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

[GetOrf]

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

MrsDB DP worked out which button I'd sat on pressed so much better

I've only been in the doghouse a few times and every time DBF was there being opinionated and aggressive and acting as if she was the world expert on dogs. No other opinions were tolerated. Some people who just needed a bit of support just got shouted out. It was bullying IMO.

Good decision MNHQ

I'm not doubting you at all Aitch, just wondered what boglach was on about.

Broom

Yay !

but you're still hearing them, aren't you ?!

Could we have a 'warning' on the thread for dodgy posts please. So we know when we've stepped over the line.

Yes.. maybe like in the Gilbert and Sullivan where one person whispers 'Basingstoke' to the other if they start slipping into madness?

@catsrus

I've only been on here a few months - & am now a regular addict but a few things have really shocked me (and I've been online since pre-web days and have moderated lots of groups so am not easily shocked) . The first thing was MNHQs response to the nasty trolling postings on the feminist section which made the section a very unpleasant place to be at times. The HQ response to this in terms of "space to debate" etc etc seems to be totally at odds with this decision to ban DBF . So the doghouse has to be a 'safe space' where people can't be challenged but the feminist threads have to be able to be hijacked by misogynists in the name of free speech

As for DBF - i didn't see the thread in question, but I have seen many of her posts, both in the doghouse and more generally in other threads and I am really shocked that she has been banned - I have seen her 'robust' postings yes - but they are honest and straightforward and I have seen her be kind and helpful and funny.. and I think she is an asset to MN not a liability.

The moderation policy you have implemented suffers from the fact that you only see the negative posts that get reported, I think you really do need to listen to people on this one and revoke the ban. it's not DBFs "friends" posting here - but people who spend too much time on here for their own good and perhaps have a wider perspective than the one MNHQ is able to get

Thanks for the post. We can see there are many people who value DBF's posts, but there are also many who think her posts are unhelpful.

On the subject of the feminist boards, we know there is some disgruntlement expressed here and elsewhere. I know this is not going to sit well with a lot of posters but the intolerance we've commented on in the Doghouse is not dissimilar to that on the feminism boards IMHO. Both boards have succumbed to a bit of: "If you don't agree with the party line then you are unworthy/ not wanted here". In the case of the feminism boards this dogma has attracted a bunch of unpleasant types who come along merely to post contrary opinions.

But the bottom line is we are a site that allows contrary opinion. That's in our DNA and we don't believe in shutting it down. Don't get me wrong we love having a board to discuss feminism/womens' rights and fully support it's existence but it is a board to discuss feminism - you don't have to be a feminist to be on it - and we can't just ban anyone who pops up with a contrary view. (Although we have banned a few folks who were solely and very obviously out to inflame)

Another request to let DBF come back. I really wonder if MNHQ have a proper understanding of The Doghouse. The scale of destruction of healthy dogs in this country is apalling, and for those of us who do our little bit to help by rehoming one poor unwanted dog it is very disheartening to see foolish foolish women treating dogs like fashion accessories and just discarding one and getting another.

I don't think that the style on TDH is any different to the response women confessing to affairs get in "relationships"

DBF has very recently helped rehome an unwanted dog where the poster sought her help, she gives good advice and, quite frankly I consider her a very worthy heroine. MN is going to look pretty stupid about this when all her good works are featured in the press (together with group of fluffy GSD) and MN has banned her for promoting animal welfare, which is highly likely given the length of this thread. Quite frankly TLES deserves to be banned for accusing DBF of being untruthful, and MN should arrange for the RSPCA to pay a visit to check on the welfare of her animals.

I wonder if perhaps some of the people supporting the poster in question haven't seen some of the worst-offending threads. There was one several months ago that I assumed at the time had got her banned there and then. I think she was lucky to have had the chances she has evidently been given.

TLES was a train wreck waiting to happen. - So because I am an individual and more than capable of forming my own opinion, looking at things from all angles etc I am a train wreck waiting to happen?

shouldn't you ban TLES for her own emotional protection? My emotional protection? i thankyou for your concern but seriously other than a few wobbles with self doubt regarding DS1 I am very stable.

scabby Chav - Scabby Chav? no i think you have me sadly mistaken for someone else.

So in DBF,s case, people that 'disagreed' with her eg TLES reported - I NEVER reported the thread!! i left it and never went back. I did NOT see the "personal attacks".

I am assuming the thief thing relates to the pushchair stuff, but I don't know the details. I am wondering what the pushchair stuff is as well tbh, I never have had any problems on here regarding pushchairs.

TLES on the other hand is IMO nuts. your opinion oh are we allowed to form our own opinion on here I mean the majority would prefer if you were a sheep follower and incapable of doing so.

further investigated TLES also due to popular demand - investigated for what exactly?

1. I didn't know Vaunda was a horrid troll Nor did I thanks for letting me know!!!!

LadyEvenStar Just curious, do you think Val should have been banned for what she wrote on your thread, in comparison to what others wrote?

I never saw what was said, as I already explained after my last posting on there i left the thread and hid it, I had decided by then to rethink things and stated that I had not made a final decision.

So on that basis, No I don't think Val/DBF should have been banned.

Those who want me investigated what is it you want to know?

i am perfectly capable of letting you know.

@BeerTricksPotter

I have a relative who will never post again because of a bf thread, Aitch. Still get wildly nasty and arrogant views on those and some truly horrendous links which still shock me.

Consistency is the key. Otherwise MN loses credibility.

Credibility? We have credibility?

Please MNHQ do not delete DBF posts as her advice has helped us train and understand the behaviour of our dog.
DBF is very passionate about her rescues and is always very helpful.

@higgle

I don't think that the style on TDH is any different to the response women confessing to affairs get in "relationships"

I think that was certainly true Higgle - we had a similar situation in relationships where people were getting jumped on and we intervened similarly.

Absolutely agree re the ethos in the doghouse topic resembling the feminist topic in respect of the poor quality of debate that comes from a few posters imposing an aggressive orthodoxy. Ultimately, I don't much care about the doghouse topic, but it is a tragedy when the same thing happens in feminism.

@soupforthesoul

Please MNHQ do not delete DBF posts as her advice has helped us train and understand the behaviour of our dog. DBF is very passionate about her rescues and is always very helpful.

No intention of deleting her posts soupforthesoul.

Sue we have great fun but it's all bolted together - no knots!

You can be passionate about rescue and not take a chunk out of people to show it. I am extremely passionate about the welfare of small animals, the piss poor legal minimum requirements for selling animals in shops, and animal rescue in general. I am directly involved in independent dog rescue and rehoming and the rescue and rehoming of small animals. If you check my posts you'll see that at every opportunity I'll voice that, but I'll always try to do it in such a way that doesn't rip a shred off someone.

but hang on... she was banned before. she was let back. she did the same thing again... so she is banned. this is perfectly credible and fair, i think.

TLES - I want you investigated yes, based on the posts MADE BY YOU that were listed on the deleted thread as well as linked to in this thread, some of them anyway.

The fact that there is inconsistency, contradictions, blatent lies and what I would call deliberately winding people up.

All these reasons have been posted in this thread however so you really don't need to ask why people want you investigated and to do so I suspect is just going to cause more debates.

This thread is not about slating you but asking that DBF is allowed to return so this is pointless.

Although I find it very interesting that you did not see any personal attacks from her, some of the worst stuff she said to you was before you hid the thread as you were still posting.

I take that to mean that she did not deserve the ban for this thread.

Justine

I agree with catsrus, and I would urge you to consider that there is some real abuse on some of the feminism and relationships threads from misogynist posters which deliberately seek to hurt women, going well beyond reasonably 'contrary opinion.'

There is a huge difference between freedom of expression and deliberate, intended hurt.

That's what I think.

And I think MNHQ needs to address this much more seriously than it has been.

@CalatalieSisters

Absolutely agree re the ethos in the doghouse topic resembling the feminist topic in respect of the poor quality of debate that comes from a few posters imposing an aggressive orthodoxy. Ultimately, I don't much care about the doghouse topic, but it is a tragedy when the same thing happens in feminism.

Now that - aggressive orthodoxy - is the phrase I've been searching for all night!

Agree, Sacre.

I'm shocked and disappointed that DBF has been banned. MN will be a much poorer place without her. More importantly, there are dogs that will need help in the future that will now find it that much harder to get the assistance they need.

I'm particularly that the Doghouse has apparently got to "change its ways". When was Justine planning on sending out that particular memo?

So the many posters who contributed to a rescue's vet fees need to stop? How about the support only last week for a poster who urgently needed to rehome her dog, and thanks to the Doghouse got it safely out into foster care the same day? The many posters who help each other on AND off the board, with rehoming, rescue fundraising, breeding queries, puppy care, advice on homechecks, charity volunteering, training, feeding and so on. For every controversial thread there are fifty which are about dog owners supporting each other and exchanging information.

Stickies have been repeatedly asked for but MNHQ have declined. These could cover the FAQ like how to spot a backyard breeder, what to look for in a reputable rescue, how to get a puppy etc.

And as for the Doghouse being some sort of area patrolled by a crack team of ninja rescue advocates, I don't know whether to laugh or cry. Anyone can post there so where are all the dog breeders? I'd welcome a puppy farmer with open arms so we can hear all about the lovely work they do.

If MN's sole remit is to make "parents life easier" then I'd say on balance the Doghouse does do that - it tells the truth about dog ownership, especially when combined with parenthood. There have been many, many posts where people have asked for advice and been given it, plain and unvarnished yes, but practical and to the point.

I am unashamedly pro-rescue, and if I see posts from people where they are considering dog ownership, I will continue to post on why adopting rescue dogs makes sense, and the horrible reality behind puppy farming. Only two months ago, a puppy farm was licensed in West Wales that has 200 (yes, you read that right) dogs with 1.5 staff to look after them all. That is legal and licensed in this country. Parents deserve the truth behind this horrible industry before they support its cruelty and end up buying a vets bill on legs. In Wales last year, 6000 dogs were abandoned into local Council care, and of these 500 otherwise healthy dogs were killed, at a cost of nearly £2million. If we're talking about making parents lives a bit easier, surely we should be saying that's £2million better spent on schools or libraries?

I repeat, please reconsider, and bring back DBF.