Opinions you have that aren't popular on mumsnet(2)

[Lockdowner35]

As the last thread reached 1000 posts

I will start

Jo Swinson would have do a better job than Boris on Coronavirus

but what do you want? What do you suggest? Government control of social media? Do you want the government to enforce freedom of speech there? So anything goes?
Then what about those that invite violence, promote terrorism, etc?

There's got to be some sort of middle ground here. Where freedom of speech is allowed unless it's breaking specific laws rather than company policy. Making these companies more accountable, maybe breaking them down and making them smaller. Or alternatively having alternative channels where people can speak, where news put out isn't fake, away from the cesspit of Twitter. I don't know, I know governments are starting to look at it, but we're really only starting to see the enormity of what's happening and what power and impact these companies actually have. Re the trump thing, I do know when it was said about him suggesting using bleach for covid, it was taken entirely out of context. I saw the original video, he didn't say those things, not in that context anyway, the video had been cut and shut to make it look like he had. I don't like him, but I find that narrative that suddenly becomes a world truth very concerning.

Good post, @Orlania, I did actually agree with most of what you said there, but still there is a question of governance of private companies to get round. The alternative channels I like the sound of, but who'd be running them?

Still not sorry Trump was banned from Twitter, though!

The alternative channels I like the sound of, but who'd be running them?

I don't know. I think key countries need to get together to manage this somehow as a group. A government initiative, but placed outside of that too, so that it's not actually government led, but adheres to the laws of the countries involved. I've only just recently started to think about it tbh, it's a huge thing to roll out, but I think that's where it needs to start. I know the government are planning to deliver news on a regular basis, even after covid, to get round the problem of the misinformation and interpretation we are given through the media. Which is a start, but we need a bigger social media initiative than something that's just pushed out by the government, although that direct news information could of course feed into it as well.

And yes the governance of private companies is problematic with free markets etc, but on the other hand, if they are damaging democracies then surely somehow they must be breaking some laws. Threats to democracy really are quite a serious thing for all of us. Where it's private companies actually calling the shots instead. That can't ever be right or a good thing to happen.

That mumsnet has massively dumbed down in recent years.

Seems to have been an influx of posters that are thick as fuck.

@1FootInTheRave

That mumsnet has massively dumbed down in recent years.

Seems to have been an influx of posters that are thick as fuck.

Can you expand on this please?

She’s right - I’ve been here for sixteen years now. If you were around then, you’ll know how much it’s dumbed down.

Well rather than just saying it's dumbed down, it would be more interesting if people were actually articulate why they think it has 🤔

16 years ago less people had personal computers. So not as many people would have been in an Internet chat room. Probably only those that worked in offices, or were more well off. People would have also been writing using a laptop or desktop rather than a smart phone or tablet. So there wokld have been less Spag errors. Writing using predictive text on a smart phone, while you're doing other stuff at the same time, is going to result in more errors. I think the older generation put more weight on SPAG as well. Younger people have grown up with phones, text speak etc, so they're less concerned with "the correct way" to write. Poor SPAG doesn't neccasarily mean less intelligence though.

So with the introduction and avaliblity of new technology, and a change in the way the wider population uses the Internet, its only natural that mm would have a much wider audience than 16 years ago. Unfortunately broader does usually mean "dumber" as the pp put it.

Children's mental health is no more important than teachers physical health.

@Orlania

but what do you want? What do you suggest? Government control of social media? Do you want the government to enforce freedom of speech there? So anything goes? Then what about those that invite violence, promote terrorism, etc?

There's got to be some sort of middle ground here. Where freedom of speech is allowed unless it's breaking specific laws rather than company policy. Making these companies more accountable, maybe breaking them down and making them smaller. Or alternatively having alternative channels where people can speak, where news put out isn't fake, away from the cesspit of Twitter. I don't know, I know governments are starting to look at it, but we're really only starting to see the enormity of what's happening and what power and impact these companies actually have. Re the trump thing, I do know when it was said about him suggesting using bleach for covid, it was taken entirely out of context. I saw the original video, he didn't say those things, not in that context anyway, the video had been cut and shut to make it look like he had. I don't like him, but I find that narrative that suddenly becomes a world truth very concerning.

Governments and ill thought out laws made this problem.

If twitter don't edit (except removing criminal stuff) they aren't liable for what is said.

If twitter edit too much they become a publisher and are liable for what's written on the site.

How would you feel about taking legal liability for anything posted on twitter? You trust the masses not to slander the hell put of each other?

@Orlania

Well rather than just saying it's dumbed down, it would be more interesting if people were actually articulate why they think it has 🤔

Politics became more extreme and so now anyone who doesn't share thier politics is "thick as fuck" .

As no party ever has more than about 30% support, every individual will now percive 70% of people to be thick as fuck.

Would be my guess

Bouncy bumble bee, your list made me smile because it contained my grammatical pet hate - the confusion of less/fewer!

‘Fewer’ pertains to plural, hence ‘fewer mistakes’ and ‘less’ pertains to singular, eg ‘less milk.’

And yes, that’s grammar pedantics, but it’s just one of the few things that’s different these days, which leads to a sense of posters being less educated than in the past. I agree that some of the typos and punctuation (the ‘S’ and ‘P’ of ‘SPAG’) is down to multitasking and use of smartphones, however the grammar mistakes can’t really be attributed to this, like the less/fewer error above.

But it’s not just that; in the past people were much more polite and supportive. They posted thought provoking ideas and it was fun to take part in debate. The practical questions related to things like dealing with colicky babies or choice of pain relief. Men having affairs, family problems.

Then everyone found MN (including the mainstream press) and the debates changed nature, they became angrier, more ‘tabloid.’ We have prostitutes saying ‘ask me anything’ and far more salacious content. It’s hard to articulate, but that’s the gist of it.

I’m sure I’ll be judged as twee and judgemental, I pointed out the grammatical error mainly because the above poster made my ‘favourite’ one. However, we are being asked what was different, and in my opinion, it was a nicer place.

@CountessFrog interesting how you reminisce about how it was once a nicer, more polite and more supportive place, while needlessly criticising a poster (with an articulate and interesting point) for her grammar...

@1FootInTheRave
"That mumsnet has massively dumbed down in recent years.
Seems to have been an influx of posters that are thick as fuck."

Absolutely agree with the above statement. If one wanted to be crude, one could say that LMC contingent counts for a large chunk of the said influx; the sheer number of banal, pointless threads threatens to drown the intelligent life struggling for survival here.

All biscuits gratefully received.

That too many people move new partners in with their DC, or introduce their DC to the new partner far too quickly with absolutely no thought about their DC's feelings or welfare. If your DC have regular contact with your ex, or are our the house frequently, there's absolutely no reason to introduce a new person into their lives. Just see your new boyfriend/girlfriend when the kids aren't with you. You're new love isn't so special that it's worth riding roughshod over children's feelings and safety for.

[quote praepondero]@1FootInTheRave
"That mumsnet has massively dumbed down in recent years.
Seems to have been an influx of posters that are thick as fuck."

Absolutely agree with the above statement. If one wanted to be crude, one could say that LMC contingent counts for a large chunk of the said influx; the sheer number of banal, pointless threads threatens to drown the intelligent life struggling for survival here.

All biscuits gratefully received.[/quote]
None of the really intelligent people I know would describe someone as “thick as fuck”. It’s just not how they think about people. They recognise their own intelligence obviously, but see it as function of a difference in their attitude, aptitude, background or interests rather than something lacking in other people.

Or perhaps, just as someone 5’7” feels taller than someone 5’2” but someone 6’4” sees them as about the same height, very intelligent people don’t see much different between the quite bright and the thick as fuck.

@Blibbyblobby

Then they are not very intelligent, innit?

{banhgs head against wall]

[quote praepondero]@Blibbyblobby

Then they are not very intelligent, innit?

{banhgs head against wall][/quote]
sigh

Love, what I’m saying is you are probably not as bright as you think you are.

Thank you for translating your musings, it was sorely needed.

Saying picky bits or Markies

@praepondero

Thank you for translating your musings, it was sorely needed.

As I said, not as smart as you think you are

@Level75

The existence of trans women is not a threat to women's rights.

It's not actually a big deal at all.

I see the men's rights activists and their handmaidens are out in force.

wanting with trans rights doesn't make you a man, men's rights activist or anything.

it just makes you a decent human being.

wanting with trans rights doesn't make you a man, men's rights activist or anything.

What rights don't transpeople have,? They have human rights same as everyone in the uk. Transwomen don't have women's rights. There's a reason for that. Can you guess what it is?

it just makes you a decent human being.

Giving away women's legals protections does not make you a decent human being

how do trans people impeach on women's rights?