mn is a public website. We do not sign up to terms and conditions that say threads may not be discussed outside of mn, on twitter etc...

[wannaBe]

yep, thread about a thread... big deal.

so - thread started on mn. Another poster tweeted about said thread, came back to the thread and said she'd tweeted about it.

Subsequently posters called for her to be banned for tweeting about a sensitive thread, followed by lots of other nasty name-calling.

Thing is, the thread was public anyway. You don't have to be logged into mn to view it. You don't have to have a button next to each post to tweet about it - all you'd have to do is copy/paste the link into twitter. Once you put your private business on a public website you lose control over what happens to it/who talks about it/tweets about it/potentially writes about it in the press.

To suggest that a poster should be banned for talking about a thread that is on a public website, on another public website is ridiculous.

Mn has hundreds of thousands of hits a day. People are very naive if they think that their private, sensitive business is limited to the few people that post on the threads in question.

And people do discuss mn on twitter. Both in terms of threads/the potential genuineness of posters/the outcomes of threads. It's just that they don't come back on to mn to talk about having done so.

If I were going to post on a sensitive subject then I would name change. I am far too easily identifiable (even if I did not have photos on my profile).

I think this new thing of expecting the OP to PM another poster to verify her identity as a long-term poster is not on, tbh. Or that the OP feels she has to do this.

She only verified it, because there were almost immediate cries of troll and she was desperate for some advice

yes, it's shame she had to do that

I havnt gone any further now than I did at the point of mentioning the link on the original thread.

I only came back to put my 2pennorth in because all of the twisting she did of my words and contexts.

I don't care if she's a well known poster or not. I don't name change, I don't feel the need to, if she wants to hide behind a name change thats her prerogative but you can't expect loyalty from people who dont "know" you.

She "hid" behind a name change for a very good reason.

The thread would still have kicked off in the same way (they always do, I am so with you on that one, Al) and would have been forced into name-changing anyway because she got such a kicking

name changers should still be subject to the same rules of decency and good manners, yes ?

MNHQ seem to think so

even trolls are a protected species

PeterAndreForPM... As LyingWitchInTheWardrobe. Yes, I would. It's not my real name, I have no profile and I only ever talk in the abstract or about things that don't matter if the world at large knows about them.

I can see that it's a double-edged sword; people do build up online personas and make 'friends', and I suppose they think that their problem, whatever it is, is best served from behind a new identity. I don't necessarily agree with that but that's just my view.

If I'd built an online persona, I might not post the subject at all but might ask a few of my MN friends for their views, perhaps?

I'm not saying that any way is right or wrong BUT the name changing allows for abuse of it and the calls of 'troll' for a name that isn't known.

Alouiseg... I agree with your last point, I would take no notice of anyone 'vouching' for anybody else either, how can anybody do that really?

PeterAndre... name changers should still be subject to the same rules of decency and good manners... absolutely, but therein lies the flaw. What constitutes decency and good manners? In my opinion, there are plenty of 'regulars' who behave like 'trolls' sometimes. They name-call and are very aggressive, they band together with others to belittle someone they don't like. It's par for the course on a chatboard.

What can MNHQ actually do about it? Rely on reports and remove the posts/poster, check. Monitor each and every thread for nastiness? Possibly but what's the point?

It really is down to the users of the site. If they don't know how to behave and conduct themselves in public then I really don't know how they can be made to?

Have not seen the thread but YANBU

PeterAndre... sorry, not trying to stalk you but... why do threads 'kick off' anyway? That is something I really don't understand. Why do people have to get shouty and sweary over a difference of opinion. Some posters sound derranged and quite unhinged almost.

I've only just found out about this as I was off MN all weekend. Not sure if the original thread has been deleted? Can't find it, but I get the gist of what has gone on. FWIW, I think it's a bit pointless getting our knickers in a twist about linking threads (whether sensitive, in bad taste or otherwise) to Twitter, when we are quite used to opening up our newspapers and seeing our quotes lifted and used on an almost daily basis, and those quotes appear in black and white print, stuck under the noses of millions of people at the breakfast table, to peruse at their leisure for the rest of the day.

Twitter moves so fast that unless you are famous and have people hanging onto your every word then you are unlikely to make much of an impact on more than a handful of people, for a few brief moments.

I think Justine's response on the Site Stuff thread was a very good and pragmatic one. And if we have learned anything at all from the Riven debacle surely it's that it is up to us to ensure our own privacy on MN is water-tight, as once the words hit the screen they no longer belong to us. It must be down to us to think ahead about how/where/why our words might be used once we've pressed send.

I understand why some people want there to be a sort of self-imposed code of conduct or decency, but it's impossibly subjective and therefore useless. As far as I can tell, even this particular issue was no longer about the OP by the time it got tweeted, but a general bunfight between the libertarians and the anti-porn feminists. Just because the thread had its root in a RL problem, doesn't mean the whole topic should be off-limits in terms of wider debate.

Alouiseg - "The only concession I will make is that if i recognised the posters name or she had a profile I probably wouldn't have linked it."

You know all regular posters then, do you? Even the ones who frequent boards that you may have no interest in and therefore don't look at?

You're being spectacularly obtuse Scaredof Cows. "recognise" and "know" are different entirely

She isn't being obtuse, but you are - pretending not to understand the point she is making, which I believe is that even though you don't recognise a name, it may still be one that many others recognise and would wish to protect.

OK Alouiseg, my mistake, you 'recognise' all posters, do you?

Lying didn't mean to ignore you. The thread has moved on a bit now while I fed my children.

It really is down to the users of the site

Yep, that's about the crux of it.

Try Google, all my stuffs on there, so's yours.

The ability to do advanced search on anyone or anything has been down for most of the day due to technical tweaking. There are threads on it in Site Stuff. Alouiseg has not had every trace of her existence pulled if that's what you are thinking!

sorry Lenin, crossed posts.

I would love to cross reference all the people banging on at AlousieG with the people posting about all these meany bullies on MN.

I have an odd suspicion that they may just tally. which would be highly hypercritical.

shame i can't be arsed.

You need the spreadsheet Yogi, it's my turn at the moment, who wants it next.

I need a bigger house, that way i can have a whole filing cabonet dedicated to the cause