The MNHQ Moderation team

[BarrackerBarmer]

Dear MNHQ

I'm very grateful for the commitment to free speech you've publicly taken, and for Justine's courage this week.

A former disgruntled employee of MN is writing on Twitter about the 'transphobia' of MN staff, and calling you TERFs. She is showing a great deal of bias and intolerance towards women with feminist views, this may well be her honest opinion, which is no big deal I suppose, since she is no longer an employee.

At least, it isn't an issue until she calls a shout out to her
'friends who still work at MN' to report and take down posts by 'transphobic scum', by which she appears to be referring to any poster objecting to being called TERF by her friend.

Regardless of the personal views of the MNHQ staff, who should be as free to hold their own views as I am mine, I am disturbed that there may be a small contingent of employees who are invested in unfair moderation and will not be applying fair-handed principles, at least if the claims of this ex-employee are credible.

Can you please give posters some reassurance that the difficult job of fair-handed moderation isn't being abused by the 'friends' of ex-employees who are 'reporting it all' and taking down posts because any gender criticism means the poster is 'transphobic scum'?

Thank you.

[Freshlylaidterf]

agree entirely

[NotTerfNorCis]

Calling people scum for political views that are actually very mainstream (eg women don't have penises) is quite... worrying.

[FloraFox]

She has also posted screenshots of MN which seem to have been taken while she was logged in as a moderator. I note that one of the buttons is "User Details".

Can MNHQ clarify for us what a moderator sees when they click on that link?

[FloraFox]

screenshot

[rememberthetime]

Impartiality is an important aspect of being a moderator- and I am sure they are all employed knowing this to be the case. I suspect this might just be posturing by the tweeter. I haven't seen any examples of posts being removed unnecessarily and if there was it would be obvious which moderator did it. I am sure they have to justify it every time because it's about free speech and that's important.

Maybe MN can clarify the process for us.

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

Wow, this is quite something.
So these people have access to our data?

[LadyMcLadyCrisps]

Yikes... that is really dodgy. Could this ex employee/current ones be doxxing people?

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

This is very concerning, and I hope MN post on this thread. I'd imagine this person is just venting and making threats, and that they don't really have a gang of secret squirrels in MNHQ, but it would be nice if MNHQ could reassure.

[NauticalDisaster]

So, has she kept screenshots from her time working at MNHQ and is now posting them? That would seem to be somewhat of a data breach and actionable. What other information might she have taken and shared elsewhere?

[womanformallyknownaswoman]

Is that a user's IP address in that screenshot?

Really this is doxxing and I hope they prosecute whoever posted these screens - surely her work contract prevent this type of harassment by proxy plus revealing MN's confidential information as well as users?

I would like to know what steps MN take to ensure consistency of moderator interpretation of their policies plus how they police trolling by mob reporting.

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

This makes me wonder about the threats I received (offline but alluded to my online activity) last week.

[GinaCarbonara]

Those are very recent screenshots. When did she actually leave?

[BarrackerBarmer]

I am also very interested and concerned about what a moderator sees when they press that "user details" button.

Clearly, whilst working as a mod, this employee chose to screengrab and then publicise on social media individual poster's comments with characterisations of "transphobic scum"

Did this person have access to personal user details?

Because their integrity is certainly under question right now, and posters have a right to be concerned if mods with an axe to grind against particular posters have access to their personal details.

[OlennasWimple]

I'm going to tag @JustineMN (I think that works)

Maybe this should be in Site Stuff, as the issues about moderators goes beyond this board

[BarrackerBarmer]

Her twitter feed says she left in March 2018.
Last month.

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

Did this person have access to personal user details?

Well they certainly had access to IP addresses as the screen shot shows. Which obviously is not unusual for a moderator but I’m pretty sure they are in some deep shit legally for publishing it.

[StealthNinjaMum]

Thanks for drawing attention to this - very useful thread.

I have just reported this thread to get some attention. I would be very concerned if these person did have access to our personal information.

[CircleSquareCircleSquare]

There are screenshots from April this year.
If this person left before then does she still has access to the site or are is there a mole sending stuff (i.e. personal data) out?

[NauticalDisaster]

I’ve reported the thread in hopes that MNHQ can answer us and possibly take action on twitter if petsonal information, i.e. ip addresses, has been leaked by an ex-employee.

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

I reported it too - if my email address is linked to my profile here it could cause me issues

[RefuseToDenounceBiology]

Yikes!

[RosenbergW]

Wtaf. What is the potential here for a data leak specifically targetted at gender critical and radical feminist women, in this climate where violence against us is being encouraged and celebrated??

[TheyBuiltThePyramids]

That is horrific!