Wasn't there a general consensus that we were going to try and steer clear of upsetting news stories?

[DingdongMegaLegsonhigh]

OK - I'll admit I'm feeling particularly sensitive today but there are currently two really upsetting thread titles in active convos. Didn't post on either as a) I didn't want to read them and b)it would have put them back up the top

I don't recall that; think that people were going to try and warn readers that the thread may be upsetting, so you can avoid it if you want to...

Nope - no consensus. I think there was a thread on it one day in the last couple of weeks, but in a community of 10,000 or so it takes an awfully long time to reach anything approaching consensus.

I don't know Malory - I didn't want to open them.
I'm being oversensitive after a sad day with ds4.

True PSHW and I knew it would only be a few posts in before that was mentioned.

i haven't read them. i don't want to read them. doesn't mean people shouldn't be allowed to post about them. anything can upset anyone, not just obvious things. christ, the word chav riles some people up so a story from the news will.

I havn't read them either but they are there staring you in the face everytime I click on active convos. People can post what they like - of course I know that but I just wish a different title could be used - I don't know how about "sad news story if you want to be outraged and saddened click here."

Sorry but I agree with ParanoidSH.

It's your choice or not to click on the thread with a title which hints/openly states the content.

Otherwise we'd all be walking on eggshells hte whole time.

I didn't say people shouldn't be allowed to post them.

Thats not the point - I HAVEN@T rEAD THE THREADS - it's the titles in active convos that I'm talking about.

I am to glad of a bit of warning as I can't read some of those things. In my head its always my DD. But I think its ok if other people want to read them.

Then don't look at active convos, just look at you fave topics.

Sorry but it's almost impossible to post in a way that covers everyone's particular concerns at any one given time.

Dont like to be shouted at, for asking for a bit of sensitivity, as just happened on one of the threads. Particularly as it now seems that they simply want to garner moral outrage, rather than inform folk of something newsworthy.

Well you can search for new threads using "find new messages", and then you can choose which topics to browse - so you can exclude buy/sell, in the news etc. THat isn't foolproof because some news will go in "Other subjects", but it is a start. If someone is shocked or upset then I'm not sure they're going to be in the best frame of mind to word a title that everyone will find acceptable. But given that talk has been around during 9/11 and 7/7 I think that it would be hard to maintain a rule of "no upseting news titles" please.

lets not post stuff thats in the news then and just post jokes all day long just to cheer you up after your bad day.

mind you, the thread about the 8 yr old boy could of been worded differently.

That's what I mean. It's not the posting of the stories that I disagree with- I understand people want to share these shocking stories - it's just the wording of the titles doesn't need to be so in your face.
Have I got that point across now.
Today wasn't just any old bad day either stinkyandjake - it concerened my 17 month son and his sn.

Exactly stinkyandjake - its not the thread, its not the story - its the "in your face" subtitles that are simply unnecessary.

Really truly unnecessary.

I agree QV - you have put the point across far more eloquently then me.

Many of mumsnet's finest moments have been debates triggered by current events. What I loathe though are news stories posted with what appears to be a sense of salaciousness, virtual rubbernecking if you like.
It feels like there is almost a natural culture of this now, borne out by the enormous number of Dave Pelzer style abuse books that are bestsellers.

No, I don't care about thread titles. All this is getting on my tits!

I also get irritated by the idiots that think that you only see thread titles if you click on that particular topic.

Rubbernecking ? people are not gloating about items in the news .

Horrible things happen.

the threadd that started it tonight - well for all we know the OP might have an 8 yr old son her self and is thinking 'my God what if that happedned to us '

just like me whose son is just two years younger

The 8 yr old boy got raped.

Its in The news. not asthough its in Chat.

We all got p in arm,s when she who must not be named but ban on what we could and couldn't say now we cant have factula thread titles .

Its a public forum isn't it ?

I guess then that there is some irony in this thread's title. If I understand her posts, Megalegs isn't suggesting that people can't discuss upsetting news, but that they should be careful of how the title is worded.

I think that this illustrates that few people can draft the perfect thread title, especially when they are upset over something.

Hardly takes a genius to draft a title that doesn't contain the more graphic details of the story, surely?

I would suggest if you can't manage that, you probably aren't up to a discussion of the story either. In fact, you probably need watering.

By MerryChristmasfromQV on Wednesday, 6 December, 2006 8:53:53 PMI also get irritated by the idiots that think that you only see thread titles if you click on that particular topic