to think MNers can be better than this

[IceBeing]

OPs may be ignorant, they maybe obtuse, they may be in the wrong and they may be trolls...

but how can dozens upon dozens of swearing riddled instructions to carry out intimate acts be considered a reasonable response?

For some people MN is the first forum they frequent. It is perfectly possible to post something that is innocently ignorant yet massively outrageous to MNers. Then suddenly you are being called all the names under the sun and told to fuck yourself preferably until dead? really?

Believe me it can be a massive shock that people say things on the internet they would never say in real life. It is possible to feel very very frightened and threatened by such an onslaught.

AIBU to think if the last 5 posters have covered the 'fuck off to the far side of fuck' angle then maybe you don't need to stick the boot in too?

The best case scenario is that the person on the other end is indeed a troll....in which case why are you giving them what they want?

hey hully I am glad you at least get where I am coming from....this last thread was the tip of the iceberg....I have seen several such pastings in recent weeks which in my head is amounting to a trend.

When the bridge dwellers are out in force is the MOST important time to keep a hold on troll hunting and attacks....

kung you can't tell if it was read and not responded to though can you? And I have recently seen people come back and say 'oh shit I hadn't thought of that - sorry' and due to the proud ranks of non-thread readers people do continue to pile in.

Regardless of troll/OP/coming back/being too scared to it really isn't okay to have a massive shit storm of personal abuse surely?

catrus you are saying what I should have been saying only better

goldenbear the perception of how much troll-hunting goes on is greatly exaggerated by threads like this. This thread turned out to be inspired by a really below-the-belt troll, but you'd never know that from the OP alone.

selectausername some trolls are a bit more complex than "how many fuck yous can I get in five minutes". I think that troll was either someone with a nappy fetish who was erm, a nasty bastard unethical in sourcing their reading material, or someone who wanted to see parents justifying and politely explaining their child's needs.

I don't think they were fed the way they wanted to be. Although they might be loving this thread...

catsrus
That all sounds great, but I can't help but think that it doesn't take much courage of your convictions to stick up for someone sneering at disabled children.

For some reason, Mumsnet doesn't have as much of a problem with outright racist trolls as other forums. Probably because on other forums they get indulged more If we get an influx of threads on here, similar to past ones I've seen elsewhere (which I WON'T repeat), I trust you'll be sticking up for them, too?

But kungfu, I have seen threads when the OP has come back, apologised, admitted they were being ignorant etc, and still many pile in afterwards with their "ODFOD" and similar comments. It does happen, whether that's because they haven't read the full thread (they should make sure they read at least all of the OPs posts!), or they just want to jump in with the slanging match. Either way, innocent people do get a kicking every now and then, and it is this that the OP and others wanted to discuss with regards to troll hunting.

Not secretly supporting the trolls so that their threads can go on and on. If anything, the feeders allow that to happen by getting the thread into active conversations were many others will see it and join in. Therefore, not exactly protecting vulnerable people.

No matter if someone shouts troll, being vulnerable and reading the post will STILL hurt that vulnerable person and affect them. The more the thread is posted on, the more vulnerable people will get the chance to see it.

Mind you

Who are all these horribly vulnerable people who can't read one person's nasty opinion on the tinterweb?

I hope they stay away from tabloids, the news and documentaries too. And ordinary people at the bus stop.

Yes, that does happen. But not on this particular thread, so I'm not sure why it's being argued about so passionately.

I've seen people take some entirely unwarranted kickings, and no-one's started a thread to stick up for them. There's a discussion to be had, but I don't think that particular thread is a good example at all.

Was "goody fucker" a genuine typo, or an attempt to evoke witch hunting?

Sorry. It's been bugging me.

I don't troll hunt for a number of reasons not least of which is that I can't ever spot them.
I hope I'm not routinely rude, I try not to jump in if 50 people have already posted because its dull.
But I suspect that a thread about teenagers in nappies is exactly the sort of thread where, depending on my day, I might tell a poster to fuck off. Because I know parents who spend the dark, small hours of the night crying about the looks, stare, mocking and contempt that their chikdren endure daily and getting stupid nonsense throw at them when they are on here for a chat or support is contemptible.

I think the wave of posts each trying to outdo the previous poster in terms of insults is often grim. I find troll hunting dull and I don't understand it. But I don't like the poster who endlessly post with agendas and there are lots on here.

Not terribly conclusive but it's several issues not one, isn't it?

I agree with you there kungfu. I think it would of been much better had a genuine thread been referred to rather than a troll thread.

Well hully, I can understand the vulnerable argument in some ways (like the troll that was on the bereavements) but the excuse that they are troll hunting to protect the vulnerable point blank, does seem to be just that. Excuse.

If it is their opinion that this site is loaded with vulnerable people who can't handle it, then why feed the troll and get the thread into active conversations which will just lead to even more seeing it?

I get you OP. I'd much rather a troll was ignored & think they're often more acceptable than some of the replies.

Although I think it's quite funny to watch - it's like a bit of online Attenborough.

Once one of the so-called "MN Royalty" posts a pithy one liner, the rest of their "gang" regard that as their cue to start jostling for position as "Bitch in Waiting". Once the floodgates are open, the feeding frenzy begins & that's it.

Of course, they sometimes get it wrong & shred an innocent - but it doesn't matter because Might Makes Right & they're Regoolarz Innit?

I think that is nonsense Captain.

One could equally say that groups of reg bashers line up to bash regs once someone posts a post like yours.

I do remember a poster called Michelle who was suffering from PND and was troll-hunted - what happened to her was horrifying: she actually had a mental breakdown on thread. I have never been so ashamed to be a MNetter.

It's to prevent incidents like this that MNHQ has their policy on troll-hunting.

Some trolls, and their respondents, are very funny: the Yoni thread, the Sex TV spokesman thread all prompted good-natured ridicule. From what I understand, the Nappy Troll was too offensive to be amusing and I do think that kind of troll is best ignored an reported.

So it's okay in your book Captain, to throw about arsey comments at regulars but it's not okay to have a pop at trolls?

Interesting.

LOL, have a look at some of the threads. It's quite noticeable.

I'm a "regular", if you'd agree that a regular is someone that has been frequently posting on MN for a couple of years. There are a lot of regulars that post good & useful advice, or humorous posts.

There are also some that are complete arses - much like real life.

I'd argue that anyone that just posts abuse is an arse, and almost as much of a troll themselves.

not a royalty thing at all in my opinion. Not a regularz thing either.

Okay the real problem.

Sometimes there is bad behaviour, a genuine thread/OP gets pasted and there is blood all up the walls. In these cases I imagine MNHQ gets out the red marker and sends out some 'read the fecking guidelines' messages to everyone involved.

Sometimes there is bad behaviour and MNHQ later decide is WAS a troll. Somehow the bad behaviour of the non-trolls then gets overlooked and given the comments on this thread even appears to be justified.

My big point is that it isn't okay to behave badly. It doesn't matter who anyone else turns out to be.

I would like to see MNHQ make it much clearer when removing a thread that they aren't condoning the bad behaviour of the troll hunters and personal abuse slingers. If a general message can be sent out about a thread (like it was in this case) it should have said 'yes it was a troll...aren't you all fucking lucky you weren't shredding an innocent? Oh and all those people who made personal attacks will be on a 24 hour ban, and by the way the rules are there for a reason.'

Unless MNHQ do actually think personal abuse is acceptable for trolls?

There are many threads where people are utterly horrible to an OP who is just asking for support.

Seems rather strange to start a thread about this particular one.

(and no I did not post any abuse on the nappies thread btw).

You can't blame all regulars. Many do not join in with the troll hunting. Far more don't than do (although can't say I have ever counted but I can hazard a guess!)

Just the same as many non-regulars don't join in, but some do. Only a minority or each join in (compared to how many members there are on this site) and I don't think it has anything to do with whether you are a regular or not. More to do with their personality. Some people just can't, or won't, ignore. And some do carry attitude with it too (those who have to use the biggest insult they can think of etc).

You can't tar them all with the same brush.

beverly trolls get banned? they don't get off scott free?

people posting personal abuse get told off and eventually banned.

What I would like to see is more evidence from MNHQ that personal attacks against trolls are being followed up too.

You cannot possibly protect real posters with issues from troll hunting if you let people get away with what happened on several recent threads.

Maybe MNHQ are following up and warning people after those threads - but I think a general notice needs to go up saying not just that a thread was deleted and it was a troll but that others had behaved inappropriately too. Otherwise you get the opinions building up that we have seen on this thread.

fanjo this isn't about that thread explicitly it was just the most recent in a long line.

But it serves the purpose because MNHQ cannot say 'no troll hunting' in one breath and then appear to condone it in another.....

Basically I think MNHQ give the strong impression that troll hunting is fine and you are allowed to through abuse at them as long as you are right about them being trolls.

But the whole fecking point of the no hunting policy is that people ARENT always right.

So that just isn't going to work!

Trolling is boring (unless funny)

I don't care about troll hunting (boring to me too)

I do hate pages of thicko abuse, but more because it's often thicko and baa baa than anything.

I prefer a nice civilised sarcastic riposte

I would like to see mnhq follow their own guidelines and delete this thread.

Why?

Sometimes these things need to be thrashed out.

Why not?

I think this thread should remain. Deletion is not the answer for everything. I suggest you hide it if you don not agree with it hazey.