Any chance of a review of the FWR moderation rules in light of Maya Forstater's success in court please?

This thread is weirdly glitchy for me, anyone else? It's being regularly posted on but is way down my list of Threads I'm On? @MNHQ can you advise?

Aw Netmums, not been on there for absolute years lol
#pastblast
Used to be on there originally but then think I came over here via a "pitch invasion" thread where basically Mnetters came across to say "you smell" or something and I visited Mumsnet out of curiosity and never left
Must be going on at least 10 years ago now

@LangClegsInSpace. Thank you.

@JustineMumsnet. This poster speak sense.

Weird that they included a hashtag, presumably to get attention from anyone searching for "#mumsnet", but couldn't tag the actual Mumsnet Towers twitter account correctly, so anyone following MN account wouldn't see it.
Anyway, I'm sure they have lots of accurate and valuable input.

Does someone who is, by their own words, banned from the site, have moral authority to moderate the posts of our community?

I mean 4chan gets mentioned a lot

Sounds dreadful so I don’t go on there

Fruit farmers…don’t go on there

Netmums…don’t go on there (I’m sure it’s lovely but ticker tapes and hun aren’t my things)

I really don’t get it

Reading posts on a site you loathe just to report them

In fairness, they probably report everything already anyway. But yes some will see this as a green light welcoming it more.

What is Sakura suggesting, there, exactly? Could anyone spell it out for me?

Sorry, I meant to add it doesn't really make sense to attack advertisers. Advertisers want to sell their stuff to the biggest audience possible. Otherwise they'll go broke.

Last year a social media intern at the Co-op declared the business would no longer be advertising with Mr Neil's Spectator magazine, which turned out not to be true.

Today the Co-op decided to fight back against left-wing calls for companies to suspend advertising on GB News, saying the would advertise where they like and defended the 'editorial independence' of the media.

Screenshot for those without Twitter

twitter.com/SakuraNoSeirei/status/1404730253524844544?s=09

And here we go. Separating the board makes it even easier to target. No doubt every single thread will get targeted and mass reported.

..and yes, Lang's post was wonderful just above...
And the other issue for websites is money and advertisers. Look at the mess vodafone has got into today and has back tracked on withdrawing advertising from GB news. These are difficult issues now social media is so prevalent and the woke left and the liberal left are so far apart on so many topics.

Website rules (which I have written in the past) are not easy to produce and to be fair so the bottom line in most cases is if people complain about posts they get taken down. I can understand that. it can be very unfair as those who take offence at things get stuff taken down all the time using report buttons all over the internet and those like I am who just about never want a single thing censored even if it says I want to kill Xenia do not do the same thing.

On MN most women want to talk about these sex issues and some trans women seem to be men trying to shut women up as ever and yet MN is supposed to be the one place women are not shut up by men. MN has very bravely allowed women to talk about this topic despite many other places online (but not all) censoring it as they give in to the voice of the tiny small minority which shouts very loudly.

I have never really had huge interest in all this but it does seem weird there are complex rules about posting on trans issues. Might be simpler just to have the same rules for everywhere and to remove posts a lot less on this topic even if the post caused a trans person to feel upset and instead refer them sources of counseling instead.

We completely reject the accusation that we treat gender-critical feminists differently to our other users.

There's a poster who repeatedly gets 4 deletions within the 4 week period and isn't banned (or its happened several times to different non GC people.)

Just a thought; if fwr is reorganised to two separate boards will some previous threads be lost?

As we obviously link to many of them in various discussions.

langcleginspace

No emoji is safe 😩

Even could have a secret MNHQ meaning and here we are flinging wine and flowers around with wild abandon!

95% of your posts about this topic are specifically about your opinion of the FWR board and the posters on it.

After all this time refusal to engage in good faith, and just sneering about how wrong everyone is, does start to look like incivility.

As an example, you will have seen many posts with screenshots of angry people on Twitter, many male, making threats towards Mumsnet. You know this group exists and is whom that post was talking about. Yet you decided to pretend that you thought hecates was saying "everyone who disagrees with the GC position is a ragey man", just so you could disagree with it. That's called a "straw man" and is a sign of deliberate bad faith arguing and usually used to derail a thread.

I genuinely don't understand what you get out of posting on FWR as you are so determined not to engage in good faith about the issues discussed here.

I have frequently found fwr to be an intimidating, hostile and offensive environment because of these rules, the way they are applied and the effect that has had on the overall tone of discussion.

For example,
Mumsnet will always stand in solidarity with vulnerable or oppressed minorities.

Where is this commitment demonstrated towards lesbians?
The Equality Act defines lesbians as being women who are same sex oriented and that this a protected characteristic.

A number of posters were accorded a great deal of latitude during lesbian visibility week to insist that heterosexual male people must be accepted as lesbians.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/4232998-lesbian-visibility-week

I have frequently found fwr to be an intimidating, hostile and offensive environment because of these rules, the way they are applied and the effect that has had on the overall tone of discussion.

For example,
2. We don’t allow posts which are derogatory or aggressive towards trans people. We believe there are ways to express both opinion and facts without crossing this line.

Where is the equivalent rule stating that MNHQ does not allow derogatory or agressive posts towards women, including those who lack a belief in gender identity?