Unpleasant thread answers, but not ‘personal attacks’? Does it make Mumsnet into a place you don’t want to engage with as much, or at all?

Almost always the first response will be nasty one. I think such people click unanswered threads to quickly get their pathetic boot in to then enjoy the nastiness which follows as others copy them.

I have also been here 20 odd years and find it tedious at times. The crap comment is usually only a few posts in, the OP gets twisted and turned. Mostly I find it boring and predictable. Not everyone can agree and nor should they but the deliberate pulling someone apart and derailing a thread is tedious.

Off topic but actually they don’t block selling pets anymore even if you report an ad but do block you trying to sell wheelchairs, rollators or orthopaedic cushions!

I’ve been here 20+ years and it was ever thus, although back in the old days there were fewer posters so when people were insufferable cunts it was more noticeable.

I actually think MN is good at self moderating. Frequently I read a thread where the first 10-15 posts are really berating the OP but by the time you get to the bottom posters have stepped in and called out the worst behaviour.

I would never post about something I felt sensitive or vulnerable about these days, and I have been here on and off for over 20 years.

I am amazed at how people can be so rude, nasty and crass as to start long running personal arguments with other posters on someone else’s thread. It derails the thread and must be horrible for a struggling OP.

The recent thread by a woman whose Dd was in hospital with burns. Horrible. People attacking her. People not bothering TRTFT continuing to attack her. Posters having vitriolic arguments amongst themselves, on and on.

I would be ashamed if my kids behaved like that in the playground. But these posters are mothers.

Totally agree OP. There are some really aggressive folks on here.

I don't know but it seems to be getting worse, especially when OP is posting about a difficult time they are going through. Is it really necessary to keep on at someone? If you don't believe OP then say so and leave the thread.

I do agree that the best tactic is just to completely ignore them, but it's still very upsetting

The layout of the site and the functionality has changed a lot - that's why people reply less to one another (sub chats used to sort of grow). Everyone used to be able to search user names and although it wasn't "done" I think the knowledge that others could look up their history possibly also curbed some insanity, but more in terms of people making things up which contradicted their previous posts rather than making posters be nice.

Gina Ford threatened to have Mumsnet shut down for nasty comments about her about twenty years ago. There were articles about the fabled meanness of Mumsnet posters and the free speech/censorship issues in the then relatively new world of huge million plus users anonymous online forums in the mainstream press quite a lot in the few years after that as there's no such thing as bad publicity the site grew rapidly.

Where on earth did that come from ?

That’s so interesting! I see lots of commenters say that things have really changed since the early days when everyone was more supportive and replied to each others more instead of to OP. This is the first I read that nothing has changed and things kind of have always been like this. I didn’t know that.

I’m a seasoned Reddit user for 10 years, but only on this site for 1. I’ve watched Reddit change so much over the years I imagined the same happened here.

I really have no problem with different opinions, and in fact enjoy reading them.
But when someone is in a vulnerable position, they are told they are negligent, failures, that the other posters feel sorry for their husbands, kids, and family… really sticking the boot in.

If someone is vulnerable, they can really absorb that.
I remember one woman who was upset at her husband for ignoring her wishes. So she had stopped talking to him.

I get that commenters felt she was wrong, but they absolutely went at her. They said she’s an abuser and abusing her spouse and children. “Feel awful for your kids, you’re abusive.” Etc.
She ended up in great distress, having the thread removed.

It was so unnecessarily cruel.
It felt like watching schoolyard bullies kick at someone on the ground and doing nothing. I know I’m too sensitive but I’ve always been thin skinned and don’t think it’ll change- I can’t handle it all up to the mass pile ons.

Full disclosure - a comment of mine was deleted because I said someone needed training (so I’m clearly no angel).

I was on MN almost twenty years ago, for a good few years, then deleted my account (because I was spending too long on MN) but back then posters made exactly the same predictions (the famous "nest of vipers" reputation dates from almost the beginning, before I joined).

It's no better and no worse than twenty years ago on here.

Other social media has generally less anonymity - there's some element of a personal profile and followers and photos on the social sites where influencers exist; that limits the kind of posts people only make anonymously to some extent, but on big public groups there are plenty of people posting worse things than you'd ever find on MN. Facebook has introduced anonymous posting so that will probably/possibly increase.

The dire predictions about MN never come to anything though - some kind of equilibrium was reached many years ago.

We need a jellyfish or bee sting reaction button. There was a light hearted thread this evening and no need for the stinging rudeness of one poster.

I report posts if they are really unpleasant even if they clearly aren’t personal attacks. They generally get deleted.

You can strongly disagree with someone and still be polite. It’s not hard.

I think there are a lot of really nasty spiteful people about. It’s sad.

I appreciate the fact that MN is a ‘safe space’ where people have the freedom to robustly express strongly held opinions which may be outside the mainstream of public discourse. A mainstream which is very narrow, very restrictive & the limits of which are strictly enforced.

I accept that when I log into MN I am likely to read things I disagree with, posted by people I would probably dislike if I met them IRL. That’s absolutely fine by me. I respect their right to express themselves as long as they show the same respect to me.

MN should be very proud of its record on facilitating debate on contentious issues, particularly that of women’s rights vs trans rights. Free speech is a fundamentally good thing. Long may it continue.

The Times were having problems with this in their comments section after the articles and they dramatically improved things by stopping anonymous usernames. All subscribers who leave a comment must now use their real names. The nasty comments have dried up.

Yes, I do think there are often horrible responses that seem determined to interpret the OP in the worst possible ways, or just to crush them when they are having a bad time. I really notice the lack of moderation here, compared to other online places I frequent. It does put me off reading or posting, and discourages me from recommending the site to others. Some of the less-frequented topics are much better - AIBU and anything showing up in "Trending" is going to be worst.

What amazes me is how often it’s the second post. It makes me wonder if it’s a bot thing.

I think a lot of people come on here to work out their frustrations against the world and be incredibly unpleasant.

However, I ALSO think that some people give far too much of a shit about what some anonymous idiot on an internet forum has said to or about them. As it genuinely doesn’t matter.

It can be irritating (and I do wish that MN had a block button), but it’s not a massive deal, imo.

I just scroll on past those comments esp. ones that quote me trying to pick a fight.

I'm more irritated by the threads that look made up just to try and hit the top list.

I don't think insults and other things like mocking are allowed anymore and yet, until 1 year ago: are you on glue - was allowed. Or : give your head a wobble - from someone who just dislikes your opinion

be careful to understand that disliking someone's opinion does not make them a bully - that is true also

or some common sense logic which expressed in a straightforward way also is not a bully ..

I don’t always agree with outright nastiness.

But your comparison with a workplace made me reflect that actually, I would absolutely love to tell some colleagues what I really think. I obviously don’t, because it’s not the done thing.

I do worry that we are living in these bubbles of ‘you can’t say that!’ That when in a space where you are anonymous and can say it, it floods out easily.

I think the goadiness can flow in both directions. A lot of OP’s will make me think ‘crickey, you are a very foolish person’ and they don’t need to be patted on the head and told there there, you’re doing an amazing job.