Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Why is it suddenly ok to make multiple threads on the same subject over and over again?

281 replies

DayBath · 04/03/2021 16:36

I'm talking about the Feminism board. Please could MN explain why it's ok for the same poster to keep starting new threads on the same topic repeatedly without the previous ones filling up or reaching any limit?

Surely there's a point where this is considered "not in the spirit" as you love to say. By all means this person should be allowed to post but why are repeated threads within hours of each other being allowed to cause Groundhog Day over there?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
LangClegsInSpace · 08/03/2021 22:31

Thank you for the link to Justine's post from 2016, @YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet. There are lots of brilliant bits aside from those you quoted. My favourite bits are:

Mumsnet has always believed - been founded upon - the idea that civilised debate is a broadly positive thing. That we can disagree but agree that people have a right to different opinions. That freedom of speech is in general good and that we'd rather let the conversation flow than censor it.

... there are always going to be posts which fall into a grey area - posts that cause offence without intention, perhaps by using words in common use that some believe should be disallowed ... And our inclination here is to err on the side of free speech rather than censorship.

We do understand it can be frustrating being told that we'd rather host a debate about why something was offensive so folks might change their mind, than delete it.

At a time when the rise of intersectional politics often seems to be squeezing the space for public debate, when no-platforming has entered the everyday vocabulary of university campuses and social media reverberates daily to howls of outrage over some linguistic transgression or other, this seems more important than ever.

We understand how anxious many who’ve battled for women’s rights feel. We understand that language plays an important part in making them feel marginalised and vulnerable.

In an increasingly polarised world of trigger warnings and safe spaces, preserving Mumsnet as a place that can host the widest debate in the most civilised fashion seems more important than ever. You’ll have to forgive me if this sounds pompous but this really is about freedom. As so often George Orwell put it best: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

It would be completely disingenuous for MNHQ to pretend that their position now is the same as it was in November 2016 when this post was written - over a year and a half before the Special Rules came into effect. Even the quote you have chosen from Justine's post does not reflect the situation as it is now -

We're mindful of the fact that many of our users are exhausted and often in impossibly difficult situations and would much rather people just understood or piped down - that we just deleted those comments which upset them or banned those who made them. But rightly or wrongly, that's not the Mumsnet we've chosen to be.

You've deleted loads of comments from regular posters because they upset certain people and you are apparently now banning long term posters too. From what I can make out this is in response to 'howls of outrage over some linguistic transgression or other' - to quote Justine.

If you're no longer interested in hosting a feminism board and would prefer instead to 'showcase the full range of opinion' on The Trans Debate then please say so honestly and please change the title of the topic so that nobody inadvertently posts on a board they think is to do with feminism, but isn't.

ItsLateHumpty · 08/03/2021 21:26

Yup, we don’t want to discuss trans rights we want to protect and advance rights for women and girls.

Not sure what MNHQ thinks there is to debate re womens rights or why inviting users from other SM platforms with a stated non interest in said rights is going to add really.

LangClegsInSpace · 08/03/2021 21:01

We are committed to allowing conversations on this topic to showcase the full range of opinion.

WHAT TOPIC?

We now have:

'conversations on this difficult issue'
'these discussions'
'conversations on this topic'

I would like MNHQ to be upfront about what conversations and discussions they are aiming to host here, and on what topic, because I don't think there's a shared understanding.

You say your aim is 'to showcase the full range of opinion' which implies your aim here is to host 'the trans debate' and that you are happy to co-opt FWR to provide this 'showcase'.

Because despite some very long threads in previous years about whether FWR is a feminist topic or a topic about feminism, you never did go over to twitter and invite F4J, or Jeffrey and pals to come and start threads in order to 'showcase the full range of opinion.'

Because obviously that would be a horrible thing to do if 'this difficult issue', 'these discussions' and 'this topic' meant the rights of women and girls. Especially for a site called Mumsnet with a stated aim of making parents' lives easier and of which Justine said in 2016, Of course - given we're called Mumsnet - we're always going to be a space dominated by women but the only qualification we require of our users is a basic level of civility.

Posters on FWR want to discuss the sex based rights of women and girls. MNHQ appear to want to use FWR for some other purpose. Please can you straightforwardly say what your purpose is? It would really help in understanding some of your recent decisions.

Also can you please answer all the other questions that have been raised on this thread, especially the OP's.

LangClegsInSpace · 08/03/2021 20:17

I am also furious.

JaneJeffer · 08/03/2021 19:43

@Mockolate

Yes I don’t understand how inviting people who are PBP over

PBP are previously banned posters, they can't post if they've been banned so not sure who this is referring to?
People who are on Twitter are able to make an account just like anyone else can, PBP can't post as they're banned as far as I'm aware, unless it's changed MNHQ?

How can you be posting on here and have never seen a deletion because the thread was started by a PBP. Unbelievable in every sense of the word.
tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 08/03/2021 19:16

@MaudTheInvincible

Performative obtusity is definitely characteristic of some people's posting style when these topics are being discussed Wink
Yup.
MaudTheInvincible · 08/03/2021 18:58

Performative obtusity is definitely characteristic of some people's posting style when these topics are being discussed Wink

TofuDelights · 08/03/2021 18:52

Can I just add my voice to the many eloquent posters above please and say this all feels unfair. I only joined as a Premium member because of how much I value FWR and all the regular posters on there. I haven't seen any of my friends for a year, or family for 1.5 years and this is such a valuable place for me. Please let Cara come back. Please.

Doyoumind · 08/03/2021 18:10

Mockolate you don't seem to have been around much if you don't realise PBPs come back. They do, using different details, but MN can often still identify them. We've even had PBPs declaring their return.

Mockolate · 08/03/2021 18:05

Yes I don’t understand how inviting people who are PBP over

PBP are previously banned posters, they can't post if they've been banned so not sure who this is referring to?
People who are on Twitter are able to make an account just like anyone else can, PBP can't post as they're banned as far as I'm aware, unless it's changed MNHQ?

Biscuitsanddoombar · 08/03/2021 17:59

Yes I don’t understand how inviting people who are PBP over, allowing them to use words that regulars are not allowed too, being aware that screenshots with lies were then posted on twitter and then actually thanking those posters is ‘in the spirit’

Thecatonthemat · 08/03/2021 17:47

I know longer understand what in the spirit actually means. The last spats certainly weren’t in what I thought was the spirit...lots of us here licking wounds and retired hurt until we can’t contain ourselves no longer.

ArabellaScott · 08/03/2021 17:25

I agree. I'm usually reluctant to pile on MNHQ as I recognise they have a difficult job to do and want to be balanced. I'm definitely up for healthy debate, with people who are courteous and are here in good faith.

Totally agree. And always do my best to stick to the rules and the 'spirit'. That just seems like a moving target lately, though.

SpacePotato · 08/03/2021 17:18

There is also a huge difference between beingwelcoming to newbiesand MNHQ visiting a rival SM platform to invite hostile posters to join MN

It's like inviting the class bully on an unsupervised playdate then telling your own child off for complaining that the bully hurt them.

DeaconBoo · 08/03/2021 17:12

That should say, " I think the board in general would benefit from NOT assuming the worst out loud"!

DeaconBoo · 08/03/2021 17:11

@RufustheSniggeringReindeer

Im not uncomfortable with debate and discussion

I do think that allowing newbies to get away with breaking the super secret rules and not so secret rules while the regulars have to abide by both sets of rules...even the super secret ones

Is incredibly unfair

I don’t like unfair...it doesn’t make me uncomfortable though

I agree. I'm usually reluctant to pile on MNHQ as I recognise they have a difficult job to do and want to be balanced. I'm definitely up for healthy debate, with people who are courteous and are here in good faith.

If people come on to goad I'll either ignore it or try and see if there's a nugget of good points to be discussed - sometimes initial posts can seem inexperienced or confrontational but that doesn't always mean the poster is being rude on purpose or doesn't have a point to make, and I think the board in general would benefit from assuming the worst out loud, as the loudest voices get heard way more than the more thoughtful ones.
However, in this case, this was really weird, with posts being deleted for 'new' reasons and rules being applied inconsistently, as I saw it?
Perhaps if MN has invited someone specifically to come and post and this is being watched elsewhere, this could be made clear and MN could guide that poster towards the 'spirit' of discussion that we all try and stick to?

when it starts looking like there's something going on behind the scenes, so to speak, people start feeling like they're being duped or mocked or something and it's not a nice feeling.

tellmewhentheLangshiplandscoz · 08/03/2021 16:52

I didn't know Cara had been banned, what on earth for? I've only seen her post civil and thoughtful contributions.

Mole thanks for those though.

RufustheSniggeringReindeer · 08/03/2021 16:50

Im not uncomfortable with debate and discussion

I do think that allowing newbies to get away with breaking the super secret rules and not so secret rules while the regulars have to abide by both sets of rules...even the super secret ones

Is incredibly unfair

I don’t like unfair...it doesn’t make me uncomfortable though

Helleofabore · 08/03/2021 16:26

@YetAnotherBeckyMumsnet

I AM uncomfortable when posters who have no intention of posting in good faith, and who state it, then post lies about posters on this board, naming names and stating they are transphobic when they were in fact, telling lies about that poster. I did make the mods aware of this poster's intention, and then when they started posting the lies, let them know this as well. Yet, MN towers thanked the poster on twitter.

I do now worry that a precedence has been set that allows this type of misrepresentation to occur again with named users. Surely, if this is happening, the bad faith poster should actually be banned?

Or are we to expect that this is now standard procedure - lies about users can be told on other platforms, and no action taken after you have been made aware of it. This then invites the potential for doxing, for abuse and other actions based on false information.

SheldonesqueIsUnwell · 08/03/2021 16:19

I didn’t know about the biscuit either.

However it looks surprising like an angry bum hole which I’m sure would upset anyone who ‘chose’ to take offence so maybe that is why....

DayBath · 08/03/2021 16:10

@ArabellaScott

We know women are being silenced, same as they are all over the place.

It's very confusing for MN to say that they are determined to allow discussion but then have hundreds of totally arbitrary rules that aren't actually ever spelled out (don't use the 'biscuit' emoticon on Feminist Chat?!) applied only to regulars is like trying to play pigeon chess while an invisible sparrowhawk picks us off one by one. To stretch an analogy.

I was unaware of this rule...how about they just disable the option to use it then we wouldn't have to guess?

It's becoming clear that Mumsnet is taking the same approach as our rather unwelcome visitors have been. Namely, the tactic of ignoring all the tricky questions that would require specific answers and instead sticking to general sweeping statements. If you can't beat them, join them eh Mumsnet?

OP posts:
DayBath · 08/03/2021 16:08

Very disappointing that Becky hasn't answered a single one of the questions raised in this thread with that reply.

Definitely not getting premium now. I was considering it but this has firmly made my mind up. I won't give a penny to people who openly mock their user base like this.

OP posts:
MoleSmokes · 08/03/2021 16:01

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

ArabellaScott · 08/03/2021 16:00

We know women are being silenced, same as they are all over the place.

It's very confusing for MN to say that they are determined to allow discussion but then have hundreds of totally arbitrary rules that aren't actually ever spelled out (don't use the 'biscuit' emoticon on Feminist Chat?!) applied only to regulars is like trying to play pigeon chess while an invisible sparrowhawk picks us off one by one. To stretch an analogy.

Kit19 · 08/03/2021 15:57

Indeed thecatonthemat

you invited people over to FWR knowing full well what that would mean, and allowed posts to stand from people who admitted they had come only to harvest screenshots, whilst deleting posts from regulars asking why those posts were being allowed to stand.

I could understand MN being neutral and letting us 'fight it out' so to speak but it seemed that we were fighting not just hostile incomers but MN too

its a pretty shoddy way to treat people