Page 9 | dear mn hq, please could something be done about the anti sn posts on mn

2shoes · 2011-09-10T22:45:12+00:00

as I know you are aware(I have the emails) people from the sn community have left this week, due to the vile things that have been said to the/or about SN. isn't it time that mn hq took some steps to eradicate this, as you do with trolls? surely disablist/anti sn/ personal attacks should be deleted and something done about the posters. or do we just keep loosing well informed, SN educated people from mn. (no I can't link to a thread as there has been too many)

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:13

@Pagwatch

In fairness I am quite an arse

I hope you haven't taken time out to email me to explain to me why my cunt posts were deleted. I can figure it out

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:12

@tethersend

Thanks for considering, Helen- I am (for the first time actually) quite confused by MNHQ's response.

This is the response I got from MNHQ to my reporting kidz' post- I apologise if I should not be CnPing emails; please delete this post if I have done wrong by doing so:

We agree that this thread/post is in poor taste but we don't tend to delete on those grounds because it would be really hard to know where to draw the line.

The truth is, we don't think we should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive and what they shouldn't. On the whole, we think it's better to let the boards self police in these instances, as it's very rare that a tasteless comment is left unchallenged and we can see that others have done just that on this thread.

As ever, we do rely on members like you to help us monitor the boards and we'd like to reassure you that we do consider all reported posts carefully. We shall be keeping a close eye on this thread.

Can you see why I remain confused?

Ok in this context, we are using "self-policing" to mean calling a poster on their (possibly) ignorant opinions by engaging them in a (non-Guidelines-breaking) way to show them the extent of their ignorance.
Apols, tethersend

Empjusa · 11/09/2011 15:11

There is a problem with not deleting the offensive posts, but deleting the responses.

Yes the responses may be breaking the rules by using personal insults, but surely you can see that deleting those looks like you are condoning the original offensive post.

Plus in the cases where a group of people are feeling bullied, not allowing anyone to answer back for them, that looks bad too.

5inthebed · 11/09/2011 15:08

I agree with Herbie on this one, why delete their posts but not the ones that were causing all the offence?

herbietea · 11/09/2011 15:06

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Peachy · 11/09/2011 15:04

So MNHW what about something on here explaining different diagnoses and the challenges that can be a result (eg queing / rude comments from a children with ASD, need for extra sapce for a car with a ramp for a child using a chair etc) written by the aprents but in a proper informed style that you could link to or we could when education is needed?

Pagwatch · 11/09/2011 15:04

In fairness I am quite an arse

I hope you haven't taken time out to email me to explain to me why my cunt posts were deleted. I can figure it out

tethersend · 11/09/2011 15:03

Thanks for considering, Helen- I am (for the first time actually) quite confused by MNHQ's response.

This is the response I got from MNHQ to my reporting kidz' post- I apologise if I should not be CnPing emails; please delete this post if I have done wrong by doing so:

We agree that this thread/post is in poor taste but we don't tend to delete on those grounds because it would be really hard to know where to draw the line.

The truth is, we don't think we should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive and what they shouldn't. On the whole, we think it's better to let the boards self police in these instances, as it's very rare that a tasteless comment is left unchallenged and we can see that others have done just that on this thread.

As ever, we do rely on members like you to help us monitor the boards and we'd like to reassure you that we do consider all reported posts carefully. We shall be keeping a close eye on this thread.

Can you see why I remain confused?

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:01

@Pagwatch

Thanks.

To be completely honest I personally prefer comments to stand because I like to know who the arses are. But the number of posters from such a vulnerable community feeling attacked is not reflecting well on this site - and I am bothered by that.

Think it's pretty obvious who the arses are - whether their comments are deleted or not, tbh

But, seriously, try as we might (and we do try) we can't monitor every thread on MN every hour of the day. We do rely on you and other MNers to report stuff to us so we can come and look and investigate/delete/warn/ban/whatever.

MmeLindor. · 11/09/2011 14:58

Helen
Could I ask how many reports do you receive in a day? On average.

And have the amount of reports increased disproportionately to the growth in the website?

Are we posters triggerhappier?

herbietea · 11/09/2011 14:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Pagwatch · 11/09/2011 14:58

Thanks.

To be completely honest I personally prefer comments to stand because I like to know who the arses are. But the number of posters from such a vulnerable community feeling attacked is not reflecting well on this site - and I am bothered by that.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:54

@Pagwatch

Fair enough

The trouble is that self policing via reporting seems to involve a lot of posts which are upsetting people being left to stand. So self policing as you deem it is leaving people feeling isolated and attacked while trolls and people trying to be vile can continue.

Perhaps there would be slightly less retaliation (for want of a better word) if 'retard' were deleted as swiftly as racist slurs would be.

I am not sure that is the case.

Possibly I am wrong. But lots of people I like seem to feel in a bunker so something is not quite working is it?

Completely understand your feelings, Pagwatch - and it sounds like we need to look at our responsiveness to reports, especially ones that are flagged as being disablist, and see if we can improve that - but we do have to apply our Talk Guidelines equally to all.

Even if Poster A is possibly a troll and Poster B is a lovely regular MNer, if B tells A to 'fuck off', B is breaking our Guidelines. Doesn't mean we won't investigate A (if she's reported to us) and take whatever action is needed, though.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:50

@tethersend

I did report, Helen. "self policing" was the response I got to reporting. I didn't break any guidelines; when kidz asked what noddy meant, I said that she called her a fool.

Tethersend, I'm sure the MNHQer who replied to you was talking about "self-policing" the same way I am - ie thanks for reporting this, this is just the sort of self-policing that helps.

But we will go back and have another look at your report, and double-check. It may take us a little while but we will check.

Pagwatch · 11/09/2011 14:41

Fair enough

The trouble is that self policing via reporting seems to involve a lot of posts which are upsetting people being left to stand. So self policing as you deem it is leaving people feeling isolated and attacked while trolls and people trying to be vile can continue.

Perhaps there would be slightly less retaliation (for want of a better word) if 'retard' were deleted as swiftly as racist slurs would be.

I am not sure that is the case.

Possibly I am wrong. But lots of people I like seem to feel in a bunker so something is not quite working is it?

tethersend · 11/09/2011 14:40

I did report, Helen. "self policing" was the response I got to reporting. I didn't break any guidelines; when kidz asked what noddy meant, I said that she called her a fool.

Peachy · 11/09/2011 14:38

Absolutely.

When people on MN get up my nose I (usually) resist the descent into abuse because it will get me deleted and frankly leave me feeling ashamed. I rely on MN to handle anything that goes too far.

if they will not then why resist? If the only recourse is returning vitriol then we need to know.

Except it sunds like thsoe horrible people who smash up people's faces because of a perceived insult and I not one of them.

motherinferior · 11/09/2011 14:37

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:35

No, self-policing means that we ask you to report to us any posts that break our guidelines.

It doesn't mean attacking other posters on the thread - however much you think they may deserve it - because that would be breaking our Guidelines, too.

Pagwatch · 11/09/2011 14:33

It is very odd isn't it.

Self police seems to universally mean call posters on their shiity behaviour yet the 'call them on it' posts are deleted and the goading nasty posts get left.

Peachy · 11/09/2011 14:29

And anohter one down
Since whenw a fool anti MN? I mean, who turns off Mr T in offence?

tethersend · 11/09/2011 14:28

Sorry Helen, but it's ridiculous- either it's self policing or it isn't?

Or does 'self policing' not include calling someone deliberately trying to wind up posters a 'fool'?

I'll be staggered if that's the case.

mamalino · 11/09/2011 14:25

I've just seen my post on this thread calling widowwadman on her behaviour to Fanjo has been deleted. What the actual fuck?!

That's made up my mind for me anyway. Im off.

noddyholder · 11/09/2011 14:23

I called someone a fool, is that offensive considering what they were saying?

noddyholder · 11/09/2011 14:23

Blimey why was I deleted?