Post deletions but MNHQ not against talk guidelines?

Personal attacks certainly shouldn't be tolerated. However, if someone is using their channel with thousands of followers, to bring Mumsnet and Mumsnetters into disrepute then our voices should be heard too.

We should be able to highlight the inaccuracies that have been broadcast. Comments stating there was NO collective criticism of said Instagrammer's parenting should, for example, be able to stand. Deletions of this nature silences us without cause, and will be accepted as evidence by observers that bullying has taken place.

I would be really interested to hear MNHQ's stance. Discussion on the matter seems to be far less forthcoming than deletions.

I feel like I ought to offer a disclaimer here. I raised no personal attacks against any of the Instamums, nor was I engaged in the thread which is being hotly debated. I have however seen the Instagram stories and feel disappointed that Mumsnet is simply accepting unfounded accusations without allowing for a response. The reputation of Mumsnet is being tarnished unnecessarily and, as a consequence of this, prospective users will be discouraged from joining what is generally a supportive forum which offers a wealth of advice for people from all backgrounds. I also feel strongly that people in all areas of life should have a right to reply, particularly where (in my opinion) accusations are largely fabricated.

I’m hoping that at some point someone will explain what happened to her via DM. It was only a few comments on here. but I don’t think it matters if it’s 1 or 100 to her anymore, she’s battered by the whole thing and I would be too really. That thread elsewhere was vicious.

This is odd.

So, there is an instagrammer making patently untrue statements about MN and their users on a public platform. That is acceptable as she apparently has mental health problems (as stated by her - I am not alleging anything). However, it is not acceptable for MN users to discuss this generally or to specifically address these false allegations?

On what basis was that blanket policy decuded ?

Is it not more MNHQ being respectful? I can’t imagine how anyone could take legal action against people discussing things on an open Instagram account with nearly 25k followers, when everything discussed was put out there by the account holder.
Certain other accounts didn’t have any support or back up and they had their address/kids schools etc posted. In this case the account says they’ve been accused of abuse. But they simply have not.

*hadnt RTFT

The issue with fake history is that it just stokes things and potentially makes things worse in the long run. It was clear that people jumping on hasn’t RTFT and there were a lot of Chinese whispers going on. It further fans the assumption that one person was being viciously attacked rather than having closure for them I think.

For the record after I posted my post trying to make clear what the OP was about did contact MN directly to ask them to change the OP or title to make it clear... they didn’t and it was a few hours after this when I suspect they were threatened by legal action again they started being trigger happy deleting.

@ivegotatheoryitcouldbebunnies1 is ne more worried about the opposite. Given the people coming over on the back of a post on Instagram it looks dreadful and they will all gleefully post back how they’ve had all the comments taken down and it really does look like every poster was just bitching and that will do far more harm than good. Some people posted positive comments and not one said anything that the IGer thought they had said. That’s a pretty toxic situation for a vulnerable person.

The posts about said instagrammer needed to be removed, whether you agreed with what was going on or not, when someone is that fragile they need to go. Personally I’d like to think that if anymore appear they’ll be removed too.

I do somewhat agree with what @eeebymum said above though with so many gone (quite a few that went that had nothing to do with the issue) fake history could be a problem. But I’d rather see that than watch someone unravel over posts about them on here.

I agree with Pommes post at 21:21.

My post was deleted that suggested letting that account know that they had the wrong idea about the thread and what had been said. But that was deleted so it is just going to look like all the comments were nasty...

I have no idea what SWMNBN is but sounds intriguing!

I know that they keep on saying things are not new but really - I think they are. Swathes of posts have been happily deleted on my thread and loads of them have nothing to do at all with slating a certain person who shall not be named. So the goal posts HAVE moved and I think clearer guidelines need to be published.

I think it was totally outrageous my posts were deleted, I made no personal attacks whatsoever.

This reminds me of SWMNBN on a rocket. It's so stupid not to be allowed to talk about someone on the internet. MNHQ must really be afraid of lawsuits.

And surprise @Pommes those stories appear to now have disappeared

I agree completely with the points you’ve raised @pommes

I also agree with the deletion messages seeming to confirm the accusations of bullying, to an outsider who may have been directed here after watching an Instagram story, having never used Mumsnet before.

I was deleted (first ever deletion in over 6yrs on Mumsnet) within 1 minute of posting to ask MNHQ about our right of reply. Perhaps here is a better place to do so.

There are accusations, some that I would argue are thoroughly questionable, levelled at Mumsnetters. The accusers are using means (e.g. Instagram stories) which don't allow a public response, and if there are disagreeable responses (e.g. on the grid) the Instagrammer can simply delete and block.

So, where is our space to mount a logical defence against unfair accusations? How can we do so if all channels silence us?

You would think it would be in Mumsnet's interest to let comments refuting publicly-made accusations stand, but apparently not.

I don't know why MN Admins don't lock a thread so no more posts can be made to it rather than deleting posts in it, leaving it open to interpretation as to what was in the deleted post and also leaving it open for others to post on.
Surely a final post by admins saying "We're locking this thread and will delete any TAAT. We will not be deleting individual posts in this thread." or something to that effect, even if the thread hasn't reached it's 1000 post limit.

The frustrating thing is a lot of those posts that were deleted didn’t mention anyone!

All the deletions leaves the thread open to interpretation and lets people weave their own fake history into what has actual been said.

Yes that is true actually. So people can say that the deleted posts (of which there are now many on that thread) were abusive personal attacks, MN is full of toxic bitches yada yada yada. When actually they have been deleted because they mention a certain person and for some reason MN have no decided that that person can't even be mentioned.

Did you get the email from mumsnet about this the other night?

Which included the following:

“Mumsnet is all about people sharing their authentic opinions, so we don’t insist on ‘fluffiness’ - we think that straight talking is valuable and useful, and we allow what we call ‘robust debate’. But we don’t allow personal attacks under any circumstances - we know most influencers expect to be critiqued more than the average Joe, but we’re not okay with meanness or spite, or mockery.
In practice, this means that it’s OK to criticise an influencer’s actions, and within reason to critique their manner and approach. But it’s never on to mock them, to criticise their personal appearance, or to call them names; we’re also likely to remove posts which imply that emotional abuse is going on, for example, without real backup.
There are lots of grey areas, as you can imagine, and we spend a lot of time discussing them. Often, it comes down to tone of voice - we generally take a dim view of posters who repeatedly express their opinion in a sneery or contemptuous tone.
One challenging area is what are known as ‘pile ons’, where legitimate criticism is repeated so often that it starts to feel unkind. This can be tricky - how many times exactly can something be said before it becomes mean? What if other posters are disagreeing, so the critical posters feel they’re simply arguing their case? We generally find that a reminder from one of our mods is the best approach, so please do use the report button if you think this is happening.“

That thread is ridiculous. All the deletions leaves the thread open to interpretation and lets people weave their own fake history into what has actual been said.