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 .

[Mmelindor]

Course it is just my opinion, JustfortheMods. That is what MN is all about. Expressing one's opinion.

How we view bullying depends a lot on personal experience, I think.

[forthemods]

Hence the need for a clear Anti-Bullying Policy.

[RowanMumsnet]

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

Often the moderators seem very slow, no doubt due to high volumes of reports.

If the volunteer night time moderation is successful do you have any plans to introduce volunteer mods full time?

Well, there are definitely times when we're slower on responding than we would like to be - usually after a big troll influx or a mass bunfight, when we have a big backlog of reports to respond to. But we've done some analysis on the data, and overall our response times have actually improved over the last year: this time last year we were taking an average of 0.4 of a day to respond to a report; now we take an average of 0.3 of a day.

Obviously we'd love to respond to everything the instant it lands in our inbox [land of dreams] and we're sorry for any instances in which a slowness to respond has caused anyone real difficulty, but in general our response times are pretty much as they've always been (and if anything, getting a bit quicker).

Overnight volunteers: they're not mods (our bad for using the word) - they're strictly general keepers-of-eye (we think we're going to be calling them The Night Watch/ Night Watchers). We're not going to be asking them to do anything they wouldn't do anyway: we're not going to be asking them to work specific shifts or demand that they're online for certain periods. They're purely bona fide, checked-out MNers in non-GMT timezones who, in the course of their ordinary MNing, will have access to one extra button (hide post/thread), which will temporarily remove the content of the post and replace it with a message saying that the post is going to be looked at by MNHQ.

Obviously we will be keeping an eye on it, and if any of the Night Watch seem to be hiding posts for odd reasons we will take action.

[JustineMumsnet]

@NatashaBee

Do you have non-mumsnet-moderator logins so you can post in AIBU about annoying colleagues? :)

I've got loads of logins from when Mumsnet first started, way back in early 2000 and I used to answer my own questions under various pseudonyms. I also used to get my mates to ask questions. I remember a friend mailing me about her pregnancy palpitations and I told her to post it on Mumsnet and then I'd answer. Felt a bit guilty about it, so rushed on site to answer only to find someone had beaten me too it. That was a happy day when it dawned on me MN might just have a future.

[forthemods]

And there is also the question of whether the opinion of some carries more weight than the opinion of others. So if MmeLindor says "There is no bullying on this thread", does that mean that there is in fact no bullying on that thread?

[JustineMumsnet]

@HorryIsUpduffed

How long is Tech's to-do list, and what proportion of it is compatibility issues across standard site/mobile site/app?

It's long, but getting shorter. We have pretty much doubled the size of the tech team in a year and will keep adding folks incrementally as we know it's so important and there's so much we'd love to do. One of our problems is that we're so old, our infrastructure is a bit creaky - as demonstrated aptly by penis beaker - so we're doing lots of work behind to the scenes to address that (and have been for a while) that doesn't actually result in any whizzy new functionality. So it can look like Tech are twiddling their thumbs, but really they've been hard at it.

[BOF]

I think you've made your point, forthemods (without responding to my points, but hey ho, we can't have everything). How about you leave it there and let some other posters get answers to their questions?

[RowanMumsnet]

@Maryz

And have you given any thought to my suggestion of solving the overnight problem by having a "this thread has been reported by X number of individual posters, so we will automatically lock it until we can look at it" idea?

It would stop overnight stirrers and trolls.

The truth is, we just don't like the idea of automated anything, because it can be too easily gamed. Put it like this - if we ever do introduce anything automated, we probably won't tell you we've done so

[ChippingInBatshitArse]

Rowan what is the 'mode' average rather than the 'mean' average?

[RowanMumsnet]

@LovesBeingHereAgain

Has the night mods gone live ? why wasn't it me

How are you going to get tge balance right, it's a fine line most of tge time and subjective.

Hope we've answered most of this in our previous post about the Night Watch. We'll be reviewing every single decision taken by the Nightwatchwomen and offering feedback - and if we think they've hidden a post or thread unnecessarily, we'll just reinstate it.

[ThatFuckerFancyPuffin]

Hello HQ

I was wondering, with constant invasions we seem to be getting at the moment, whether anyone from the team monitors other websites using a combination of keyword and -ummmm- whatnot to pre-empt things.

Also agree with what some others have said about issues the site is having with newbies/nchangers coming on to whine about regs.

Also, this is the most important one, could this be incorporated in the site.

[ChippingInBatshitArse]

Oh my eyes - naughty Puffin!

[RowanMumsnet]

@ChippingInBatshitArse

Rowan what is the 'mode' average rather than the 'mean' average?

Our tracking software won't let us work this out Chipping so we'd have to do a report-by-report calculation across tens of thousands of reports to find this out. (Which we're not going to do )

[RebeccaMumsnet]

@LineRunner

I am wondering, do you all have an agreed definition of goading?

And how will you manage to be fair and consistent in applying it?

Hi Linerunner,

Goady is a tricky one but if you look at our Talk Guidelines you will see that we say

No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour

The guidelines used to include the word goading which in hindsight was a mistake on our part and they were edited earlier this year.

Each report is a judgement call for the person who receives the report.

Generally, we will discuss between us what the best course of action is depending on many different factors like the tone of the post, the poster (length of time on site, if they've been flagged to us before etc), the subject matter and so on.

There are lots of subjects that posting about could come across at deliberately inflammatory and we do take note that there is a fine line between allowing freedom of speech about touch paper issues and posting to inflame.

We do get it wrong sometimes. We do tend to give the benefit of the doubt unless it's an out and out obvious case or the poster is known to have done this sort of thing before.

We do try and work as a team to be fair and consistent and we often have sometimes very bizarre discussions about certain posts/posters and try to strike a balance.

We rely on you to report posts to us and we do appreciate that it can sometimes seem like we aren't doing anything but we will be noting and building up a picture of posters who repeatedly post to inflame and if they continue, we do take action.

Statistically we remove around half of the posts that are reported as being 'goady'. So when folks are reported for goading, about half the time they are simply posting a controversial viewpoint.

The majority of posts reported for being goady are written by 'normal' posters (we aren’t being overrun by GFs, although it can feel that way)

[JustineMumsnet]

@Hullygully

These are the problems/flaws as I see them:

1. As human beings, mods, despite good intentions, will inevitably a) read things in different spirits b) apply the rules differently therefore.

1. A lot of threads bumble along full of people mucking about, being rude to each other etc etc and no one minds so no one reports so nothing happens. THEN on some threads, others take exception and report like mad, so that things seen as normally acceptable, are then deleted. Thus it looks like reporting=deletion

1. If people take a dislike/exception to someone, they deliberately report report report in a concerted attempt to get that person "in trouble" (I can't believe I'm having to type this), whereas said individual would never use such behaviour and thus has little defence against it.

I don't know the answers to any of it.

I don't disagree with any of this, but short of having a football field of moderators we have to really rely on people to bring things to our attention - legally it's also a good idea: The moment you start trying to pre-moderate (ie checking all posts) you're in danger of being seen as a publisher in the traditional sense and open yourself up to lots of potential defamation claims.

There is no neat answer beyond everyone a) trying to stick to the rules b) reporting things that break them c) mods having some flexibility to use their common sense and not sticking to completely hard and fast rules.

The last point is why we try to avoid spelling out every single eg of a personal attack - so often it's more nuanced than that.

[BlackeyedSusan]

(oops I mis-read and thought that olivia was hoovering ) clearly not g and t then

does mn hq issue free flame proof suits to all those posting in g and t? and do they think it is acceptble that anyone querying whether their small child is gifted gets ridiculed?

[JustineMumsnet]

@ZingWantsCake

Well, I really fancy discussing why - despite many pleas, begging, wishing and hoping - there is still no gin emoticon. just why?
it can't be hard!

I think that issue is an urgent one.
we need . really, we do.

and today would be the best for introducing it, since it my 1st MNiversary and I would love a special gift.
just saying.



thanks for listenGIN.

You don't think gin and wine is overkill? I mean we could do it if folks really want. We could even try to get Gordons to sponsor, I suppose. [there's an idea]

[ChippingInBatshitArse]

Thanks for answering Rowan :) That really does make the 'average' a bit meaningless though, because if MN are on a thread and are zapping posts immediately that is going to lower the 'mean' average 'considerably'. I know when I have reported something it's usually 24hrs before I have had a reply and we all know the troll posts are there for more than .3 of a day.

[SoupDragon]

Olivia and others are hovering

I misread this as hoovering and thought it a little mean given Olivia's advanced state of rotundness.

[RowanMumsnet]

@mollythetortoise

Overnight/ after hours does seem to be a weak spot.

I guess because everyone at mnhq is quite rightly in bed.
Would you consider paid and well trained over night mods?
A small team of 4 working in pairs could manage 14 shifts a week (7 nights x 2 mods each night)

I must declare an interest here as it is a job I would loveto do but that aside, the overnight mods could generally keep on top of the nightly shenanigans , freeing up Rowan's / Rebecca's time every morning, which must currently be spent deleting overnight threads and posts.

We're going to wait and see how the Night Watch goes - hopefully it will resolve a lot of the problems around puerile overnight spamming/abuse sprees.

[IamInvisible]

No trolling, misleading or deliberately inflammatory behaviour

But, there are posters, some of them regular who post very misleading information about themselves and nothing is done.

[RebeccaMumsnet]

@Maryz

I'm concerned about the number of deletions for "personal attacks" where really I don't believe it's an attack but part of an argument.

I was deleted the other day for saying someone was "pathetic". I was trying to make the point that passive-aggressive "poor me everyone is being horrible to me" posts aren't actually proof of bullying, but are possibly proof that the poster was wrong.

It seems to be that if a post is reported it is deleted, with no account taken of the discussion that is going on.

Hi Maryz,

Personal attacks can be fairly straight forward. You can post to question what someone has posted but not to personally attack them as an individual.

RebeccaMumsnet, you are pathetic - personal attack
RebeccaMumsnet, your post was pathetic - fine

There is obviously some wibbly ground around PAs for example

RebeccaMumsnet, your post makes you sound pathetic - probably ok (we would look at the context)

[Taffeta]

I would be interested to know how MNHQ view posters who appear to be kind and fair, and then namechange and are abusive and unpleasant.

So that everyone that "knows" them on MN then sticks up for them all the time, as they think they are kind and fun, but in reality a small group of people know otherwise.

I guess this isn't trolling or sock puppeting, does it have a name and is there an MNHQ view on it?

[HoneyDragon]

Zombies will have a shit fit if its Gordon's not Bombay Sapphire. We'll be reattaching limbs for weeks.

[RowanMumsnet]

@ChippingInBatshitArse

Thanks for answering Rowan :) That really does make the 'average' a bit meaningless though, because if MN are on a thread and are zapping posts immediately that is going to lower the 'mean' average 'considerably'. I know when I have reported something it's usually 24hrs before I have had a reply and we all know the troll posts are there for more than .3 of a day.

Not quite Chipping, because when MNHQ is in a thread deleting things, that often (depending on how we're doing it) won't be generating a report - IYSWIM? So it won't be affecting these stats.