that all mumsnet is about is hunting "trolls"

[justsue]

I have read so many posts tonight that are not short of bullying to be honest. So someone has questions and ideas that do not sound particulary sane, so what! This is exactly why some people "including me" are a little worried about posting thier ideas, fears, little problems that to the individual are huge but to some of you lot are funny or total lies that you can belittle and make fun off.

If that is what mumsnet is all about then you carry on

Belle - PMSL

I think if you read the first thread and how horrible posters were to and about WWC then I reckon she was rather goaded. Not an excuse but a reason. Lots of people can be goaded easily into that kind of behaviour and I can't see the difference between starting the BF thread to wind people up (or with an element of it) and the personal attacks and troll hunting she got on her first thread... Mih it matters not to me. I quite enjoyed her threads even though I find some of the opinions expressed obnoxious....

Seriously? We should ban everyone who is ever deliberately provocative? There'd be no-one here... AnyFucker, Bitoffun, Thesecondcoming, scottishmummy, bonsoir, Xenia, WashWithCare, Shineoncrazydiamond, me... the list would go on and on and on and we'd lose all the interesting people and some of the brilliant advice givers

If someone really is taking people in with motivations to take money or things then report them and MNHQ can at least post to warn people or ban them.

Good point, Curiosity. I didn't think the first post was particularly lacking in integrity (nearly used the T word there!) and although I posted on there I didn't think it was anything other than a genuine thread. I think her unfortunate tone contributed to the flaming but I see your point. It was only in the subsequent posts that things seemed to get out of hand and rather deliberately inflammatory (?spelling).

No, I like deliberately provocative - my wording is poor. It felt spiteful and not real to me. Like it was being done to really upset people. I do think there's a clear difference between creating passionate debate and deliberately trying to cause offence.

expressing an opinion others disagree with is not trolling. that is the problem - people may think 'oh she couldn't possibly be sincere' simply because they strongly disagree.

also, if i was feeling particularly raw on a subject, i'd avoid it like the plague on the tinterweb - doubly so on AIBU. I feel sometimes people are only looking in order to be offended.

i've just spent a bit looking for a comedy clip where (i think Rhod Gilbert) points out that there are much worse things in live than being ofeended - and we should worry about freedom of speech instead!

i seem to remember some notable names being taken in by (or giving the benefit of the doubt to) a certain poster i thought was v. probably the worst kind of troll before xmas, so agree that mere hexperience is not necessarily a sign of judgement.

Anyway, if her intention was to attract attention I would say that need has probably been met!

I'm off now - have to complete an assignment about the Dalai Lama from the Tibetan perspective. Any thoughts on that gratefully received.

I'm probably fairly similar to you BoF.
I do find it quite interesting all this trolling malarkey - I just dont see the point in getting all giddy at poking someone like wwc. Whats the point, its why they're here.

Who is talking about banning?!?!

I said I ignore the deliberately provocative ... that includes Xenia.

I've never seen any of the others being vitriolic.

'in life' 'offended' stuff the keyboard.

curiousity - i am disappointed not to be named..it's always a blardy poplarity competition of some sort!

Edgar, dear, consider yourself divorced.

that poster is entitled to the benefit of the doubt I reckon since the ones 'taken in' are perfectly capable of safeguarding themselves and nothing was ever proven either way. Also I reckon better to give the benefit of the doubt than publicly doubt without proof in that scenario. If it is true then excluding her from MN and hunting her down is cruel beyond cruel, if she is lying then some people have tried to help someone disingenuous on an internet forum. I know which I'd rather and I feel it is a person's own responsibility to safeguard themselves purely because no-one is actually going to do it reliably for you if you don't.

Edgar - you should just be more 'blardy' noticeable then shouldn't you?!

@belle - tibet is now 50% han chinese due to the 'strengthen the west' initiative (ie, the chinese believe the tibetans are too stupid to manage on their own an therefore send people to run the country...)

tibetans watch chinese tV which is a pack of lies from start to finish - i saw a 'news' article allegedly depicting a riot of 'taiwanese communists' in a place that could have been anywhere on this earth (the taiwanese aren't big on demonstrations, but usually do them in places that are recognisable landmarks, and the communist party is banned in taiwan...basically it didn't happen.)

...they probably accept the chinese are there to stay - they just want some kind of autonomous status (like, say, HK, though with less of a view to money)

the dalai lama however is a major Buddhist symbol - and there is still much respect for buddhism in chinese culture generally (not just tibetan culture)

take a look at this blog which has a list of other interesting blogs...

evidently i haven't been annoying enough..

Hully, my precious, with your beauty that reminds me of a snowflake caught on my hand - delicate, yet fragile, as though you'd melt at the touch of a mans lips...how can you desert me! I shall perish of misery, pierced by the dagger of your charms!!!

basically i see trolls,i decide whether i want to prod and tease for a while or ignore.

but responsibility for ones on-line sanity is wholly individual.posters need to be savvy not to get too drawn in or share or disclose too much personal circumstance.

given that trolls want and crave attention and each exasperated response is a kerching moment for them i generally ignore

but as a principle mn is open access and i do hope range of opinions a good thing. id hate to see it over moderated and stifled

i dont get worked up personally about trolls or inflammatory posts.as ultimately we have individual self control,dont like- dont look

curiosity....I have taken deep offence at being put in the same list as BOF

how could you compare anyone to her

she is the very definition of troll, she even physically resembles one !

< humpf >

although I have been rather uncharacteristically naughty and given this person a pretty hard time over the last couple of days, I have not hunted her down nor do I want her banned

she was quite entertaining when you got past the offensiveness (it entertained me anyway) and I do believe in freedom of speech

just like I would like to continue to have the freedom to taunt offensive posters, only checked by my fellow mumsnetters

tis how it should be, and why I like MN

justsue I completely agree with you. It isn't what it should be, I'm sure of that.

I think WWC deserved a bit of poking on the BF thread, I didn't like to see it on her previous ones, all brought about by being a possible OW. There was no other reason pre BF stupidity. I think this is why some of us are uncomfortable

wave back at Ellensmum

There are people on here making stuff up. What a weird world we live in?!!
I suppose there are people in the real world doing the same..... of course there are people on the internet doing it. Mums net seem a strange forum for it though. Aren't we supposed to be sisters united (sorry brothers) parents united, it's a hell of a boat to sail otherwise!

Scaredoflove, your OW thing is based on your assumptions. I was very critical of WWC on her second thread (husband stealing), but I was critical about the impact on the life of the kids, as were many other people. I could not care less about the sex and relationship history of the adults involved, and neither could most other people.

I don't get why on a site called MumsNet, people can't understand that some people are going to be concerned for the kids. Starting a thread where you say you want 2 kids to lose the place they live in is going quite a bit beyond the level of controversy of Xenia or Anna. Turning it into a stealth AIBU further down the thread didn't really help.

I know you are not the only person who has tried to make out this was predominantly about women who were angry about infidelity over 3 threads. It really was not.

Who was the creepy wanking troll? I always miss the good stuff me

it was washwithcare apparently

Curiosity, no need to do that.Dot.Thing - it's a bit tedious.

Re Trolls etc you are being disingenuous. I'm not calling for anyone to be banned.

However, I reserve the right to point out if I think someone is being deliberately offensive. Does that mean I want them banned? No, it just means I think they are prats, and i'm entitled to air that view on this Forum.

That's what Mnet is all about, people expressing their honest opinions.

no shit mummysgoingmad?? i have only read her "i split my DHs family up" thread and the first post in her Bf thread - nothing to wank over in that surely???

You see, when i think of creepy wankers i think of the time i was a vet nurse and i answered the phone to some guy who told me i was a very naughty girl and that i was making him hard!! I sooo wanted to put him on speaker phone - five minutes later he rang back and was obviously hitting the phone with his cock!! lol