Reducing Moderation Load for MN (continuation of Dealing with Inflammatory Posts)

Maryz
I think putting a thread on Aibu would be goading MNHQ - and I don't believe that they deserve that sort of treatment.
Post after post on here has acknowledged their courage in listening to this community after Spartacus and allowing debate to happen.
We know that they are under immense pressure and I think there's a consensus that on occasions some of the many threads on here have 'not been as constructive' as they could have been.
I really believe that the issues are too important to lose by getting into pointless arguments with MNHQ. There are hundreds of threads which are powerful, informative and don't break any guidelines but are responsible for highlighting issues, getting things into the media and informing so many people. Let's stay focused on the issues and continue to persistently, respectfully but assertively call out the erosion of women's rights that is happening without society's consent and keep highlighting #nodebate

Agree with all the comments about the subreddit. It is harsher in tone but it is moderated by the community it was created for so trolling is quickly shut down.

I don't actually post there because as Ophelia said it's quite US centric (and I haven't quite got to grips with how reddit works ) but I enjoy reading some of the discussions even though some of the regulars are way more radfem than me.

I have noticed we have a lot of support there for how we are pushing back against the narrative in the UK. We have an advantage in being a smaller country with a centralised government. I get the impression it's so much harder in the US because of policy differences at a state level.

If we used the subreddit too, it would also have a British voice and we might learn from one another. I agree though the tone is far less polite than on here and sometimes that isn't helpful. I can think of a few posts I've read where I thought it was a bit much,having said that I think it can be a product of frustration and if the majority of users are US or Canadian then they are in a different place to us and their frustrations may be a result of that.

I think that subreddit has mainly USA users too.
The great thing about this place is that we're all mostly British and so don't have to navigate our way through another country's laws or customs to make our point.

It doesn't solve

4. The hiding of FWR from active achieves making that forum harder to find for casual droppers in, and less easy to casually drop in and stir on. However it also hides it from the rest of MN and many of the women on FWR are there because they initially picked up threads in active and had a look.

There's no quick answer to that one, but in the short term I sympathise with HQ needing a break.

The subreddit is great but fair warning, those who're already having trouble with the more direct commenters here and who need a layer of softening language around the more robust criticism of specific individuals/men as a group/fetish as a motivating factor for some transitions etc probably aren't going to like it much. The tone tends to be a lot less "nice".

It's not really a place randoms would stumble across if they weren't specifically looking for it though, which was one of the main advantages of having conversations about how trans stuff impacts women happen on Mumsnet.

The more comfortable people have become with FWR having become a trans excluding space rather than one that is for feminists across the spectrum,

I'm sorry but that is tosh, unless you're saying that transwomen with the 'wrong views' aren't really trans. There are a number of trans MNetters posting regularly on the threads who feel very strongly that self ID and much of the ideology is wrong, damaging to them and does not represent the trans community. Not agreeing with Self ID and being gender critical is not 'exclusionary' or 'hateful', and that's the heart of what the discussion here is trying to argue.

I have the greatest support for MNHQ. They listened to the Spartacus threads and changed moderation policy. They have allowed discussion here allowed nowhere else, and it's obvious that behind the scenes they are being hammered over it. The point made last weekend was that when they're dealing with complaints they're put in a very difficult position if the complainant has a point. It's a fine line. Madigan, as a public figure taking actions and making statements on social media within a public facing capacity, should be held accountable for actions and those actions open to discussion as for any other public figure. It cannot be unacceptable to voice criticism of any trans person no matter what their role or actions purely because of their trans status, that's discriminatory against them in itself. However the tone and language of those discussions have at times crossed the line into angry, personal, rude and just plain using the space to have a dig. That is not acceptable, HQ can't stand behind that and make a case for their support of free speech and good use of MN, and it feeds the false view being spread that MN is a hive of nasty gossips. It will be used as a weapon to stop free speech because the root of this is a desperation to prevent women talking about it, questioning it and sharing information with the wider world.

of the discussion so far, 3 things.

1. Tone policing. Not engaging with people there to be rude and looking to just have a dig or stir the pot. I've seen several threads today where someone's said something provocative and other posters have just ignored it and carried on talking. The willpower to not 'have to have your say' in response to something provoking matters.

2. A standard TRA political strategy is to inundate and blitz a non compliant organisation with endless emails, tweets, complaints, with the idea of causing enough annoyance and dominating enough staff time that the organisation buckles. Basically scream long enough and you'll get the sweets. So HQ need the complaints to be obviously groundless every time . If they can quickly and easily check and reply 'no, that doesn't break guidelines' it makes their life easier. Its where some complaints have a point and deletions happen that make it harder for them.

3. The suggestion of 'vexatious complainers' sounds a really good one. If three reports in a row are found to be not breaking guidlines than suspend or ban that user. Equally if someone is deleted x number of times in a row for breaking talk guidelines I'd also fully support MN suspending or banning that user too.

I guess we will have to keep posting things into AIBU/Chat/News. Not the debate/personal opinion/twitter stuff but anything that is political or newsworthy that the media is also reporting on. Keep it visible.

Who dares wants to start an "aibu to think mnhq shouldn't be censoring free speech by hiding the entire Feminist Board?" thread?

We need to bring this into real life. How did the suffragettes get their message across before the internet? Perhaps use their tactics and modify them for now.

The internet is vast and the percentage of people who use forums is tiny. We need to speak to people face to face.

This is a good subreddit www.reddit.com/r/GenderCritical/

How long it will last is anyone's guess. It's been targeted for closure just like FWR.

"a space where people not yet up to speed on the changes can stumble across the discussion"

That used to be here. Now no-one will stumble across it

It would be better if they outright banned all discussion; that way we could vociferously object on the main board. This way they are paying lip-service to being a place for free discussion - but just hiding it from everyone who doesn't know it's here.

Agreed, the question is where? There are plenty of small blogs where women can talk freely but that doesn't do much good if it's just the same people talking to each other all the time (other than venting, which is useful in itself). What's needed is a space where people not yet up to speed on the changes can stumble across the discussion.

So where else do we do it? Everything else seems to be on Facebook but half of us don’t have it.

This will probably sound overly cynical to some but, for what it’s worth.

It strikes me that Mumsnet are regretting letting the discussion run as freely as it has until now. It probably benefitted them at first, drew more traffic to the FWR boards but then it got too much negative attention and it’s more trouble than it’s worth.

They clearly want an “out” but now they risk user revolt by dropping discussion abruptly..

They want an excuse, any excuse, to shut the conversation down and they’ll do so slowly and quietly to minimise user complaints.

For me, Mumsnets current stance signals the beginning of the end of open discussion on here and individuals who want to continue the debate probably need to be looking for somewhere else to do that.

It’s almost like we need a sexism board.
But we shouldn’t have to.

If you look back at feminist history, this policing of women's tone, whataboutery and accusations of exclusion has always been around.

I do totally agree with this, I should also say that I have learnt so much from the intelligent well informed posters on this board about all sorts issues, so thank you.

Datun How horrifying about Action for Trans Health, I had no idea! Also thank you for all your well informed and calmly rational posts.

re Because it's not intrinsically about trans people, it's about women. Perhaps discussion should just centre around trans people in relation to women and girls? There have been many, many posts here discussing trans issues though, from things Lily Madigan has tweeted, to studies about outcomes for post operative transwomen to whether or not gender dysphoria exists. I do think these things should be open to discussion.

'Trans-Twitter' has proved a very effective tool to some TRAs who wish to stoke fears and/or silence debate... It really is worth people being more aware about the various mechanisms used.
Changes in legislation/ policies has also been used very successfully although perhaps more as a threat (I think?) rather than being actually tested.
There is a much bigger picture!!

Can I point something out re reporting each other for tone violations, etc? Spartacus worked because there were so many women who all stood up and refused to be silenced all at once. If we now have some people policing the language others use and reporting back to HQ if they don't like the tone of other regulars then that's basically opening the door to divide and conquer approaches. So if the idea is to be tactical here, maybe keep that in mind.

Redirect to relevance to women and girls, WGLTGH etc is a different thing, in that it's a public reminder to keep one's eye on the prize.

If whoever is trying to shut down these conversation sees a potential for schism they'll exploit it for all they're worth.

It seems like this is one of those unstoppable force meets immovable object type problems for MN.

Whoever is putting pressure on them is unlikely to be happy with anything but total capitulation into TWAW.

Of course MN like many other orgs could decide to comply with this but it doesn't exactly sit well with a company that runs prominent campaigns about things that affect biological women.

It's a uniquely difficult situation because if they go fully down the trans inclusive root then in about ten seconds flat campaigns like the birth injuries one will be 'transphobic'. If they outright ban FWR then they get Spartacus again probably x10.

It's a similar situation to the one the WEP finds themselves in. All because women and girls must never be allowed to talk amongst themselves and form opinions without the input of men.

Yes, that's right, although that may have been before some of Stephonknee's more questionable identity decisions.

Wasn't Steph-on-knee given some sort of special advisory status in Canada?
And there was rapist/killer Karen Jones who was asked to speak at the House of Lords to shape opinion.

Indeed the "die cis scum" People are shaping policy.

Because it absolutely is those types. Action for Trans Health, who were the group who liked the 'let's fuck up some terfs' comment before the violence at speakers corner, were invited to give evidence to the original transgender equality report.

Agreed, these are the people insinuating themselves into every part of this movement.

they're not giving those posters enough information to self regulate.

This is also true, without guidance we are blindly assuming the problem when we 'may' be missing something crucial so even our best intentions might go awry.

This kind of issue makes it all the more confounding for me to hear women denounce feminism.