Meet the MNHQ moderators. Live chat Friday 8th Nov, 1-2pm

[JustineMumsnet]

Hi all,
We promised you a webchat to discuss all things moderation (and anything else you fancy really). So, tomorrow lunchtime RebeccaMumsnet, RowanMumsnet and I (and possibly a few other team members - suspect that OliviaMumsnet might be lurking) will be on hand at 1pm to answer your questions. If you can't make it along, then do post your questions here in advance. Mind the guidelines at the top of the page now - only one question each and be nice .

Zing - I'm fairly confident MNHQ will not agree with you

oh yes deferring posting rights on joining would be great -- I wouldn't keep rejoining on an impulse then. I'd be cured! (And it prob would keep the trolling down too.)

Trouble is, most registrations are probably a bit impulsive, and I bet far fewer people would bother if they couldn't get stuck in straight away.

Yes, but MN isn't the only source is it? There's lots of other groups/sites/googling capacities - if it was an 'emergency' that can't wait 48 hrs then perhaps MN isn't the optimal choice anyway for that circumstance.

the trouble with stopping people posting for a limited time means it impacts on people who really need help NOW - particularly for people with new borns - time moves so slowly and so quickly then.

I would like to join the chorus of no deleting and no editing. I think it is helpful to see what has been said and if it defines anyone as a cunt then so be it. Would MN consider a week of not deleting unless it is something that would impact on MN legally?

can we ban the words "Mumsnet Royalty" said in a sneery tone please?

Its actually quite irritating.

I've just read the Gok thread again to see if distance lent perspective, and I think even more so that it was NOT bullying.

Precisely.

No it wasn't Hully.

In fact given how patronising and sexist Gok was, he got off lightly.

I really think that sums up the need for:

a) an Anti-Bullying Policy

b) a designated MNHQ member who is trained to distinguish bullying from "a bit of fun" or what you will

People who get off on bullying will always say:

"Gok Wan deserved the kicking he got because he is/says something I disagree with."

Although Zombie was the one to ask Justine to consider holding this webchat, she's now not sure what to ask. She thinks that almost all of the points she would like to see addressed have already been raised by others on this thread:

1. Those who word their posts so carefully that they remain just within the posting guidelines but which are nonetheless upsetting and / or attempting to provoke a reaction;

1. Perceived lack of consistency in applying the guidelines and

1. Delays in responding to reports.

She appreciates that there are no easy answers to many of these points but hopes that this afternoon's discussion will help both HQ and site users move forward together to make MN an even better site than it now is.

MN has been an enormous source of support for Zombie over the past couple of years and she would like to take this opportunity to thank both HQ and her fellow Mumsnetters from the bottom of her (undead) heart.

forthemods - you really think people "get off on bullying"?

goodness

I have to go out now, but us disagreeing doesn't make you right, forthemods, delightfully Orwellian tho the concept is.

For the record, I found the Gok thread rude and embarrassing.

However, I would like to point out to you, forthemods, that your comment, directly after a couple of posters have stated they did not think that threat was bullying, can be perceived as a personal attack on identifiable MNers. The unpleasant sneer of "people who get off on bullying" is unnecessary.

It would have been easy enough to say "Some people say that what I'd call bullying is merely disagreement; how do we work out the difference?" That would at least sound constructive.

Instead, we have a loaded comment which gets people's backs up and causes bad feeling. That, together with the fact that you are an anonymous namechanger on this thread, so posters don't "know" you and what your agenda with them might be, is part of the problem, not the solution.

It has been a bit of a theme recently: regular posters are picked and picked at. It is really spoiling the humour and goodwill: I can think of at least three well-loved warm and witty posters who have helped make MN what it is, who have deregistered because they are fed up with this kind of thing.

(sorry that took me an age to post- I had a visitor at the door halfway through typing)

BOF can I please get you cloned and shrunk to pocket-sized so I can carry you around with me at all times?

TIA

Without wanting to sound like Teacher's Pet, MNHQ do a bloody good job, since moderating us lot is like herding a bunch of incontinent, feral cats. The kind of cats who love you one moment, and then piss in your shoes when you are not looking.

I don't think there is a way of moderating the site that keeps everyone happy, or that ensures a perfectly balanced and fair deletion policy. We'd need a robot to do that. Every MNHQler has slightly different opinions on what constituents a PA, and I guess that they might even delete or not delete depending on the kind of day they've had, and how many trolls are about the boards.

I'd like to know if the people who constantly complain about the moderation of the site are also those reporting dodgy threads and posters. MNHQ have stated many times that they don't have time to read even a fraction of threads, they only look if a thread is reported.

And I would like to know how MNHQ deal with those who know the site well, and are skilled at pushing the right buttons without launching a full PA. Whether we call them GFs, or another name, these posters are very damaging to the site.

Could we have a better way of bringing these posters to the attention of MNHQ?

Hi, I'm sorry but I may have missed this... How do you actually mod ? Do you all sit in front of screens checking every thread? Or are there trigger words that alert you to a potential problem?
I have this image of HQ being an under ground lair with mods sitting in front of banks of rolling screens.

The gok thread was just rude. It highlights how people will act when they are hidden behind a username. People from behind a screen will act outrageously

The thing is – what was done to Gok Wan is done to ordinary Mumsnetters every single day.

Just had another look at the Gok webchat.

Tbh, his PR people should be ashamed of themselves. I posted the question about his insistence on spanx at 10.30ish, and I wasn't the only one asking that question. He started answering questions hours later, and obviously no one from his team had even looked at the thread, much less prepared some answers.

At the same time, it wasn't MN's finest hour. The webchat was derailed long before he arrived. It would have been fine if it were questions or comments about his work, but it was quite a lot of rambling chatter and limericks.

Bullying? No. But impolite and unnecessary. I wasn't impressed by Gok, but it was a shame for those who actually liked him and had a question that wasn't answered.

"Bullying? No." But that is just your opinion, MmeLindor.

Hello, hello,
We've just about made it on time to our own webchat (phew). Rowan is next to me, Becky is in a remote location but online and Olivia and others are hovering. So ta for all the questions and we'll get going in just a jiffy.