Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Anon. members - Forums open to court action??

757 replies

justasking111 · 10/04/2019 13:47

Was quite shocked to see this. Will this be a test case? Mumsnet is such a tame well run site compared to the comments I see in the online press. Is the writing on the wall for free (cough) speech or is it a culling of trolling. Personally I think that something needs to be done, some folk have no filter or are just plain nasty.

news.yahoo.com/transgender-activist-wins-court-ruling-forcing-parenting-website-reveal-identity-alleged-online-abuser-121317596.html

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD · 10/04/2019 23:59

And abusers who post rape ‘cartoons’, threats, lies, insults and... oh hang on, that was only to a woman so... as you were...

loobielousplaits · 11/04/2019 00:10

LordProfFekkoThePenguinPhD Wed 10-Apr-19 23:59:48
And abusers who post rape ‘cartoons’, threats, lies, insults and... oh hang on, that was only to a woman so... as you were...

Eh? WTF are you going on about? Of course that is never OK - What also isn't OK is a person who can make up a username and post vile accusations against someone without any come back - This is about making those who think it's ok to anonymously post accusations about whoever under the cloak of anonymity - and yes the ruling should make it accountable.

JaneJeffer · 11/04/2019 00:10

I'm surprised the British justice system is wasting time on this nonsense.

loobielousplaits · 11/04/2019 00:18

JaneJeffer Thu 11-Apr-19 00:10:12
I'm surprised the British justice system is wasting time on this nonsense.

I'm not - this ruins people's lives and it's high time that those who think they can post abusive/untrue comments against someone are brought to justice.

MetroToy · 11/04/2019 00:30

What also isn't OK is a person who can make up a username and post vile accusations against someone without any come back

Or a person allegedly because we know you cant changing sex after doing something vile and it being 'transphobic' to "dead name" them.

It's all gotten fucking ridiculous. You are born male or female. Dress how you want, act how you like, but don't think we can dismiss biology on a whim.

MetroToy · 11/04/2019 00:33

And @OP can we stop with silly comments like 'I thought this was a place for intelligent conversation' Hmm

Its a place to chat, no IQ checking goes on here so do one with that ridiculous put-down.

Meandwinealone · 11/04/2019 01:06

I’m literally speechless. What an epic cluster fuck
I hope the person gave a false name. Like so many people seem to do.

JaneJeffer · 11/04/2019 01:11

I'm not - this ruins people's lives and it's high time that those who think they can post abusive/untrue comments against someone are brought to justice.
Well as their comments were deleted I'll have to take your word for it that it ruined Hayden's life.

GeordieGenes · 11/04/2019 18:23

Update: Mumsnet have complied with the order. However, they said they would have fought it if the poster had asked them to, which the poster didn't.

sackrifice · 11/04/2019 18:23

I’m literally speechless. What an epic cluster fuck. I hope the person gave a false name. Like so many people seem to do.

Many many people seem to be changing their names for a range of reasons these days...and don't want people bringing up their old names whilst getting annoyed that other people are using fake names.

So weird.

AuntieCJ · 11/04/2019 18:44

Just place marking ready for the links to all the transphobic "stuff". Nothing posted yet?

OP posts:
FenellaVelour · 12/04/2019 12:57

There are transphobic comments on this very thread.

justasking111 · 12/04/2019 12:59

Fenella I just used this case as my first example, I have used another example. As the OP I am interested in censorship generally not particularly. I think you need the feminist board to object to.

OP posts:
eurochick · 12/04/2019 13:13

There is no finding of a crime here.

The case brought by the lawyer is civil not criminal.

The merits have not yet been considered - this is no landmark judgment.

An order has been obtained to require MNHQ to disclose registration information about one user. As I understand it the application was unopposed. An unopposed application will almost always be granted.

There is really nothing to see here.

NoCauseRebel · 12/04/2019 13:13

Must these threads always descend into an anti trans debate and to the posters saying they have never read any transphobic messages on here that is presumably because they are themselves transphobic.

But that aside, the fact that people think they can log into any website under a username and post unfounded and often defamatory allegations about a named individual is something which does need addressing. The sooner that people realise the internet is not anonymous the better. MN have already posted in their t’s and C’s that they are able (and willing) to pass details to authorities in the event of safeguarding concerns, so anyone thinking that signing up with an assumed username and made up rl name is wrong if they believe that is untraceable. HQ also have your IP address etc, and indeed did apparently alert the authorities to someone’s posts recently, something which some disagreed with at the time (me included) but which many others applauded.

In fact this kind of case removes all liability from the website and gives it to the user instead. Anyone remember the Gina Ford case? She took legal action against MN itself due to posts about her on here,and I believe that the subject was no longer actually able to be discussed at the time or she was not allowed to be named. Similarly with the McCanns, an awful lot is posted about them and MN usually take the posts down because of the liability towards them but actually the user making the comments is the one responsible for making them, even if the site removes them from public view.

So there are many situations which could be affected by this. It’s not just about beating down the rights of women as the hysterical feminists would have us believe, it goes a lot further than that.

EdithWeston · 12/04/2019 13:14

MN has of course 'been here, done that'

If someone objects to user-generated content, the law already provides for them to challenge it, by getting in touch with the hosting platform and asking for them to provide the identity of the poster or to delete the material, or become liable themselves as well if it all ends up in court.

MN has in the past chosen not to expose itself (probably because it cannot verify posters' identity in nearly all cases) and so then contacts the poster, explains the issue and asks they wish to withdraw the post or have what identity info MN holds passed to the complainant (not sure if it needs to be verified at this stage, the purpose is so action can be taken against the poster not the site). If the poster does not respond or MN cannot adequately identify the user, then MNHQ will delete the post.

Is there really a significant change now? (Other than people seizing on something already extant and harnessing it to a different agenda as if it were new and linked)

justasking111 · 12/04/2019 13:17

8So there are many situations which could be affected by this. It’s not just about beating down the rights of women as the hysterical feminists would have us believe, it goes a lot further than that.* Thank you Nocauserebel. This is what I have been trying to get across from the beginning. It does go a lot further than that.

Looking across the pond Homeland Security have powers they were given years ago. Some folk feel those powers are being abused, some are grateful that they are on the ball.

OP posts:
EdithWeston · 12/04/2019 13:21

The powers have existed in England for at least 4 years

GabrielleNelson · 12/04/2019 13:22

Do please point them out, Fenella, and of course report them too so that Mumsnet can delete them.

I find this sort of discussion very frustrating. Several posters appear saying that Mumsnet is full of transphobia. They don't give examples. They just keep repeating that allegation, and that leads others to accept it as true, when if they actually saw what was supposedly so vile they'd be amazed.

justasking111 · 12/04/2019 13:30

Interesting Edith. "The Online Harms White Paper was issued on Monday by the UK government"

OP posts:
CallMeWoman · 12/04/2019 13:46

Until I see places like kiwi farms - which are full of horrid transphobic comments - being targeted like Mumsnet currently is, I will remain skeptical over the claims that this site is the only corner of the internet that transpeople need "protection" from.

JaneJeffer · 12/04/2019 14:30

There are transphobic comments on this very thread.
Where are they?

Aeroflotgirl · 12/04/2019 14:36

I didn't know it was transphobic to state facts!

ScreamScreamIceCream · 12/04/2019 15:16

HQ also have your IP address

I don't have a fixed IP like many in the UK. I've actually been blocked by other forums thinking I do when I've never logged on to them.