Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Unflip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Unflip

1 2 3

Original poster

Could warnings to people be issued by PM rather than email?

65 replies

magimedi · 23/03/2015 12:12

This is not a TAAT but has been raised on another thread.

WorraLiberty has summed this up well & (with her permission) I am quoting her from another thread:

"I don't use a phone for Mumsnetting, so I would actively have to log into my email to check on the off chance that HQ might have sent me a warning for something.

Rebecca said... We have temporarily suspended her account for personally attacking several times on the same thread in a short space of time when we have sent previous warnings about similar behaviours.

If it was in a short space of time, she might not have seen the emails.

Whereas if her inbox lit up, she probably would have and then heeded the warning.

It's how lots of forum moderators do it."

It seems such a good idea. Not all of us use phones for Mumsnetting.

OP posts:

ZingDramaQueenOfSheeba · 23/03/2015 16:39

worra

but I can't check my old email on my phone

SauvignonBlanche · 23/03/2015 16:34

I'm registered under an email address that I use infrequently, so I agree.

WorraLiberty · 23/03/2015 16:31

Good point Fru. Perhaps a standard 'Please check your email' by PM to just maximise the chance of them seeing it?

FruChristerOla · 23/03/2015 16:00

I agree with the concept of a 'warning/banning' PM, but I think a two-pronged message from MNHQ might be better. An email plus a PM.

After all, if MNHQ sends only a PM - the 'warned/banned' person might have already logged out, so they can't log back in (because they've been banned), so how are they going to be able to see that PM?

Bakeoffcake · 23/03/2015 14:24

Oooooh, I read the OP as saying Worra's account had been suspended....

I'm off to start a rumour......

Only joking! I do agree with the PM thing though. A very good idea.

bumbleymummy · 23/03/2015 14:21

You don't want one Zing!

GoadyFuckAaargh · 23/03/2015 14:16

never had a PM

ZingDramaQueenOfSheeba · 23/03/2015 12:52

I don't get a purple balloon!

wigglesrock · 23/03/2015 12:51

I use the app on my iPad and don't get notification at all if I've got a pm.

AlpacaLypse · 23/03/2015 12:47

The only problem is that the symbol that shows you've got a pm is very inconspicuous. Maybe if there was a device that came up with 'you've got a pm, check your inbox' - rather like the notorious purple balloon?

I've just checked my inbox and found a message that's been there for weeks unnoticed - thankfully not really important!

trufflesnout · 23/03/2015 12:29

I'd much prefer not to get emails from HQ tbh, including in reply to reports.

QueenBean · 23/03/2015 12:27

Yes agree with this too

Can mods pm replies to things too - ie reasons why messages have been deleted within threads instead of emailing?

ZingDramaQueenOfSheeba · 23/03/2015 12:19

Totally agree, PMs are better then emails.
And I'm on my phone (and tablet) and don't ever use my old email so MNHQ could have sent me dozens of emails in the last year I'd never know.
they don't pop up on email/gmail. and I bother them sometimes and I know they'd be answering as they always do.
I just don't ever get those emails.
(Sorry. Hope all the gin I'm sending does get there safely! )

WorraLiberty · 23/03/2015 12:19

Just to clarify, that was ESD's account that was temporarily suspended

Thanks magimedi

bumbleymummy · 23/03/2015 12:17

I agree with this. Emails are easily missed if they aren't checked regularly and if warnings are being sent mid-debate PMs would be more likely to be noticed and read at the time.

Unflip

1 2 3

Swipe left for the next trending thread