To think this is going to attract a lot of the 'wrong' kind of people?.....

[SprocketAndTubbs]

article

I probably am, I'm all for change and development and I understand that MNHQ have to promote this site, as it's a money making business and that this article is not the result of any marketing as such, however I can't help thinking that coverage like this will only make the site much more attractive to hairy @rsed truckers looking for a cheap sexual thrill on a Friday night. The extra publicity also attracts more trolls, which makes the boards so much harder to read these days. The site is infested with trolls / threads about trolls just now, or at least any time a slightly unusual situation is written about, this is the conclusion that is jumped to.

I know it's about time I dragged myself kicking and screaming from the 18th Century to the present where marketing and news coverage are the norm, but as a long time lurker, the site just doesn't seem to be as great as it was when it was much more of a smaller and lesser known place to come online. Gah!! Need to get over myself!!

'To think this is going to attract a lot of the 'wrong' kind of people?..... '
You mean Daily Mail readers?

ha at the comments. wasn't that on the independent earlier?

yikes
well educated
middle class
what a load of crap

Yanbu. I agree.

There is another thread today linked to this DM article and yet another one linking to the Times Online article.

Yes Cornsilk, have just realised how bad that sounds!, was thinking more that it's a story that has been put out to all media, etc.

Even with that article I'd be surprised if we were the first port of call for "hairy @rsed truckers looking for a cheap sexual thrill on a Friday night".

the sexual technics lego comment is bloody funny isn't it

I agree, I read the Times article in the newspaper today, it's fair enough getting publicity to atract new people but I thought this was a step too far. It's going to attract all sorts of weirdo's after a quick thrill.

Whenever I read articles like this, it's the comments that piss me off more than anything:

"A bunch of bored, overweight, post-partum women all hitting the online forums and getting the jollies they don't get from their fed up, turned-off husbands. If they stayed off the full-fat lattes and muffins and looked after themselves better they might actually find people who would invite them out of the house...and their husbands might even find them attractive enough to be seen with in public again."

Oh do fuck off Merry from Belfast. I've had better sex than you're ever going to get, you sad shrivelled bitter person

ha what does it say about merry from belfast then apart from they do the same but on the daily mail website

was meant to be

Is it me, or is The Sunday Times becoming a little obsessed with MN? It feels as though there is something about us in every week...

So a group of women, who by the fact that they have children (the clue is in the name people...) have probably had sex at some time during their lives, actually talk about it...? Quick, hold the front page!

Who cares what that bunch of mother-cuddlers from the daily mail say? Why would men come here for a sexual thrill considering what else is available on the interweb? They would be better off with the pictures of Rochelle from the Saturdays' 21st birthday party or photos of Kim Kardashian in her bikini in 'Femail Today', the soft porn area of the mail.

I am all for this site being publicised to child carers or those who are looking for advice or interaction with others about parenting, etc. - it has been a god send to me and I wouldn't want to deny the excellent advice and support that I have received to anybody. However, personally I am becoming less and less encouraged to post on the boards, as now so many of my friends and colleagues also come on here, I'm afraid I will be identified. It's also being hijacked even more by the media and policitians in the run up to the elections. I still love the site and check in every day, but when I first started lurking, I felt that I was part of an exclusive club, I had fun trying to work out if those people in my RL were closet MNers like me!! These days, it's more of a challenge to find somebody who isn't using the site!! I know I'm a bit sad and childish and understand the irony of me posting to say that I'm afraid to post!! but I'm sad that Mumsnet has grown so much, selfish I know.

i think i've only heard mn mentioned once by someone in my real life and even then i think they meant netmums

Dear god. Those quotes are OLD aren't they.

What the hell is that all about?

Has there been some friday night action recently that I have missed?

I think if I were the owners I would be looking for a buyer for MN now.It must be about at its peak and I suspect this is why they are grabbing any bit of publicity possible.

Hang on, pirate sex and sexual technics are both joke threads ...

oh no they'll sell to disney and then we will be no more!

i though the quotes were old too.

You said it Sprocket. If you really are a lurker then it is a shame you have not posted before on these here boards.

Also, lets hope that the DH who behaves 'like a pirate' either a.) knew his DW had posted about it on MNet or b.) doesn't read the DM - see, I would imagine that that situation would be fairly unique, the OP has posted presumably believing that they were doing in a fairly confidential manner (admittedly on the internet) and now it's been publicised in the media - I wouldn't feel comfortable posting anything personal on here now - I think MNet has sold out.

It's in the Sunday Times aswell Sprocket.

Why should dirty men/women pay to get a thrill on a sex site when they can get it on here for free?? It's being advertised as a 'readers wives' type site, it's going to bring in all sorts. Bad form IMO, seedy and not at all what this site should represent.

Oh no! I thought you were genuine Sprocket. I've been had . Must be losing my touch.

Lawks! That left my lighthouse tingling! Arrrrrhhhhhhh!

i'm confused, you're a long time lurker yet are scared of posting anymore? i'm lost