"on MN this week" in the Daily Mail

[StealthBearWipesBumOnDailyMail]

Thread no 2

I agree, saintly! I remember your stalker, too.

Saintly, that goes back to the same circular argument though doesn't it?

If we post here for support than we have to say "I need support" we can do the best we can to protect ourselves and the chances are that the abusive husband/toxic MIL is never going to log on to MN and find out that the OH is planning to leave with the kids or something but when it is published in a newspaper? Doesn't that open up a whole new world of vunerablility? One that we did not sign up for when we wrote those posts and assessed the risk we were taking in doing that? AFAIK MN can use our posts, journos can lift the occasional bit here and there and that is it. If that is not the case then it changes the risk that I am assessing IYSWIM.

lol, it's a rum do, indeed pointy. lolol.

Tamba/HugeMistake. Oh, man, I'd forgotten about that one! Then there was the dirty nappy in the library, Narniagate.

Oops:It's very worrying that MN seem to have absolutely no idea whatsoeverr if they own our posts and can sell them on or not

We know we can sell your posts Oops (not that we did of course in this case) but can random journos is the issue in question? And, the answer, it seems to me, depends on volume.
It's not that clearcut - any number of lawyers/people who sound like they're lawyers seem to have had different opinions on this and the other thread... Mark Stephens, however, seems to think there might have been an infringement of copyright - I will confirm that soonest and then we can decide what to do next.

Although I presume when MNHQ wrote their terms and conditions they wanted them to allow them leeway to use posts in ways they hadn't yet thought of if it might generate cash. Hence some vagueness.

A lot of the whether or not it's OK to use posts in particular circumstances will be outside MNHQ control anyway. It's an open public website and therefore general rules will be the ones that come to be used no matter the T&C's (closed websites will have a different set of standards). IME if you write on an open website, that anyone can see, it is generally seen as freely available and public, open to use. That seems to be the way it is going.

Maybe I misread then expat. I couldn't work and earn what was needed to support the children on my own, obviously didn't intend for that to be the case and feel shit about it. I don't see where I've been upset about this a lot though? Other than a few posts on the thread.

On a tit for tat basis, if LH gets posts mentioning her old MN name deleted, can she arrange for the DM to take her column from this week off the website then? Seems a fair exchange...

tamba and carlk got close whilst posting here on mn and then it was all verry public when she announced her pregnancy and then a d=bit of detective work , egged on by the protagonists revealed that they were having a RL affair.

IRRC
and alot of people were corss because they felt abused/betrayed/taken advantage of...

Isn't it though, aitch.

It's a funny old game

pointy yes - odd turn of events, but it was all outed on the first thread....so

(points over there)

the nappy in the library, expat? that was some vicious game of cluedo.

So can I sell mn posts?

Can we have a competition to see who's the best tout?

the nappy in the library, expat? that was some vicious game of cluedo.

Kingcanute- if you post on an open website then you have to realise that it may be used. I stopped posting about my MIL years ago when someone did recognise her from my description. Nothing meant by it, but a reminder to me that I had been far to open on a public website.

It's fairly easy to disguise a post if you need help. MNHQ cannot be responsible for individual poster's vulnerabilities. IMO.

Pointydog

farkin' hell, yes.

The internet is about to eat itself, to quote an old friend of mine

There - feel better for that namechange given what's going on.

Needless to say I'm totally, utterly against this and am appalled that MNHQ think it's a good business idea.

It'll change the nature of MN, people will (and are already) losing trust, and as numerous people have stated, it risks a poster looking for genuine help being identified because they've given details of an identifiable situation.

I'm confident that few people in my family or workplace would come on MN and identify me, but they might if it was in the DM.

MN could refuse permission - any copyright lawyer would advise that wholesale cutting and pasting breaches MN's intellectual property - unless they give permission, which they have.

Killing the goose that laid the golden egg comes to mind.

How many mnetters are writing trashy novels (or very good ones) based on the personal details of another mnetter?

oh, i was a nppy in the library person.
was i a goodie or a baddie in it?
I don't remember!

It was a 'starlover', of later Narniagate fame, thread, Aitch. About lack of toilet facilities in libraries and parents changing nappies on the floor during children's hour and then leaving the dirty nappy there for someone else to pick up.

It dissolved into your typical chav-guardiansta fracas with plenty of outrage and flouncing on all sides.

saintlydamemrsturnip you have suprised me

wow 2 deleted

i love vodka.

moldoes moldies moldies

who will appear

oh she has already

howdy

I thought you were about to break out into mouldy old dough there, custs

I'm afraid we can't force anyone to post on MN and nor would we want to - but I have suggested to Leah H that would be much better to come on and talk this through than to have it rumble on and on - it must make pretty horrific reading from her end - I know I'm finding it tough. Whether she comes, though, is completely her choice.