MNHQ Racism policy

Well apparently second opinions had to be taken to decide if something was inflammatory or not Maybe we are supposed to suck it up, certainly looks that way.

It was the having to "argue the point" with mnhq that bothered me the most. Couldn't our views have been accepted rather than argued with, in the first instance? I don't think this was the right approach. It seemed to be assumed that we were in the wrong.

Yes, I know that, you eventually deleted it for the correct reasons when it was pointed out to you.

But my point is that this happens on all threads that discuss NI, and that needs to change.

Otherwise, what are you actually waiting to discuss with seniors?

HQ exacerbated the issue with the original flippant response & the deafening silence since isn't helping either.

Well yes. The holidays ended yesterday. And still no response. I was patient, but now I am just wondering if the other posters who wanted immediate answers were right after all.

My issue isn't so much the racist aspect, but the referral to the thread as a bunfight and the fact that it keeps happening when NI comes up. I keep saying it because I hope they are reading.

My thread about midnight shopping was full of PAs and the things that were said were awful. It didn't bother me because I don't have the energy to waste on that. There were some deletions, but no message on the thread etc.

Yet a thread is started by an OP attacking a group of people and when they defend themselves, quite calmly I might add, it was other posters creating the nastiness, it was declared a bunfight, the thread was locked and finally deleted.

I. Don't. Get. Why. Its. Different.

I see now, too much kids tv has addled by tired head

I think my main issue was actually with MNHQ itself & it's ah shucks attitude. If posters are racist, sectarian, disabilist, homophobic, ageist then they are to the most part pulled up on it. Deletions can be slow, although I personally don't think posts should be deleted, I think they should be left up with a deletion type message but the actual post should be left - better the wanker you know.

If HQ panic because a thread involves NI then they need to be more on the ball, & less dismissive and patronising fuck knows we've had enough of that.

HQ exacerbated the issue with the original flippant response & the deafening silence since isn't helping either.

No wigglesrock, my post was about MNHQ familiarising themselves with issues being raised on this thread (and following the previous thread) and developing a policy to deal with issues if reports are made on a thread in future - just like with any other thread.

They most probably have done this with other contentious issues so NI threads are no different.

Yesterday a post was deleted for being disablist for talking about glasses.

It was? I was on that one and I wear glasses. I was offended about this much (holds thumb and finger about 1cm apart) If I'd gone to pieces every time someone mentioned glasses I wouldn't have survived primary school, let alone the decades since.

The only way not to offend is to shut down all discussion. Maybe closing MN is the logical next move?

Sorry SacreBlue, not SacreBleu

SacreBleu I'm not really sure what you mean? Do you mean if a poster started a thread re NI that it should be monitored/ looked at more closely by MNHQ. Or that threads should be oked by MNHQ before they're started? It might just be me but I'm not really clear on what you're suggesting.

I read the other thread and reported posts. I have to admit I suggested in reports that having an in-depth think/discussion about threads on NI stuff in particular might be a good idea - and I still think that is right.

NI, as most of us know, has particular, and often subtle, nuances of what might constitute offence or inflammatory remarks. Scotland and Ireland work into the mix there too as well as having their own distinct points of conflict.

These are not always obvious to anyone without direct experience so for MNHQ to do a bit of research seems fair to me.

When I saw the hoo-ha this morning I felt a little sorry that I hadn't posted on thread as with everything else going on I think MNHQ having to deal with an issue that they were unsure of must have been, well possibly bewildering.

I think Pan I agreed/agree with your take on things. I know MNHQ response may not be quick enough for everyone and to many of us it seems simple & straight forward - possibly not so to others. All in all I would rather MNHQ took time to put in place something more long-term, in plenty of time for the inevitable flash points later in the year rather than jump in and be accused later of not getting the full picture, misinterpreting, going too far, or not far enough. of course all those things may happen anyway but potentially less so if they do a bit of info gathering first

I am sure they are reading this thread and taking into account everyone's considered opinions and thoughts and hopefully will work with their whole team to aim for consistency and fairness on future threads in similar vein.

and of course, HQ aren't in anyway bound by the Act alone. IF they consider someone's dignity is being compromised by virtue of their demographic or personal characteristic outside of the Act (council house ownership, wealth/benefits status etc) then they can press the Big Red Button in any case.

Agree entry level stuff but apparently missed in the past few days remarkably, and from time to time previously.
There may have been an 'expertise' gap at HQ about the evolving world of equalities (and the interpretation of the Act is developing/evolving - there is stuff moving on about religions, def of sex/gender, learning disabilites and large institutions in RL are being financially held accountable as we speak through a lack of knowledge on these issues), and HQ need, I think, to take timely advice on these things.
So it need not be a long term thing at all. Just much more comprehensive than it has been in the recent past.

I think you are looking at a very long-term shift though Pan. I'm looking at a change from having to have a debate with HQ about whether being Irish counts as a race - pretty entry level stuff.

It doesn't have the opposite effect on me at all. There's all sorts of issues around the operation of 'dignity' in MN posts and the NI issues (that the vast majority of posters have little idea) is but one of them. So taking time and consulting (which is what HQ are doing here now) seems a good point.

I think hq believe that taking time, having a full review when everyone is back from their hols will show that they are taking these complaints/comments seriously.

I think it has the opposite effect.

I noticed that too pigofhappiness.

I'm going to be assuming that we are not looking at updating a non-existent 'anti-racism policy' but rather looking at how TGs are operated from a dignity POV to be more inclusive of GB/Irish matters, nationalities, ageism(which is fairly rampant round here), Roma and other travelers groups, and all else that is more familiarly known re minorities.
With the Equalities Act 2010 as a source rather than the start and end.

ahh well , whenever you're ready

I am feeling very let down by England today not only by MNHQ but also by all the bloody supermarkets who failed to stock potato bread so that I could have a proper hung over fry up.

Yes sootikan, you're right

world, that's indicative of talk boards in general, isn't it? Anonymity means people are braver when it comes to making berks of themselves.

Ah, thanks. Wondered if the law had been changed without my noticing, But nope.