To not ‘pay my way’?

[LeLavandou]

By not paying for Mumsnet Premium and using an ad blocker. Is that ‘not paying my way’ as Justine Roberts suggested on the MN premium thread in Site Stuff?
Does this make me a freeloader, if I still use MN and just block the ads? Given I only use the talk boards where content is produced by users, where does this stand in the MN freeloader stakes?

I take the point, of course, about Mumsnet users also generating content, and the value that posting brings, and of course that applies to everyone who's contributed to this thread but most people don't contribute - by far the majority of regular mumsnet users are lurkers not posters.

If I may offer a suggestion MNJustine, you might want to consider distinguishing between regular posters and lurkers when you give your opinions in the future on ad blocker users and fairness. Because quite a few of the people who create your content for free for you were unhappy about you saying that, given that they, well, give you a lot of stuff gratis. The same is not true of the lurkers.

Basically, if some people are contributing no content or advertising revenue, that's different from users who, while they don't bring in anything from clicks etc, are still voluntarily helping create the product without which you wouldn't have any advertisers in the first place.

I have been for a nose at the site and it is not a 'cheap knock off' of MN. It bears a completely different interface and appears to have a range of topics, discussions regarding MN from an initial glance, appear to be a couple of threads only. I have yet to see any spamming here though.

Back OT, thanks MNHQ for explanation, although the choice is easy. Join premium or not.

I personally feel it's a copy. Board titles like AIBU, Chat, Style and beauty, site stuff. If it was an original forum they would have used original names, it was clearly set up for Mumsnet defectors. That's just my opinion of course.

I personally feel it's a copy. Board titles like AIBU, Chat, Style and beauty, site stuff. If it was an original forum they would have used original names

I was mod on a club forum. We had boards with all those names bar one. I don’t think MN coined any of the board names!

Sorry meant to add this was back in 1998/1999/2000

Fair enough Mary. Maybe the Mums chat creator didn't have Mumsnet at all in mind when setting it up.

Maybe they did, maybe they didn’t. I just don’t think the MN are that unusual to be a copy!

I don’t think they’ve got an AIBU anyway

It was blatantly designed to be a copy of MN.

They got rid of AIBU when they realised they couldn't use it.

Oh I have just been back. I went on the first day and it had an AIBU and that's changed. Fair play to them to try and make it a bit more original 😁

And anyway didn't mumsnet take aibu from another forum anyway?

I’m sure countless have used it, we did 20odd years ago.

I personally feel it's a copy. Board titles like AIBU, Chat, Style and beauty, site stuff.

I don't think they have AIBU and the other names are pretty generic tbh.

lots of people acting all superior about how stupid mumsnetters are etc.

I don't think that's true either, it seems very pleasant over there.

Why have you furloughed staff?

For the same reason most other companies have I Imagine. Revenues are down due to Covid and they can’t afford to pay them during this period.

Maybe the Mums chat creator didn't have Mumsnet at all in mind when setting it up

I agree, they then just stumbled upon it and decided to spam it to recruit it’s members.

Does MN have 'defectors' ?

I find bitching about a site and the language surrounding all this, quite laborious. Start a thread on it if it is getting under people's skin. It is a site, where just as posters here, likely go to many sites.

I did mean 'defectors' as tongue in cheek as the site was set up in response to Justine's thread about paying for premium. Clearly didn't come across as intended.

I might be sheltered in forums as PP said, but as it was set up after that thread from Justine with very similar board titles and a pretty similar name it does suggest they probably had Mumsnet in mind do you think?

Well most of the defectors were the Megan and Harry loons so it did MN a favour really getting rid of that lot.

@JustineMumsnet

We don't alert the Daily Mail to threads

Perhaps YOU don't directly, but there is clearly a fairly symbiotic relationship between MN and the DM. Perhaps because there's a fair cross-over of demographics, or perhaps because PR?

oh they so did it to be a rip off, they even announced it when they opened the forum

Admin Apr 10, 2020
Hello,

Mums.chat has been setup as an antidote to a very poorly run parenting site that makes millions a year, is using the current pandemic to charge users £49.99 for a "premium" service that is anything but and is a shadow of its former self.

How much clearer can it be?

4. Our moderation is poor/ inconsistent. I don't actually think this is fair - we've always taken the decision to invest in professional mods...

I am astonished to hear this.

I have reported the inappropriately flashing ads on the side bar in site stuff and been told that many people have raised that issue.
Asking people to pay to see fewer flashing seizure inducing ads and if they won't risk it by turning off their ad blocker they are treating MN unfairly is deeply offensive.