Thanks MNHQ for the innovations to address privacy concerns

[pluperfect]

I was on a thread this spring, about the appearance of the Facebook and Twitter buttons, and got rather arsey about the arsey response from Justine at MNHQ, reminding us all that MN is a public forum, and we all ought to be aware of eavesdroppers.

I had argued that the nature of parenthood, especially early parenthood, (sleepless nights, depression, being cut off from networks, being vulnerable at work and home, etc.), some posters could not be presumed to be giving informed consent.

Another poster started a thread about how the FB/Twitter buttons were on sensitive issues such as bereavement.

However, having seen the new innovations of Off the Beaten Track and the personal messaging, I want to thank MNHQ for offering some potential solutions to these issues. The OTBT in particular is good. Of course, MN remains visible to the world, and accessible under pseudonyms, but the power of aggregated statistical analysis is blunter, and outsiders are less likely to stumble upon private information.

However, if anyone wants to suggest other moves, or loopholes in this new regime (am I being naively optimistic?), let's hear them!

Yes I agree that personal messaging has been a good innovation. The 'Off The Beaten Track' topic is somewhat confusing although I can see what MNHQ are trying to do and should be applauded for the effort they made. My problem with OTBT topic is that it is so secret I only came across it by accident and as it does not come up in Active Convos I dont know how new posters would ever find it and even then I dont really know how I will follow what is on there.

My own view is that the popular Chat topic should be modified so that it is deleted after 30 days and hidden from search engines but stay in Active Convos so people see current topics. That way people can post about private things but not have it forever archived on Google. If something is so secret people do not want anyone to see it outside MN then perhaps dont post at all is the best advice.

I wonder rather than the OTBT topic MNHQ would be willing to put some sort of warning on the header of all topics to say they are searchable by Google and that anything private should be posted in Chat so it can be rendered invisible to Google and other search engines and deleted after 30 days but still visble on Active Convos?

I am very very cautious about my own privacy and will not go on Facebook for that reason. Not even MN know where I live or who I am (I hope) but my life story is just two clicks away on the internet for anyone who wants to snoop. I just dont want Facebook/Google/Twitter and whatever other meta search engine comes along in future to be able to piece bits of private data together to build up a searchable database of me and my family. That ultimately is the unspoken aim and holy grail of all internet businesses so our data can be sliced and diced and analysed and monetised through advertising and direct marketing contact. No doubt Govt also would want access to that data too.

I suppose you would follow it through "Threads I'm On" or "Threads I'm Watching"? I will try now to "watch" a thread, and report back.

It does work to watch threads,
BUT

it is searchable!

www.google.co.uk/search?q=TDWP+-+update%2C+and+it%27s+bad+news+mumsnet&hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images

Threads moved into this topic from others will appear in Google search because they once did. I don't think there's much we can do about that. But threads started in this topic shouldn't do.

ps arsey? Moi?

As someone who disliked the FB and Twitter buttons intensely - and wish that this site wasn't linked to them in any way because of their appalling privacy ethics, I also welcome these innovations.

I was very grateful when Mumsnet agreed to the request to remove the FB and TW links from sensitive threads and I think it is brilliant that we now have a means of contacting posters off board.

I especially like the fact that you need to register with Mumsnet/log-in to see the OTBT board.

Thank you, I think these are all very positive steps.

As for the "arsey" comment, you did sound exasperated, as though people were silly for being pissed off!

In any case, having seen these innovations, I did want to say a public thanks rather than subsiding in silence, which would have been very ungracious!

However, the thread I took as a sample is still showing up on google:

www.google.co.uk/search?q=tdwp+update+mumsnet&hl=en&num=10&lr=&ft=i&cr=&safe=images

Yep that thread was started in another topic and moved into OTBT, that's why.
[desperately trying not to sound arsey]

pluperfect, there are many jokey threads you could have usen as your 'sample' rather than my thread.

I asked for that thread to moved due to the sensitive matter being discussed. I didn't want the thread to be deleted as I have been given some wonderful advice and also need to be able to update the posters concerned.

It is public and google-able and that is what is great about it!

Think I would have been arsey too, sorry.

What came up when I googled for haemorrhoid advice? Mumsnet! That's all the personal info I'm willing to give and all anyone else needs to know!

Oh, dear, TDWP, I'm sorry I highlighted it in this way. I only wanted to point out that it had already been cached on Google, so OTBT was not a non-indexed part of MN, or something wasn't working.

However, if it was originally elsewhere (in an indexed part of MN), that was probably when and how it was indexed by Google.

My apologies, to you, TDWP, and you, Justine.

TDWP, do you want to report that post of mine with the google address, or shall I?

This does mean, though, that people have to know from the start that a thread is going to contain private information, or else the same will happen there.

Maybe it is time to speed up the "kill" process? Or perhaps it would take a two-step procedure: re-publish a blank page at the URL, "force" Google to cache it, then later delete it entirely. However, that smacks of "Google-whacking" and manipulation, so Google itself would probably resist. They have to , for the sake of their reputation. For one thing, they have had a lot of negative questions about censorship in China (stepping carefully, myself), and for another, when peple manipulate Google, I imagine they they are generally doing it for commercial reasons!

Any comments/ ideas on this?