@Maryz

Poor old WillowWhispers has been left off again

Sorry I admit to being a bit slow but what is the criterion for being on the list?

Nope deletions are categorically being driven by a marketing strategy (not sure we have a marketing strategy )
But what is for sure is that we at MNHQ have been uncomfortable for some time about the following issuettes:

The level of aggression in AIBU
The level of trollhunting - and what that means for unfortunate newbies/namechangers who need help and get disbelieved.
The periodic surfacing of aggressive orthodoxies on certain boards - eg the Doghouse a while back.

If there are extra deletions (and we will review the evidence and revert!) then some might be down to the above factors - but again, we will analyse what's occurring and report back.

We delete posts that are racist break the law - even conceding we're not perfect I think Hitler would fall foul quite early - unless he was just on chicken keepers or something...

But joking aside - it is important for MNHQ to follow the spirit and not just the letter of the law (as it were) - if we start trying to define a form of words that's a necessary precursor of deletion, then it's always possible for clever unpleasant types to get around them...

@LemarchandsBox

But....but .....

Rebecca says MNHQ are pedantic and there is a fine line (giving examples of phrases falling either side of that line).

Justine says it is futile trying to pin down what is acceptable.

Who is right? Whose Guidelines do we follow?

The Talk guidelines!

I do understand why there's been some confusion here - there are some fine distinctions for sure - in short we hear you and we'll have a think about how we can offer clearer guidance to avoid unnecessary and annoying deletions. Thanks for raising it.

I like to think Hitler would be deleted and banned pretty quick, cardamomginger, for breaking our talk guidelines!

Yes, yes of course you can disagree - it's Mumsnet!

Ultimately, though, it's a futile exercise trying to pin down exactly what form of words is and isn't allowed because, as has been noted here several times, context is very important.

I think it's worth thinking about whether we all accept the core MN ideals - ie freedom of speech, polite and reasonable discourse, all posters treated the same, no trollhunting, no breaking the law etc etc - if you don't then that's clearly going to be a problem on the deletion front. If you do then there is a question of whether our talk guidelines are the best way to achieve them (and if not then what would work better) and if they are then are we implementing them consistently/sensibly...

We have found the mail that we sent you and you posted

"you are making yourself look very bigoted" and "You really don't sound nice on this thread" if you'd said, say, "I think your opinions are bigoted/not very nice", your posts would have been fine. It is a very fine line and we can be very pedantic about this.

Having said that, there are always exceptions to the 'rule' and context is important. Posting to inflame or goad for example.

yy Maryz, we will have a dig and should be able to find anything that was deleted, just asking as it really speeds things up if we can have a rough time frame [lazy]

For future ref, if a post of yours (or anyone's) is removed but the thread still stands, you can report the deleted post to us and we will always explain a deletion if it is unclear.

Hi Tantrums,

Can you tell us when this was please as that should not have been removed?
We will happily have a look if you can tell us where it was.

tia

Off to get more children. Back laters.

Well not sure of the backstory but quite sure thread wouldn't have been deleted to cover up and error if that's what you are implying AF? - most likely deleted cos it became a bunfight...

As I understand it blistering cross was implying poster member of Klu Klux Clan yes - ie person is a racist. That would be why it was deleted I'd say.

Sorry LtEve, we are taking a look and will be in touch asap.

MN is not unmoderated - never unmoderated - but post-moderated, yes. But I agree that you've pin pointed the key question.
If there have been more deletions of late it's one of two things...

1. More reported posts
2. Different interpretation of reported posts

We will do some analysis on a) whether there have been more deletions and if so what's the cause and get back to you forthwith... (really going now, v late for children...)

Honestly think no deletions would lead to hell on earth - particularly around the trollhunting - we have always aimed to treat newbies on a par with oldies - I think it's the thing that keeps Mumsnet vibrant and comparatively un-cliquey. But interested to hear if folks think different (ps apols in advance for radio silence from this point - have to rush out to pick up children but will be back on later).

No I think you should be able to say "i think what you're saying sounds racist - here's why..." but you can't say "You're a racist" (not without clear cause anyway)

Can't comment for sure as not seen the posts but broadly calling someone a rapist sounds like a personal attack - and potentially libellous - as does calling someone a racist. But obviously context is important.

The real point is whether folks buy into the idea that they are liable to be deleted if they make a personal attack - no one likes being deleted, naturally, but do we accept the principle that we are aiming for debate and discussion without hurling insults about?

We have absolutely no problem with you publicly challenging discriminatory/ offensive views, we actively encourage it.

However, we will delete posts that break our guidelines.

As we said up thread (or down depending on how you are reading MN) we believe that it is entirely possible to have a debate without personally attacking another poster, no matter how vile you think their opinion is.

Hello, hello. Have been alerted to this thread by RebeccaMumsnet who's a bit knackered and has retired for a well-earned tumbler of gin.

Ok so first off there's clearly a lot of strong feeling about this issue from a lot of MNetters so we shall, absolutely, take note and have a think about the way we are implementing things and how we could do things better/fairer/most consistently.

That said, let's be clear there hasn't been any change in policy - we've always considered posts like "You are a twat" to be a personal attack and deleted them when reported. We also do always aim to take note of context and if we are deleting a post in a tit-for-tat exchange we should be deleting the tat as well as the tit (as it were). (If/when we are not, it's an error though, not a change in policy.)

We do, and always have taken a dim view of troll hunting - as ever that's because we'd rather err on the side of giving folks the benefit of the doubt than mistrust or be unwelcoming to someone who needs genuine support. Sometimes this means we can all be taken in, but I feel really strongly that that is a price worth paying and if we slipped into knee-jerk suspicion of newbies MN would be half the place it is. From time to time we see people that have genuine needs and issues being doubted and it is really uncomfortable and unpleasant watching and not what MN is here for (See more on our troll policy here - its been the same for about 10 years!)

We are, of course, aiming for polite and reasonable discourse wherever possible and strongly believe that we are a forum for grown ups, so folks should be able to disagree and debate without resorting to insults. In short, if you don't want to be deleted the safest thing to do is not to be rude to someone (yes, even if you think they are deeply unpleasant you can make your point without calling them a twat) and not to troll hunt.

There will, of course, be inconsistencies and there always have been - most obviously because we don't and can't read every post so there are probably loads in existence that amount to "you are a twat" but which have not been reported. I'm afraid that's a function of the sheer size and rudeness of Mumsnet. But our community team do do their damnedest to apply the rules consistently. That said, they are human and they are making often quite fine judgements that require interpretation, sometimes under great pressure - inevitably they sometimes get things wrong.

Anyways, as said, we will have a careful look at everyone's contributions to this thread and make sure we are doing our very best to to apply our very few rules fairly and consistently and that we've aren't getting too trigger happy. Thanks for everyone's thoughts please keep them coming.

No, not at all.
We read all reports and make a judgement call on each one. Sometimes we get it wrong, sometimes our judgement differs from others but we try our best to be consistent and to answer questions when they arise.

We do reinstate posts from time to time when we have been a bit fat fingered about deletions.

So you want a site that doesn't delete anything ? Mumsnet has always removed posts that break our guidelines if reported, that hasn't changed since the dawn of time beginning of Mumsnet.

No conspiracy AF, if folks are reporting you but you aren't reporting them, then we are more likely to delete you and not them on the grounds that we won't see their posts unless they are on the same thread or your post is a direct response to them.

We get over 30,000 post per day, we cannot read them all - please report stuff against you and we will take a look.

We are not saying that you shouldn't challenge unhealthy POV, but we think that this can be done without breaking the Talk guidelines.

No, nobody is 'fair game' for personal attacks and if you report these posts/threads, we will take a look.

Hi CharminglyOdd,
We would be interested in seeing that mail if you still have it?