to want to know if DogsBestFriend has been banned from mumsnet?

[GetOrf]

Because if she has been I would like to know why.

The Doghouse was not supportive. It was aggressive, insulting and bullyish. If you hadn't done things in the perceived Correct Manner you were rounded on and, dare I say, hounded.

Nasty. Imagine that attitude on other topics.

Also, HQ, it should be noted that the DogHouse does seek to manage its own problems from time to time - there is a thread where everyone bravely spoke about how they felt about shouty posts there, both the scared-to-be-shouted-at and the feeling-misunderstood-shouters. The upshot, for a long time, was that DBF and a few others were more careful about their posting style - not wanting to alienate the people they really need to educate re dogs.

It might need refreshing, but bans? Don't agree, sorry.

@HeresTheThingBooyhoo

"How can "You are a liar, foolish and a disgrace, not just for what you are doing to this dog but for trying to discredit someone who works her arse off to save them. You appall me.." Not be classed as a personal attack . Fraid it's a personal attack in my book."

"You are a liar proven fact, foolish fact and a disgrace ok, opinion (unless you think TLES' behaviour WRT the dog was praiseworthy?), not just for what you are doing to this dog but for trying to discredit someone fact who works her arse off to save them. You appall me..fact" (she appalled me too)

NOT a personal attack.

Tis too!

I think MNHQ have made up their mind. And that twat tles is presumably reading this and rubbing her hands in glee. This is probably exactly the kind of response she wanted.

I am not going to stay here, I'm off - it is unfair that a valuable and NICE person like DBF has been banned, when a complete leech and liar like tles remains.

justine

I asked very nicely on the deleted thread whether you guys at HQ would consider re-instating DBF under her DBF name

Now you can see there is a lot of support for her, would you have a good ole think about it please ?

I reported that thread earlier. Assume others did too.

It wasnt necessarily in defense of TLES, she, apparently, quite rightly got called on blatant lies. I'm not a fan and tbh agree with the general feeling towards her (its all been said).

But, fwiw especially as mnhq are apparently open to persuasion, it absolutely wasn't DBF's posts that prompted me to report.

It was just pretty vicious, and while I underestand the anger i felt there was an element of Sport to it. TLES had become fair game it seems, and that is never nice to see.

Sometimes someone slips up, (i dont mean the dog thing, slipped up in terms of there being iron clad proof of twattishness) and it is pounced in a really ugly way. It stops being baout the actual topic and concern, for some (yes some, not all) the concern over the dog was a perfect excuse to unleash their anger on someone they didnt like.

There was a very long thread a while back about the aggressive tone in the Doghouse.

I did have the impression that it had improved and become more welcoming since then.

And this is different, as TLES was a train wreck waiting to happen.

Ok so logic entails that MNHQ act and warn when a poster is reported.

Val makes an impassioned attack against someone justifying doing somethig unpleasant to a animal.

So from MNHQ's POV she is prolific. A majority of posters are now saying WTF? SHE WAS TELLING IT HOW IT WAS.

The people are listening, we just don't like what we hear.

Delete her posts if you have too, but don't delete Val, I beg you. Unless you have had the time to read her every post and weigh up how many people she has helped vs how many people get upset because they are told to take some damn responsibility for a innocent vulnerable creature and don't like it.

Surely Mnet ethos is about caring for the weak and vunerable?

Getorf, is that a flounce? Noooooooooooo

I agree Hully - ironically offensive and unnecessary language, Jeez.
MrsDB - or ?

Getorf...dont you dare!

I reckon DBF will be back, justine wouldnt have said they would take peoples thoughts into account if they rerally weren't willing to.

In fact HQ, shouldn't you ban TLES for her own emotional protection?

Serious question.

hmm yet xenia and her well people earning under 100 k should not be having dc is allowed to stand and post

In defense of MNHQ, they don't see the great supportive posts that DBF posts. They see the ones that get reported.

So we cannot blame them for judging on the evidence in front of them.

At least some people are fortunate enough to have dogs. Mine are imaginary. Justify taking an imaginary dog for a walk in the rain!

@LoopyLoopsRootyFroots

Admit it Justine, you just don't like her, do you?

This flimsy 'personal attack' excuse just doesn't wash.

I don't like her posting style, from what I've seen of it - which admittedly might have been skewed towards the worst. Not overkeen on the general tone of holier-than-thouness in the Doghouse either. But I'd imagine DBF is smart and fun from what you've all said.
I actually think if folks can't see that her post was a personal attack then something's a bit amiss. You can argue that TLS deserved it because you think she was deliberately winding folks up, but you can't argue it wasn't a personal attack IMHO.

steady on, everyone.

sense will prevail

calmness and love is more likely to help sense prevail

Cats are so much better stirs the shit

lots of personal attacks on this thread

Burn the witch.

"Surely Mnet ethos is about caring for the weak and vunerable?"

No, Mnet ethos is all about maximum advertising and press. Banning posters that derail relationships threads doesn't help the core ethos, as people like to see a really controversial bunfight. Wright Stuff fodder. However, the press don't report on doghouse stories, so they are safe to get rid of anyone they choose to dislike there.

BINGO!