Deletions due to being discussed elsewhere

The thing is there are people that are just posting gossip and flat out lies about MN posters else where that are just accepted with out question. I have seen it said that that behaviour is fine because they are free to go and say their piece, but it really is like walking into the lions den where 90% of the posters are so invested in whats described as freedom of speech but in reality is freedom to viciously attack. Walking into that is a pointless exercise that will only result in further hurt to the OP of the target of the day. In this case I think its totally correct that an OP should be allowed to have their thread removed, they have posted on MN where they should be able to reasonably expect their thread to follow talk guildlines and if its then been taken away with the express intent of talking about it without the hassle of following guildlines I think the old phrase of 'Don't feed the trolls' is entirely appropriate.

Tbh, I think the problem here was the deletion message, not the fact the thread was deleted.

The thread was deleted because the OP didn't need the aggressive and snidey forensic examination of her posting history that was going on elsewhere. She also didn't need facts being cross examined, and dots joined up, with ever present hints of outing and RL repercussions. It was supposed to be a support thread, fgs, for someone going through a tough time in RL.

Sure, MN is an open forum, and anyone can read the threads. It has however, always been frowned upon to instantly pounce on a thread, or part of one, and call troll, or try to prove/disprove parts of it. Or scream for more information, or try to derail what was supposed to be a support thread in an inflammatory manner.

My feeling that a deletion message of 'the OP has requested this is taken down due to attempts at troll hunting and fears of doxxing' would have been more truthful, and closer to reality.

FWIW, I don't like thread sending up in the Fail, or on FB either.

Yep pax

And twitter and Facebook

Or would mumsnet be empty then

If this is a policy, it should apply to threads ending up in the Daily Mail, too.

It’s not just that the bread is being discussed elsewhere, though, is it? That’s (to use an old MN favourite) just disingenuous.

The thread was being discussed, the OP of the thread was being Advanced searches, with details being dragged up, connected, and picked over like vultures.

More than that, the thread was being liberally (one might actually say wilfully) —mis—interpreted and twisted, as happens with many other threads and posters too, with misquotes and, let’s face it, overhyped lies being accepted as fact.

On a site which is regularly linked to here, so it’s tantamount to having a parallel thread on MN saying all that (in fact, why not just do that?)

I should think some of the above may well have had an impact on why the thread was deleted

Sorry dipping

Is it just the one thread or has it happened a few times to your knowledge

Good point

I would be interested in the answer to this one as well

Is it a particular thread dipping

I'm guessing they are duplicate threads as opposed to topics discussed off site. There's no need for five different threads all talking about, say, the Zimbabwe coup or Theresa May's latest cough.