Active discussions

Are your children’s vaccines up to date?

Set a reminder

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Behaviour/development

Talk to others about child development and behaviour stages here. You can find more information on our development calendar.

Original poster

Mumsnet behaviour-is it a police state?

499 replies

talktalk · 04/05/2006 14:18

Hello, I've been lurking on Mumsnet for some time now but finally decided to post having been horrified at the reception that some people have received.

I always assumed that, within reason, mumsnet would be a place for parents/carers to come and, mostly anonymously, discuss their concerns. Over the last few weeks I have seen some ghastly behaviour from mns against innocent posts.
Are some of you out there assuming the mantle of "mumsnet police" and if so should you not announce that fact?

Why are people so aggressive? I've researched some of the more aggressive posters and it seems that there is a pattern to their behaviour.
If you disagree with a post or challenge its viewpoint perhaps you should just make it known and move on-berating people for their view or concern seems wrong to me.

There are lovely people on mumsnet and its such a shame that there are others who seem to get too busy and bully people into submission when they don't agree with them Sad

OP posts:
Are your children’s vaccines up to date?
Set a reminder
TaiTai · 06/05/2006 14:29

If you feel that strongly, Greensleeves and Custardo, then why don't you lobby for MN to change their policy so their is a blanket ban of posting about children and sexual arousal? That way, people won't be 'naive or stupid' enough to start such threads, people then can't respond with their own stories, no one will then report these posts and everyone's children would be protected. On second thoughts, I'm sure you have done that, because that would be more constructive than calling people "downright stupid".

Greensleeves · 06/05/2006 14:30

I haven't called anyone stupid. In fact there is nothing inflammatory, insulting or even vaguely ofensive in my post. Get off your soapbox and calm down. :)

TaiTai · 06/05/2006 14:35

No, you didn't but Custardo did and I was referring to both of you, either together or invidiually.

And I'm not on a soapbox - I'm serious. Getting MN to have a policy on such posts would mean there is no ambiguity, no room for eventual upset. I personally think it would be a shame, but the last three posts I've seen about that topic have all been reported, regardless of whether the OP has a history of posting before or not.

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 14:38

Which three would they be then TaiTai?

One is mentioned on this thread. The person who reported it has already apologised and admitted she overeacted and explained why.

The reporting process is private, so unless you have insider knowledge how do you know?

Greensleeves · 06/05/2006 14:41

"No, you didn't but Custardo did and I was referring to both of you, either together or invidiually."

What illogical rubbish. You accused me of something I didn't do and you should apologise.

Stop trying to rake up a dead argument. It's pointless and can't achieve anything other than more bad feeling.

Pruni · 06/05/2006 14:42

You either 'get' MN and feel it's the site for you - and there would me more than one reason to feel that, and more than one 'community' of people to join in with on MN - or you don't. In which case there are many similar sites with a different feel.

There are some instances when it feels a bit like a witch hunt on here, but each has a different set of circumstances behind it, so a bit weird to say "MN is like this" I think.

It can take a while to know how to word posts to get your opinion to be heard - I know I am particularly bad at this so not v memorable - but I don't think that's a personal snub, more that the funny/unusual/heartfelt ones stand out. Exactly like RL.

Pruni · 06/05/2006 14:43

oh god I'm a bit behind, this thread has gone off at a tangent...

sallystrawberry · 06/05/2006 14:45

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TaiTai · 06/05/2006 14:49

St George - The thread you're referring to, where someone reported it and then apparently apologized -you've got confused. picnikel posted a link to it and then later apologized to the fattimama, but it was PanicPants who said they'd reported it, and haven't seen an apology from them.

spacedonkey · 06/05/2006 14:50

What the hell is the point of this thread?

zippitippitoes · 06/05/2006 14:53

why should people apologise for reporting a thread? Presumably they were acting with integrity

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 14:53

Not confused at all, just that I read it ages ago.

I don't have a notepad and pen next to my PC logging exactly what each and every posted says.

Apparently you do.

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 14:53

poster not posted obviously.

TaiTai · 06/05/2006 14:57

as for the other two posts - i thought someone reported the one I was originally referring to, but I think I've got that wrong. I've had a quick search and I can't find the other one, but it did exist and I'm pretty sure someone said they reported it.

nothercules · 06/05/2006 14:57

I've skimmed read some of this thread and it reminds me of a song - round, round, baby right round....

TaiTai · 06/05/2006 14:59

That's very aggressive, Saint George. I don't have a notepad and pen, just quite a good memory. Which does fail me sometimes.

And Greensleeves, I don't think it's illogical rubbish what I wrote but I'm sorry I didn't make it clearer it was just Custardo I was referring to.

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 15:03

TaiTai - why am I getting the feeling that there will be no answer that you will be happy with.

If people post their concerns (with or without the use of the word Troll) - not happy, they shouldn't be nasty to the poster.

If people click the little ! and report the thread and admit the have done so - not happy, they shouldnt jump to conclusions.

If people click the little ! but don't say a word about it - not happy, will just assume they have done so anyway and slag them off.

If people ignore the potentially worrying threads/posts and do nothing - not happy beccause MN will become a cesspit full of trolls and weirdos, because no one tries to stop them.

Greensleeves · 06/05/2006 15:05

Is it me or is there an unusual concentration of "difficult" posters on MN today? Grin

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 15:06

Please tell me you don't mean me by that remark GS? I thought we were friends now [sulk]

arfy · 06/05/2006 15:06

well I expect TalkTalk is thrilled that we've all shown how aggressive we are now Grin

Greensleeves · 06/05/2006 15:07

No, not you StG!!! Grin It's just that two threads I've been on today seem to have somebody battling it out with no-one in particular and being aggressive. At least it's not me for a change Grin

WWWontSlagOffAnyone · 06/05/2006 15:08

Not getting into the general debate, I think mn is fab and no, it isn't a police state but I do think the reaction to the thread in question was understandable, totally. Hey, none of us knows for sure what the poster's motives were do we?

zippitippitoes · 06/05/2006 15:08

I think it's a mistake to have done away with moderators entirely. I think they would still have a role to play as complementary to the report this post button.

TaiTai · 06/05/2006 15:09

What? I don't have a problem with people reporting posts (and I didn't say anything about people not admitting they'd reported). When I suggested that there might be a blanket ban it was because it seemed that posts about children and sexual arousal ended up in suspicion and high emotion, rightly or wrongly. I don't want to get into my, ahem, discussion with rhubarb again, but I wasn't criticising her point, more how she expressed it.

SaintGeorge · 06/05/2006 15:11

All the moderators could do before was step into an argument and hope the posters would pay attention. That hasn't really changed.

The moderators have been officially removed because of legal technicalities.