Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6

Original poster

School Internet/email use agreement

143 replies

GiraffesEatStingingNettles · 23/01/2017 20:54

My children's school have sent home letters with agreements for both children and their parents to sign. In principal, I am very supportive of their aims, but one clause in the adult agreement does not sit well with me.

'I will support the school's approach to e-Safety and will not upload or add any pictures, video or text that could upset, offend or threaten the safety of any member of the school community'

They are talking about social media and general internet use, not just the school website and internal systems.

Obviously I am not planning a hate-campaign against any of their members of staff - but the way I read that phrase I am basically agreeing never to post anything online, ever. I have no way of second guessing what might offend (reasonably or unreasonably)1000+ people, many of the total strangers to me. I agree with the sentiment wholeheartedly, but feel that actually, within reason I am entitled to express my own views online.

Quite how they intend to police this policy I don't know. Pupils they have more control over, but I am curious what sanctions they propose for adults who sign the agreement and fall foul of the rules??!!

DH thinks I am being silly and should just sign it and send it in. I am sorely tempted to cross through/reword that section before I do.

Am I being precious, and would you all just sign it without batting an eyelid?

OP posts:

FlouncingInAWinterWonderland · 26/01/2017 13:18

wettunwindee

Effective at guiding people. The whole point of advisory notes/ guidelines etc is to guide.

Because reverting to legal disputes should be a last resort not a first one.

If they don't have any standing against what's already illegal why suggest posters should just sign? Surely on that line of reasoning, it makes them a complete waste of everyones time and they should just be ignored.

BroomstickOfLove · 26/01/2017 13:19

I don't know why you keep telling me that it is legally unenforceable, as though this is new and vital information.

I am not actually worried that I will sent to prison/fined etc for sharing a petition in social media.

My worry is that the school is encouraging dishonesty and carelessness.

wettunwindee · 26/01/2017 13:43

@user1484317265

"'I will support the school's approach to e-Safety and will not upload or add any pictures, video or text that could upset, offend or threaten the safety of any member of the school community'"

If you read it slowly, do you understand how it's related to the school? If not, run your finger under th words and try saying it aloud as you read.

@BroomstickOfLove

My worry is that the school is encouraging dishonesty and carelessness.

By omitting "with intent to cause...". I think you're over-reacting quite substantially.

If you feel that this encourages dishonesty and carelessness then you need o give your head a wiggle. Is that really what you meant? Go on, say it aloud, "this letter encourages dishonesty and carelessness." If you can do that without smirking, send me a DM and I'll send you a substantial and well-deserved box of chocolates

user1484317265 · 26/01/2017 14:01

I will support the school's approach to e-Safety and will not upload or add any pictures, video or text that could upset, offend or threaten the safety of any member of the school community'

What does school community mean? Pupils, parents, families, teachers? So the entire village, basically. What does upset or offend mean? Any number of things may upset or offend any of those people, things that have nothing at all to do with the school or the workings of the school or that would affect the school in anyway.

If you read it slowly, do you understand how it's related to the school? If not, run your finger under th words and try saying it aloud as you read

Go on, try it, you might finally understand the point everyone is making!

wettunwindee · 26/01/2017 14:06

@user1484317265

We got there. You're on yellow books tomorrow. Tell your Mummy and Daddy. Off you go!

user1484317265 · 26/01/2017 14:08

No, I got there, you are still confused. I'm not agreeing with you, dear.
Good try, but read it again.

wettunwindee · 26/01/2017 14:16

I have a proper job. I wish I could devote hours to deciphering your ramblings.

BroomstickOfLove · 26/01/2017 14:21

No smirking. Telling lies counts as dishonesty. Not noticing that you are telling lies counts as carelessness.

user1484317265 · 26/01/2017 14:32

I have a proper job. I wish I could devote hours to deciphering your ramblings

I don't think you do, you're on here all day! They don't need deciphering, iys just you.

wettunwindee · 26/01/2017 14:39

I don't think you do, you're on here all day! They don't need deciphering, iys just you.

Bananas?

carefreeeee · 26/01/2017 14:51

wetunwindee

I think you may have missed the point of the Tree Tops disclaimer - it doesn't abrogate their responsibilities, it is evidence that they have fulfilled part of their responsibilities. Which is to ensure that you are aware of the risks of the activity and agree to participate with that in mind. Obviously they need to ensure that the risks are understood and not just get you to sign something you haven't read. But getting your signature on a form is part of the process of informing you of the risks and making sure you understand them.

Do you take the same attitude (of not bothering to read the small print) with financial investments or with medical treatments? Because the rights and responsibilities thing is just the same.

carefreeeee · 26/01/2017 14:52

And, it's ironic that someone who is so keen on signing a form agreeing never to be offensive, is actually quite rude to quite a few people online.

wettunwindee · 26/01/2017 14:59

@carefreeeee

Of course I don't take the same attitude. I know very little about about financial investments. It's the reason we paid a man a fucking fortune to tell us what to sign, what not to and what we we should do with our money.

In a hospital, when they're telling me the risks of an operation, no, I don't question it. If something goes wrong due ton their negligence I have the same rights. I have intelligently weighed up the pros and cons of the procedure before being admitted. My signing a letter to say I have understood the potential complications makes no difference to my legal rights.

If something goes wrong due to someone's negligence, I can still sue them. If it doesn't, I can't. The 'understanding risk' aspect is worthless in court.

Do you think signing something makes a difference?

splendide · 26/01/2017 16:16

Are you a lawyer Wet?

merrymouse · 26/01/2017 16:33

It is very ironic that this thread has so many deletions.

I think schools do need need social media policies, if for no other reason than that so much bullying takes place on-line. However, you can see from this thread that it's difficult to get people to comply with a simple, straightforward and easy guideline like 'no personal attacks'.

Why make things more difficult by including policies that nobody can follow?

user1484317265 · 26/01/2017 16:35

I know very little about about financial investments. It's the reason we paid a man a fucking fortune to tell us what to sign, what not to and what we we should do with our money

Ha, good luck with that!

wettunwindee · 27/01/2017 00:24

@splendide

No. A head.

@Merrymouse

Because schools don't have the ability to delete posts they deem to be outside of the guidelines.

@user1484317265

merrymouse · 27/01/2017 09:54

Because schools don't have the ability to delete posts they deem to be outside of the guidelines.

So because schools can't delete posts, they might as well include any old thing in their social media guidelines?

It isn't possible to avoid upsetting people. You might as well have a cycling proficiency test that advises people never to use a bike or teach children that the safest way to swim is to avoid getting wet.

Schools should be teaching children to be clear and effective when they use language. They should be able to understand why it's impossible to avoid upsetting people, but be able to think about where the line should be drawn and the power of social media.

Every teenager in Britain should, for instance, be able to debate and discuss the ins and outs of Trumps attempts to control tweets from the NPA. How on earth can you do that and take seriously a social media policy that asks you not to upset anyone? How do you even teach or function as a school?

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6