Justine says MN is too mean and will tighten-up moderation

[noblegiraffe]

Justine posted this on a low-traffic thread in AIBU and I think it deserves a wider audience than it is currently getting, especially as it is asking posters to report low-level sniping and pile-ons. Perhaps a bigger announcement is planned, I don't know.

"Thanks for raising this - it's something we've been discussing internally as we've noticed the same shift you’re describing and we agree it’s something we need to get a much firmer grip on. Debate is part of Mumsnet’s DNA, but unnecessary meanness isn’t, and it helps absolutely no one.
We’ve already put a plan in place to tighten things up. It’s not just about deleting the really obvious personal attacks, but tackling the low-level sniping and pile ons that drain the life out of threads and discourage people from posting in the first place. That means more proactive involvement from us earlier in a thread, not just sweeping up afterwards.
One thing that really helps is reporting. There are around 25,000 posts a day on here, so we really don’t see that much in real time. If something feels off, please do report it. We promise to read things in context and we’d much rather step in early than let a thread spiral.
Most people on here genuinely want to give support or perspective. When that gets drowned out by needless nastiness, everyone loses. So thank you to everyone who’s raised this. We hear you, we agree with you, and we’re working on it."

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/5442610-the-current-state-of-mn-and-how-do-i-stop-reading?reply=148524522&utm_campaign=thread&utm_medium=share

Its not about not owning what I post. I've had the same name for a couple of years now so I know that info is available. If I needed to, I could name change.

If you suspect someone of trolling or wrong doing etc, you can just report them and let MN decide can't you? I don't understand the need to check for yourself?
I have seen it used in horrible ways on threads and it makes me uncomfortable. Then that information is usually shared with others on the thread. Not being able to check for trolls is a small price to pay to maintain some privacy imo.

Trending is also a bit weird. I've just screenshotted this - how can a thread with only 39 posts be number 1 on trending? It might be getting lots of views (I assume that's why it's top, because people want to know what the problem is), but it's not actually getting much engagement. So it's just promoting clickbaity titles but not actually good content?

MN need to put their money where their mouths are and pay for proper moderation, the fact that they still run nightwatch with a few volunteers is insane

I'm not a data analyst but my guess is it's not just number of clicks but also the time in which those clicks occur. Clicks per second etc. It could also be views of the thread without posting or just moving on quickly.

It’s a bit self fulfilling if they put at the top of trending!

Mumsnet moderation has such a difficult job as there are (understandably) so many people with many opposing views.

People obviously have strong views on what they deem to be goady, racist, homophobic, transphobic etc but I find it particularly unhelpful when PPs just announce that a whole thread is ‘full’ of hatred or bigotry or whatever and get cross if MN doesn’t delete everything they dislike. Their view of ‘transphobia’ for example, may just be a plain statement of reality.

‘Hatred’ is such a subjective and overused term often applied when PPs disagree with a point being made or inconvenient facts but can’t actually refute any of it.

I see some inconsistencies in moderation, that’s always going to happen but I do think MN are doing a pretty good job in challenging circumstances.

That’s fine, but I think any trawling back through old posts, to simply use it to batter a poster over the head is wrong, and does not help achieve what Justine@MN is seeking to achieve.

Some posters post inaccurate info - they either make a mistake or do so deliberately. One should be content to correct them at the time.

The AS feature has been weaponised by some - we all know it. It is not what it was designed for.

Be wary of this. I've been accused a few times of being Poster X, Y, Z. I have name changed several times over the years, but none of the posters I've been accused of being have been any of my past identities.

Maybe if posters could only AS their own user name, it would stop the nosey parkers and the stalkers.

If you're a name changer, your name change history is in your settings.

I used to change my name by a tiny bit most weeks
with the express aim of breaking advanced search
but I CBA any more

Certain topics I no longer engage with
as they were why I had a rather long holiday from the site

unwatching threads that get derailed seems to work for me

I don't have a problem with AS. I find it useful for finding old threads that might have some good advice about an issue I'm having.

Not a chance I'd start a new thread for advice now.

True. To be clear, I would never accuse a poster on the boards. But as pp said, it can help confirm if there is anything iffy going on and whether it is best to ignore a poster.

@Damnthetorpedoes

I think any trawling back through old posts, to simply use it to batter a poster over the head is wrong, and does not help achieve what Justine@MN is seeking to achieve.

Yes, I agree with this.

I don’t want an echo chamber either, but I would like the ability to block posters.

There’s one poster in particular whose views I find very upsetting - I now leave any threads that they are on, as they seem to generally skirt just the right side of Talk Guidelines, but it does feel as though I can’t discuss some things I would like to. Blocking would lead to a much better experience.

Keyboard warriors have been in existence for at least 25 years.

Best ignored, or get off of the thread. Don’t provide more click bait. 🤷‍♀️

I think mumsnet users are pretty good at calling out the miscreants but I can understand how it might sometimes seem quite hostile, especially for those who aren't used to it.

I don’t understand how blocking works? If the poster you want to block is engaging with others won’t you just see half the conversation? And then I assume they won’t see your input so it creates a disjointed thread

I will never start a thread on here again after the vicious pile on mine received at a time when I was really low and needing an online shoulder to cry on. To their credit MN deleted the thread promptly at my request.

How would that work on a public discussion forum though?

Wise words, Boomer55
There are some great threads on here, but also some which need engaging with only with caution and some I won't engage with at all

What really beats me though is why folk give oxygen to the few who are very obviously only there to wind people up. Doubtless the clicks please the advertisers but I'm not sure what use they are to anyone else

About time!

I've had so many threads ruined even plain in cous threads ruined by the human bull dozers.

Let's hope this includes dealing with the mra/incels/common-or-garden misogynists that are allowed to flourish here. That is long overdue.

The forums I’ve been on before that allowed it basically hid posts from the blocked person saying “this post is from someone you’ve blocked” but you could still choose to click and see what they’d written if you really wanted to. It just wasn’t in your face.

This to me Is not about different political views but posting about wrapping a present and one thing you've said being repeated ,blown out of all proportion and called selfish and wicked for wrapping a present

or on the threads about dogs in shops etc - I’ve noticed pro dog people come and just post pictures of their dogs thus killing the discussion. I don’t think this is ok.