect, in regards to the deletions I am referring to, I'm wholly glad that MNHQ disagree with you.

OP posts:

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 14:48

Be fair Alice, you know threads you are referring to, others have no idea!

Trigger happy reporting of posts can be seen as censorship so, regardless of how offended you may fell it could be better to leave the disagreement public.

That your OP here says you have reported people for 'ignorance' is somewhat astonishing! You want to police a public forum based on your personal take on other people's lack of knowledge?

Astonishing!

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 14:50

Bumping and reporting again, as for some reason it's being ignored. I just noticed the time of that post!

Get a grip! An hour before midnight on a Sunday and you waited what, an hour and a half before demanding a response?

LouKout · 20/02/2017 14:50

If you are merely mentioning hidden disabilities then you wouldnt be deleted even if someone did report you.

LouKout · 20/02/2017 14:51

Or rather making an innocuous comment not thinking about hidden disabilities.

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 15:08

Wow, serious lack of reading comprehension here. Monday feeling everyone?

Our Blanche
The disablist ignorance was deleted - so MNHQ obviously agree that it broke Talk Guidelines. I am questioning the deletion message as it was agreed or maybe even proposed by MNHQ that these messages would include a bit about disablist comments being unacceptable on these forums. It certainly was not trigger happy reporting of posts, but in this instance I refer to two reports, of two separate comments, on two separate threads, which contained disablist language that MNHQ agreed wasn't acceptable, yet failed to follow their own guidelines of specifying to the poster why it was deleted.

And Fri 17-Feb-17 21:19:56 to Sun 19-Feb-17 22:52:17, I think you'll find is slightly more than 1 1/2 hours, so maybe actually read first before you start "demanding" someone to "get a grip" for their "astonishing" posts.

OP posts:

LouKout · 20/02/2017 15:12

I think one persons being deleted for daring not not consider hidden disabilities is anothers posting very disablist things and getting rightfully deleted.

Alice IMO you make a good point.

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 15:19

Why the assumption that the comments I reported were related to hidden disablities?

IIRC, one of them in particular was someone stating that someone with a serious (and life threatening) disablity could do something regardless of their disability if "they only wanted to".

OP posts:

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 15:22

Shoot me now... too much looking at the minutia - time - and not enough on the big stuff - day of the week. Sorry Alice

But, again, as only you can be sure which thread/posts you are referring to you are only going to get generalised responses... which you seem to want to take personally!

Your point, that MNHQ have said they will make a more definite deletion message, is getting lost beneath the way you are stating it!

Try conversing instead of demanding.

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 15:24

Had you included that in your OP posters may well have responded quite differently!

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 15:31

It was for the attention of MNHQ, who will be aware of the posts I'm referring to.

I didn't mention any specifics, as it is not a TAAT.

OP posts:

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 15:34

Out of interest... why didn't you just email them?

Then no one would have responded to the thread at all. You could have told MNHQ that you were irritated without having to put up with other people 'butting in'!

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 15:47

I had my browser open at the time, but not my email client. There was also the chance that someone who actually read this thread could have directed me towards something where MNHQ retracted the decision to implement those deletion messages.

HTH.

If you are still spoiling for a thread, I'm sure there's many others where your input would be welcomed.

OP posts:

AliceInUnderpants · 20/02/2017 15:47

*spoiling for a fight, dammit.

OP posts:

OurBlanche · 20/02/2017 16:01

Spoiling for a fight?

More, confused why you are so oddly PA in your postings... There was also the chance that someone who actually read this thread could have directed me towards something where MNHQ retracted the decision to implement those deletion messages.

Why consider some sort of retraction, conspiracy theory, skullduggery? Why not user error or, given your OP was late on Friday night that MNHQ are currently discussing your post and, once a couple of working days have passed they may get back to you.

Or that they have decided that they won't! Their playground and all that!

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

AmyGMumsnet · 21/02/2017 16:15

Hi, sorry for the delay in coming back to you on this one.

The standard deletion message on the reported posts was an oversight; we've fixed this now.

OurBlanche · 21/02/2017 16:16

So... User Error then

Flip

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.