to think MNHQ should not be deleting posts in this way? WARNING: Ranty

[doublestandard]

So, having a post deleted is a MN rite of passage and all that, but I think MNHQ have got a bit trigger happy with the delete button of late but not in a good way. And yes this is a bit thread about a thread but I think it's a general problem and worth discussing.

As an example, I have recently had a post from AIBU deleted because I said the manner in which a poster had disregarded others opinions was "flaming arrogant" and that "You have come across on this thread as a self-important, judgey know-it-all". Apparently this constitutes a personal attack?? Since when have we not been allowed to say that a specific post on a thread suggests arrogance? Or that a poster is coming across in a certain way? It is not saying the poster is arrogant or a self-important, judgey know-it-all but that is how they are being perceived.

Now ordinarily I'd shrug this off but I'm seeing more and more posters crying "personal attack!" when disagreed with and then having posts that seem to me to be quite reasonable deleted. I am also baffled that MNHQ have decided that it is not a personal attack to leave up comments by another poster stating that I condone child abuse (I mean what the actual fuck?!) when I have said nothing of the kind and because my post above is deleted people can't make up their own minds. Either delete both or delete neither surely?

I think most people on MN employ an attack the posts, not the poster as a rule. Yes, it is a bit more blunt on AIBU than relationships or behaviour and development for example, and I think that's right, but I find the nannying attitude and selective decisions not to be in the spirit of MN.

-----

Disclaimers

I have namechanged because I don't want to draw any more attention to the thread where MNHQ sees fit to allow a post to stand that falsely states I support the abuse of children. I suspect a few people may recognise me and/or the thread so I'd prefer not to be outed thanks.

In the interests of fairness there was another part of my post that MNHQ felt could be interpreted as "giving the finger". It was actually nothing of the kind - it was a reference to being part of a particular organisation and then a flounce - but I can see how someone might have interpreted it as that even if I don't agree. Fair enough to decide to take it down, but why leave up a libellous post stating a poster condones child abuse when the orginal post is not there to be judged?

I have raised this with MNHQ and the second paragraph draws on their email response.

ditto. Will fwd it to work.

Perhaps this when you're tempted to rise to the bait. It says I've seen you, but I'm not playing

I've absolutely come around to the idea of hide poster. If a few of the people who see red when they see my posts hid me too the world might be a happier place.

Oh and MN should amke sure people are reliably told when their posts are deleted, does that happen? otherwise the peple who stop by for a fight when in a bad mood will never even know.

No it doesn't happen Peachy. I had to hit the report button three times and wait literally hours before I got a response.

I had only gone back onto the thread because I realised it was still appearing in my Threads I'm on to hide it when I spotted the rant about me by the other poster... and then the deleted post.

I've absolutely come around to the idea of hide poster. If a few of the people who see red when they see my posts hid me too the world might be a happier place

Me too. Although I would worry about being hidden by someone I thought was a friend. So I'd end up saying where's peachy, or aitch, or mme they are usually sensible, while everyone else could see their posts. Sort of everyone else being in on a joke.

I could create a MN utopia! fab!

unfortunate X post LMAO!

MNHQ I'd also be interested to know what would happen if I say emailed and said I note that X gets turned on by unrecognsied posters all teh time in the same style but new names; would actual action be taken? or would they just be watched whilst some poor vulnerable sod gets attacked in the meantime?

I reported that lst one, would love to know.

You could PM them lissie. And then they'd tell you they'd been on holiday.

Psamme - that's genius! love it.

I have just spent a looong time reading the theme park thread. And was to the core. I cannot see why some of those posts were still there - although in a way I am glad they were because it highlighted the sheer disgustingness of the attitude of one poster in particular. But how awful for the parents of children with SN to read that shit! especially if the DC is newly diagnosed and tehy are just coming to terms with it.

But - there were so many outraged responses that if all the posts related to the disablist ones were removed, it would have left almost nothing much to read!

Ds, but they wouldn't get my pm. So I'd get more and more paranoid...

Thumb, I do like the fact that we self-moderate. I like the fact that if someone is being treated unfairly, or posting nasty crap, we tell them orf.

You can do that forever Liss but we won;t ehar ou, no point posting twice

Just a question about hiding posters: will it only work on poster name? Or will ArseyGit be able to just change their names to get to someone they have worked out has hidden them?

Would that encourage namechanging? or can it be linked to registration?

Also if someone name changes obviosuly just to cause offence and MNHQ catches up with them, they should be banned from using that facillity.

Thumb- good innit? Trouble is though the whole 'pile in and tackle the offensice person' has led to jokes about SN mafia / professionally offended / whatever and that is then used to detract from the message that X you are a wanker.

I did ove ths sel;f importance of the person saying people with a Sn should avoid themeparks.

Ahem, oftentimes the person may have been given a free pass by Merlin's Magic Wand; if Merlin has said yes pleae come then sodding detractor can bugger off.

I agree that people who nc to be a bitch should be banned from nc-ing.

Why would you not be able to PM or receive PMs from hidden posters? Am i being very dim?

Morning all (in my time zone anyway), must inhale some coffee and then catch up on what's happened.

Have any MNHQ folks popped back in to say they're taking any/all of this on board?

Yes I saw that on the other thread, Peachy - can't win, can you? Not allowed to take your DC out in case they upset or inconvenience someone, not allowed to be offended when someone who has been upset/inconvenienced shouts/writes obscene insults and God Forbid you should defend yourself or your rights "entitlements" when someone starts in at you!

So very, very sad. :( and -making.

Excluding trollism, I fail to understand why mumsnet delete some posts in their enitrety while leavings others looking as if they've been redacted by MI5.

No matter how offensive the post or the response(s), I don't believe that censorship alters beliefs or perceptions.

In the case of a thread mentioned earlier, it was a great shame that it was reported and disappeared from view it as it should more properly have stood as a testament to the entirely unreasonable sense of entitlement exhibited by the OP, and to their general twattishness when confronted by those who objected to their unfounded assertions.

Notwithstanding my personal opinion of that particular post, if OPs can't be unreasonable on AIBU the title of this section of the site should be changed forthwith as it clearly doesn't do what it says on the tin.

if it was possible to devise a like/dislike button that could only be used once per poster that might allow the silent majority to express their feelings.

I would be very interested to see what % of mumsnet users actually use the forums and how many leave within, say, 3 months. I suspect they are figures mumsnet would not wish to publish.

This site can be an amazing source of advice as it has intelligent women with experience in almost anything you care to ask about. But most people don't want to have to constantly stand up to bullies and will vote with their feet or keep away from AIBU. The cunts on this site then think they are a majority when in fact most people are avoiding them as they would in RL. I don't usually come here, this thread came up on active conversations.

The deletions on the site are probably more frequent since AIBU was set-up. Maybe there needs to be an extra mumsnet warning - if you want to be a cunt keep it to AIBU.

My experience is that three types of post get deleted by MN

• ones making personal attacks
• ones disagreeing about more sensitive subjects
• ones saying something that a sensitive poster doesn't like

Personal attacks are a no no but IMO unless the latter 2 cases were out and out flames/trolls they should stand IMO. No topic is too precious to not be argued with robustly IMO

Lissie, Hide Poster wouldn't mean that they disappeared themselves from your view. It only works the other way around. E.g., if you decided that I was a total cunt, you would Hide Tortoise and never be able to see my posts again. And thus be able to post in blissful ignorance of any of the utter crap that I was spouting.

I've long been an advocate of Hide Poster, as Lenin knows. Because it's one thing to say 'let posts stand so people can see the cuntishness in all its cunty glory' but if you're a rape victim who has to read 'I think women ask for it' over and over, or the mother of a SN child who has to read disabilist vitriol constantly, or a sole parent on benefits who has stumbled into a benefits bashing thread it is cold comfort that others can see the same posts and disapprove. One already fights these attitudes every day, having to do so over and over is very wearing. And if there are a few posters who are egregious offenders, it makes life much simpler if you can just hide them.