Active Threads : What is the real criteria? (as it is NOT activity)

I think you might be right there. Threads in the brexit topic don’t seem to appear in most active.

That wasn’t the reason HQ gave though.

Likely that people were complaining about threads/topics they've hidden still appearing in most active and the only way to stop the complaints is to remove whole topics from active. Seem to recall MNHQ stating it wasn't possible to tailor "active" to individual accounts.

Isn't it amazing that people who wish to can use reports as a sneaky way of controlling things quietly?

I could maybe understand the point if it was a bunfight, and there were lots of deletions, BIWI. I don’t agree with it, but it would prevent more people piling in.

'needed'

Sorry. So disturbed my grammar has shot out of the window!

The more I think about this, the more shocked and disturbed I am. For a site that claims to be unmoderated, this is no longer the truth.

It's also very parental. When did you start treating us like children, @MNHQ?

I can see why you're doing it - it makes life easier for the community team - stops threads that are controversial attracting too much interest or becoming bunfights. But what the fuck is wrong with that?

No wonder MN feels so mundane these days compared with what it used to be like.

If you can't deal with the trolls at your end, and we aren't allowed to call them out on threads ourselves, this seems to me to be the inevitable result - threads that are deemed 'troublesome' and somehow need to be quarantined from the rest of the site.

Threads which have drawn lots of reports are less likely to be featured in the active threads area.
Yet, at the same time, Trending (a select list of only 5 threads) often displays threads that have deleted (not individual posts have been deleted, the whole thread has been deleted).
It seems inconsistent.

I wonder if @MNHQ will be brave enough to come back to this thread to justify the unjustifiable apparent ability to force censorship?

Censorship by another name. Very disturbing.

"Threads which have drawn lots of reports are less likely to be featured in the active threads area"

I am very disappointed with this.

It's akin to the (abandoned, fortunately) policy of making unmarked deletions to keep a thread 'nice'

Active Convos should feature all active conversations irrespective of whether there are reports.

There is a specific topic available for people who want to post a thread that will not appear in Active. And users can hide topics or threads in which they are uninterested.

It strikes me as just plain wrong to censor what goes into Active.

I generally browse the site through active conversations and I'm really shocked by this. It's no wonder that I can't keep up with the Westminstenders threads - I'll dip into the start of a thread and the next time I see it, it's got 100s of posts and I kind of give up because I'm so far behind.

Well how naive am I?

I genuinely thought Active conversations was a board for the conversations that were the most active.

This is deeply disturbing.

ta1kin

I would also be curious to know whether they delete based on requests from non-mumsnetters as they do with the FWR board

Just to chip in and say that along with the weather threads, Westminstenders is one of the most valuable threads on here for providing clear and easy to understand information on the current political situation. It would be a real shame if it wasn't readily available for those who might find it useful.

I'm flabbergasted by this. Surely you can see how this policy lends itself to being influenced by people with nefarious motives? Not to mention that i.e. the Westministenders threads are top quality political analysis that can only encourage posters to spend more time on Mumsnet.

Threads which have drawn lots of reports are less likely to be featured in the active threads area.

I've just seen this - WTF?! So MNHQ is censoring Active on the basis of controversy? You do realise that is absolutely encouraging people to flood MNHQ with reports in order to get threads removed

That's horrendous and it really needs to change. Maliciously reporting threads or posts to promote a political agenda really goes against the spirit of MN.

Very true prettybird

But the Westministender threads are only ever in the Brexit topic

And if they end up being hidden in the Brexit topic, the lurkers, of whom there are many and more coming delurking regularly may never spot them.

I only came across them initially because I saw them in Active and was curious as to what they were.

So someone is resorting to reporting multiple posts - and MN is effectively letting them get away with being a snowflake

I would think they use the number of reports as more people moan about brexit threads in other sections than actually reporting individual posts. In fact I remember seeing someone gleefully commenting that they got a brexit thread in AIBU moved to Brexit section

MN never seem to move baby name threads from AIBU into the Baby Name threads

It should really be called something else - like threads MN have decided are suitable to be promoted.

That's very odd. Is there somewhere on site where I can read up on policy? I assumed active threads came up on active threads.

If number of reports was an issue it’s a miracle any threads in AIBU end up in active.

And why number of reports rather than deletions? That doesn’t seem to make much sense.