To ask Mumsnet why it hasn't implemented the ID check requirements on its adult content threads

No, of course not. No-one is infallible and that includes Mumsnet staff.

Are you reporting these threads? And they're ignoring you? Or do they get back to tell you they disagree with your viewpoint? I've always had a quick reply when reporting a thread. Mostly to say it's been removed, occasionally to say they see my point but will let it stand.

I'm not sure that you posting that you don't think its real really helps the wider community tbh. It just starts a row on the thread, pushing it up, keeping it active. Also, it's not you job to moderate the threads in that way. Report and move on, you've done your bit at that point.

I've seen threads go on for days which are clearly trolls or break guidelines

MN mods are not infallible

Posting "this is probably not real and should be viewed accordingly" helps encourage discernment from posters who might needs a little help recognising trolls and spam

It gets taken down if it's inappropriate, offensive or considered to be a troll, admittedly not always as quickly as would be ideal.

I don't think anyone is helped by you 'calling out the nature of a thread' on the thread, pushing it up, keeping it active.

That doesn't mean it gets taken down. And no "troll hunting" means you can't post on the thread calling out its nature least your post get deleted but the thread stands

You know you can still report this material? You don't need to 'troll hunt'.

You seem very sure that perfectly legit things like medical images won't get caught out by the law

When it'll be a AI bot somewhere which will be catching out websites and will definitely catch out some "none pornographic nudity". Which will lead to big fines on websites for no reason

And I've seen MN leave up threads which should be deleted...

Their Moderation isn't as robust as you think

And I've seen when sites have implemented vague "content rules" akin to this law and how badly they've worked.

AND the insidious “tell me about the time you wet the bed” “talk to me about your daughters heavy periods”. Mn is riddled with surreptitious pornographic material. Sure you can’t guard 100% against pervs but forbidding “troll hunting” had left this site wide open to abuse.

Umm no, as the vpn I use doesn't store any usage data. Most don't.

Is this since they changed to pre approving photos before they are posted? And are you sure these images fall within a definition of pornography within this legislation?

Also the images of CSA but we don’t seem to talk about that

I’ve seen more photos of fannies and more proana content on mumsnet than any other site I use. That’s becuse on other sites you need to seek it out. Here it’s a “please help, what is this, do I need a doctor?” and oooofff a big up close photo of someone’s vagina.

Considering that there are people who’d love to take this site down, it’s not unreasonable to ask.

There are lots of disordered eating threads on here and if comments like “I’m 9 stone and still need to lose more because I have a jiggly stomach” or “I’m a diet and eat 1100 calories a day” is considered promoting eating disorders then the site is in potential trouble

It’s worded in a way that I got the impression the OP hadn’t read the actual law.

No one has yet shared a Mumsnet link with anything close to something caught by the law. And before this I’ve seen Mumsnet remove whole threads that vaguely maybe if you squint could be caught by the law

This isn't Reddit. We don't need blokes moaning about how this makes it slightly more difficult to masturbate and dressing it up as a "privacy concern".

This is just basic child safeguarding really. That some people are so dismissive of it is highly concerning.

what a silly thing to say. I just thought at the time maybe on day one it's not terribly helpful to advertise VPN sites to get around it

There isn't anything inappropriate on here? And certainly no images or videos that are dodgy.

But it does come back to the issue

It's worded in such a way that someone has thought "MN falls foul of this"

People can find examples of where MN might skirt very close to the law

It's not a separate discussion

There’s been a total change in how images are uploaded to Mumsnet, and maybe they have been through and deleted all old inappropriate pictures (although I imagine not all images of genitals are pornographic, but I haven’t looked at the definitely of pornographic for these purposes).

My point is that you really have to stretch the law beyond reasonable interpretation to conclude Mumsnet needs to implement ID verification, and I’m sure they have their decision decoded in a nice document to share with Ofcom should they ever ask.

I know they’ve banned people uploading these now, but there used to be far too many people uploading pictures of genitalia. Unless these have all been deleted, I’m guessing that counts as adult content.

Some of the food threads on here are dangerously close to promoting eating disorders as well.

I do see it as worrying. The question here is why isn’t Mumsnet asking for age verification, and looking at the law I can very clearly see why that isn’t necessary.

I’ve not shared my opinion on the law at all…

If you can't see how the law being written so loosely that it's easy to misinterpret is a problem then it's worrying