to think that mumsnet should be a website for all mums regardless

[tittytittyhanghang]

of literacy and the way they speak/type and should be welcoming to everyone? I cant fucking stand this perceived superiority over certain posters that use text speak, use of hun, lol, x's etc or the suggestion that they are somehow unsuitable for this forum and should bugger off to the other one.

As as for the fucking grammer police, fuck the fuck off. Just because someone maybe didn't use capitals, or misspelt a word, or hasn't posted perfect english, doesn't open their post to ridicule.

I know it's 3 pages back, but Shakey = genius.

I used to frequent dance music forums until I became pregnant (about 2 years ago) then I joined MN and gave up the dance music forums because I could no longer relate to the people I knew on there, some of whom I counted as RL friends, but then its funny what happens to your friendship circle when you have children. I most definitely consider myself a lurker more than a poster because I find the MN terrifying and captivating in equal measure (more terrifying btw). The weirdest thing is that MN is no different to the any of the music forums I used to trawl, there is a hierarchy and a hidden "code" that's adhered too.

For the record, I can't abide text speak BUT I do love the challenge of reading it AND I think it's amazing that people can have entire conversations this way and to be controversial I don't think some parts of text speak are any different from some of the acronyms people use...

I will now go back to lurking!

fellatio you're post is a joke right? Women who come on here want to be like you or 'we' whoever the fuck we is. Oh yes please can I join your elite, then my life will be completely revolutionized.
Seriously deluded springs to mind. You are aware this is just a website?

Weeding out undesirables? Really?

Well I couldn't give a toss whether someone can spell or not.

As far as I am concerned the bad spellers and txt speakers are all welcome here.

As for wanting to live up to being socially acceptable to the middle classes? Hmm that might be your motivation fellatio but it sure isn't mine.
I am what am, like it or lump it. There are loads of us don't feel the need to fall in with, or impress anyone here. Even if you do.

scaveola,you've spectacularly missed point.there's no mn rule stating no txt speak
might be your individual preference/foible but it's not a universally accepted rule
and frankly you're not moderator so tis not up to you to set desired standards on mn

Since when was text speak against the 'rules'.
It's not is it? That's just nonsense.

Christ alive I'd hate to be a luffly or the right mn sort.if there's a mn sort I hope I'm not it
how very pompous to be professing what sort of site mn is,what meets expected standards
you see here the rub,some of you have gotten all very its like this when no one asked your opinion

To give Fellatio her due, she did say that she didn't condone behaviour to weed out the undesirables.

Let's face it, while it's pretty unpleasant to witness it at times if it didn't happen and we were equally welcoming to all, we'd soon be just like netmums and 80% of us would no longer want to be here.

If that's the case (which it bloody isn't) then we would do well to be rid of your 80% anyway. Leave it to the remaining 20% who are clever enough to realise that poor spelling or grammar are no indication of intelligence or need.

Clearly being able to spell indicates nothing of a good character does it?

I don't agree at all Fellatio.
Mn is all sorts these days, the majority, who are smart funny women who are everything from cleaners to company directors.
And even people like me who will be on benefits for the winter, until tourist season starts again.
Which is why I like it and will stick with it.
I still don't like text speak though and I'm far too old and lazy to want to learn.

people apparently don't like mummynames on mn,preferring an obscure literary refernce
some people believe their foible/preference is a mn norm.without any substantce
I suspect same such people reckon mn gorn to dogs,not like ole days

Generally the posters who have mummy names are not that pithy. There are exceptions.

I reckon we need eight different fora to reflect our individual stances on apostrophes, swearing/robust language and whether the plural of anecdotes is data. People on opposite sides of any of those divides are always going to have trouble playing nicely together because their basic rules of debate are so different.

What we don't need is different fora for rich/poor, right/left, middle/working class. The very best serious MN discussions represent all sides and backgrounds with different views genuinely sharing debate.

What does it matter?

If a post is in text speak you are quite at liberty to ignore it. Those of us who don't mind it can reply if we'd like to.

I don't see the need for launching on and issuing the wagging finger about it though.

Don't like it? Leave it then.

It's in the talk guidelines. One way to get the link is to wait for someone's post to be deleted: a link is usually provided then!

yes, the post is, if not a joke exactly, then at least heavily laced with irony. I thought that came across but obviously not.

And when I say and 'we' I do mean that in the loosest sense - I agree that we are not a critical mass in terms of all being the same, all having the same backgrounds, etc, but I do think that to a large extent 'we' have the same values. I do think that MN has a very strong identity based around those largely shared values, and if you arrive at MN not sharing them (especially) but you stick round long enough you soon become institutionalised and brain-washed.

The phrase 'weed out the undesirables' was definitely tongue in cheek. My point was that although we officially cite the reasons for disliking text speak as being unsuitable for dyslexics and people with English as a foreign language, the subtext for 'our' reasoning is 'and it makes it makes us think you are probably a bit thick and you won't like it here because you won't be able to keep up with our lightening quick minds.'

You can practically feel the frosty air of condescension that comes through on those threads. There is no point in pretending otherwise.

As no-one seems to bother clicking on the link about the guidelines for text speak, here it is, in full:

"Mumsnet's accessibility policy

We want as many people as possible to have the chance to be unreasonable and discuss the pros and cons of Greggs sausage rolls.
So, where possible, we consider accessibility in Mumsnet's design and content, especially regarding members who are partially sighted or use screen readers to access the site.
The techs are going to strive to help us meet our responsibilities under the Disabilities Discrimination Act, in particular, the priority 1 and priority 2 guidelines defined in the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG). (For more info, see www.w3.org/WAI/).
You can do your bit by avoiding unnecessary punctuation (appalling punctuation will be jumped on in pedants' corner) especially in Talk thread titles.
Text speak (or txt spk) is obviously an abomination, but should also be avoided to help members who use screen readers (strangely, they don't find it very interesting to hear "asterisk, asterisk, asterisk" repeated ad nauseam in a monotone).
If you've got any accessibility suggestions, gripes or questions, please email [email protected] and we'll do our best to address them. (Alternatively, just start a thread called Am I Being Unreasonable to want to access Mumsnet?)

Best,
Mumsnet Towers"

So you can see - we have been asked to avoid using it.

Oh thank fuck fellatio!

And I agree. It sucks.

yes, the post is, if not a joke exactly, then at least heavily laced with irony. I thought that came across but obviously not.

And when I say and 'we' I do mean that in the loosest sense - I agree that we are not a critical mass in terms of all being the same, all having the same backgrounds, etc, but I do think that to a large extent 'we' have the same values. I do think that MN has a very strong identity based around those largely shared values, and if you arrive at MN not sharing them (especially) but you stick round long enough you soon become institutionalised and brain-washed.

The phrase 'weed out the undesirables' was definitely tongue in cheek. My point was that although we officially cite the reasons for disliking text speak as being unsuitable for dyslexics and people with English as a foreign language, the subtext for 'our' reasoning is 'and it makes it makes us think you are probably a bit thick and you won't like it here because you won't be able to keep up with our lightening quick minds.'

You can practically feel the frosty air of condescension that comes through on those threads. There is no point in pretending otherwise.

While we're on the subject of talk guidelines: for a thread that is clearly about another thread, this one has lasted much longer than I was expecting it to.

Aye - but it's not a rule, and new people to the site know nothing about it, so it's a moot point.

whoops, sorry.

And also - there are reasonable ways of saying that text speak is discouraged for the reason stated.

It doesn't have to be "Oh text speak...cba with that because you're obviously rough and common and not up to my snooty standards.