If you (still) feel the need to discuss Moldies [part 2]

sorry, quattro, I get you now

No, I'm not sure most people have decided that Hunker. Although some people have said it often...

I'm not sure I have decided that MN is better for the existence of Moldies, actually.

I have, though, accepted that it is a reality and isn't likely to change.

WHAT, iorek? like the BIRTHDAY TABLE??!!

ok hunker

for time being let the people who got hurt talk

Thanks for doing that Aitch.

And sorry Daddy - was trying to be positive about the existence of moldies

I think I see aitch. So there were polls initially, then these were replaced by nominations which were accepted or rejected by a secret panel. And now all doors are currently closed until a new system can be agreed upon.

Maybe all members should be allowed to invite a friend on their birthday, say? That would be fair and avoid both unpleasantness and population explosion, no?

Haven't most people decided that MN's all the better for Moldies existence anyway?

And DaddyJ, I'm still interested why you think I'm like Nestle. I haven't knowingly killed any babies in the Third World recently, for instance.

Aitch, good summation. I think a lot of Moldies just wanted some time to think things through - a bit of a breather. I felt like Alice after she'd fallen down the rabbit hole and discovered a new land and suddenly OBM's there going "Drink me, eat me, follow the White Rabbit, OFF WITH YOUR HEAD!" and all I wanted to do was put my apron straight, adjust my Alice band and work out where Dinah had got to.

forget the polls, BIWI. that was over in a day.

think vetoes. a list is put up, you veto via CAT. i don't know how many vetoes it took before a person would be excluded but i asked and was told it was more than one. there are a few mods as well and it was agreed that if there was any dubiety i think that they would just decide. but don't for a minute think that the admin was conducted by a professional pollster, people seem to have fallen through cracks all over the place. but given the furore and hurt of the last fortnight (yikes), it might be difficult to contact people now. thank fuck i have nothign to do with that, i wouldn't fancy sorting that out.

anyway, really, all i wanted to do was de-mystify the process... i hope i've gone some way to achievinig that.

truth and reconcilliation, quattro

we have had 7000 post of bile and bitterness already

well i've said on the other thread that i wish MNHQ would make MN posts only accessible to those who register, but that idea seems to have been rejected because of those who want advice only by googling. At least then we would gain some of the benefits that Moldies have.

see i'd disagree with you there, soapy. but that's cos we is all different. to my mind a system that can exclude someone on the basis of a few negative votes can't be democratic. i may have whinged on about that at the time.

but certainly people wanted to do the right thing, and to find a fair and decent system, no question about that. it's just that there probably isn't one, really, and there's the rub.

But see the moldies wanted a different type of forum to the one they had here. As others have posted, a benign dictatorship as opposed to a democracy. And you know (repeats herself) isn't it good that they have the forum that they want?

You're looking at this hurts issue in isolation onebat. If the mouldies had stayed on here and carried on undertaking prefects duties etc - which not all of them did but a fair few - then the possibility of hurt is not isolated to the creation of moldies. Just look at all those negative threads started about MN ...

Or was it really as simple as deciding it on the basis of the polls?

no, iorek. there was never any open 'don't like the cut of their jib' going on, nor any [yes] or [no] with a name attached (i realise i suggested that with the de facto polls thing but it couldn't have happened that way, tehre would have been uproar at the attaching of names to votes, so i steered you wrong there). soapy has explained what MP and i are remembering, that there was an expression of distaste for the results that 'penguin a' was getting because penguin a was generally known to be a good MNer of long-standing and therefore there must be some exercising of grudges going on which is nasty and unbecoming of a lady. at least i think that's right.

So whilst we're picking scabs, still no-one has answered my question as to who actually made the decisions as to who was in/out.

Yes that is very true, Mrs A, re: the general take-it-leave-it attitude to democracy - in that Moldies only reflects the wider world.

In fairness Aitch it tried to be democratic about how things were run. There was poll after poll after poll asking for members' views. However, almost as soon as the decision was made 'democratically' the next volley of 'discussions' started.

Aargh. I say everything twice. Sorry. Will stop asking questions now.

Threadworm - I issued an impassioned plea for it all to stop last night. The post was totally ignored. It'll stop when it stops - that's all that can be said I'm afraid.

TFM, yes, a benign dictatorship seemed to be exactly what a lot of tired people wanted.

Onebat - sorry to have brought this all up again. I know you have been caught painfully in the middle of it all (and from what I can see have acted with exceptional integrity throughout).

As an outsider mumsnetter who is not really involved and who missed it all while it was happening, it is irresistably fascinating. If you did want to continue the discussion, could you not just obscure the names in your examples: penguin a nominated penguin b, but penguin c said b was a c*/never heard of her/didn't like the cut of her jib etc.

Aitch thanks for your demystification. It is sounding less like a satanic cult already. Regarding the poll threads though, I'm not sure I understand the distinction between "debating the merits and demerits of people on the threads" and using them as "de facto polls". What's the difference?

Onebat - sorry to have brought this all up again. I know you have been caught painfully in the middle of it all (and from what I can see have acted with exceptional integrity throughout).

As an outsider mumsnetter who is not really involved and who missed it all while it was happening, it is irresistably fascinating. If you did want to continue the discussion, could you not just obscure the names in your examples: penguin a nominated penguin b, but penguin c said b was a c*/never heard of her/didn't like the cut of her jib etc.

Aitch thanks for your demystification. It is sounding less like a satanic cult already. Regarding the poll threads though, I'm not sure I understand the distinction between "debating the merits and demerits of people on the threads" and using them as "de facto polls". What's the difference?

"The only discussion one can have is to decide what is the "least worst" way of deciding membership."

Well, there's a valid ethical position which says that anything which needs the 'least worst' option to be chosen is unethical, unless the act of NOT choosing so is ethically even worse.

So NO-ONE was going to be hurt if MOldies didn't come into existence.

But SOME-ONE was going to be hurt if it did.

Option One is the ethical choice, if one buys this argument.

It's not going to stop being confused, full of mutual misunderstanding, hurtful, etc. But it can just stop. At 1000. Please?