Linking Sensitive Threads to Social Networking Sites

[WhenwillIfeelnormal]

Please can you take a look at this thread in AIBU which explains the rationale behind this appeal.

When Mumsnet decided to provide the facility to link threads to Facebook and Twitter, several of us had grave reservations about this move. When it was clear that Mumsnet was going to continue with the policy, I started a thread asking for you to consider removing the buttons from the most sensitive discussion boards, such as Relationships, Bereavement and SN. Others made similar requests and you were kind enough to agree.

At the time, I said that just removing the buttons without having a permanent request and rationale on display, might not be enough to dissuade posters from linking sensitive threads to those sites. Unfortunately, no such written appeal has been displayed.

Last night a poster decided to link a very sensitive thread on to Twitter and the issue for me is not about privacy. The OP in that thread is pragmatic enough to know that what we write on here can never be considered private.

The issue is more to do with human consideration and making a decision not to invite Twitter followers to gawp at another person's distress.

Could you please consider writing a policy on this issue, with clear expectations about users' behaviour, including any penalties that will occur if this is transgressed. Could this policy also be reinforced at the top of each of the non-Twitter/FB linked boards please, because it is evident from the AIBU and sensitive thread concerned, that many users hadn't noticed the absence of the FB and Twitter buttons on those boards.

Thank you.

How woudl MNHQ know that a poster has transgressed the policy? No-one would know who I am on MN from my twitter accounts. Or would it rely on other mumsnetters to report anything they saw on Twitter?

As Mumsnet has a Twitter following themselves, I imagine that they are able to police this, as would other Twittering Mumsnetters who noticed contraventions. However, there doesn't appear to be a policy about this, despite the buttons being removed. I'm now asking for one to be written and published - and a statement at the top of the relevant boards.

there's no way to enforce any kind of policy on this. Mn hq can ask people not to tweet threads but there's no way of proving which mn'er tweeted which thread. My twitter name has no resemblence to my mn username, and even though I do follow mn on twitter, they still wouldn't know who I was if I chose not to tell them. Aside from which someone could be a lurker and still tweet about mn (a journalist, for instance), and there would be no way of taking any action against them.

I imagine as time goes on people will become more guarded about what they post online, but reality is that once you put your most intimate issues out there they become public property. so if people don't want that then they probably shouldn't post about them. You wouldn't stand in the middle of the village and explain your private business to all passers by, you would reserve it for your closest friends and family, so why is the internet any different?

Wannabe I also posted this on your AIBU thread:

When there is a reciprocal arrangement between sites, as there is between MN, FB and Twitter, I know that there is a lot they can do to help eachother enforce each site's policies and procedures. However, there is currently not even a policy about this on MN, or a visible statement about why the link buttons are not available on sensitive boards.

As evidenced by your thread and the one that spawned it, many users were oblivious to the fact that there were no buttons; they have become the screen version of White Noise.

Hence, I am asking for MNHQ to clarify their policy, part of which will presumably include whether compliance is capable of monitoring and enforcing. It is evident however that trusting the membership to do the right thing, isn't working.

I just cannot see how MN could or would police this. I agree that it might not be good form to tweet about particular topics designated sensitive, I wouldn't do it myself, but equally MN is a social networking site and everything written here is 'out there' the minute it's posted.

I think the best MN could do is give a policy or guidelines but enforcing it would be impossible.

i htink its naive to think that anything on the internet will be private

laughable in fact

hits tweet on this thread ;)

Retweets

I thought it was pretty clear that this issue wasn't about privacy iCod, but about taste, manners and decency.

link here to my thread asking for the removal of the "buttons" and appealing for an accompanying statement from MNHQ.

I think the fact that posters hadn't noticed the buttons missing means those buttons do not play a part in someones rationale about sharing the info posted IYSWIM - they copy and paste anyway and the buttons could be missing on all topics and it would make no difference.

MNHQ can add wording to the sensitive topics saying that "you shouldn't/must not/it would be bad to... re-post these threads" but I cannot see a way they could police it to the extent that they ban posters who contravene it.

Are they going to disable all our copy and paste buttons as well?

All they can possible do is ask us for self-moderation and common sense, surely?

(don't know what threads are being talked about and am not on Twitter)

There is not a 'reciprocal' agreement between MN, Twitter, FB or anyone else. Anyone can get the Facebook and Twitter logos and use their code to link to and from and between the sites.

Also, it is not even necessary to use those buttons that MN has placed there. I could simply cut and past the URL to this thread to Twitter or Facebook and no one would know it was me (except that I have the same Twitter name as I do on MN!).

You are asking MN to do the impossible. To police the internet.

Once again I will point out, as has been pointed out over and over again, MN is not a private site. You do not need to log in to read. You do not need to log in copy and paste a link. All you need a log in for is to reply to a post.

Privacy on the internet is a fallacy that it is time to stop perpetuating here and elsewhere.

Now there's a MN campaign I could get behind.

Thanks for tweeting ladies. The more people that know about the behaviour that I'm referring to, the better.

But taste, manners and decency are all personal to an individual and that's not something you could ever police.

The best MN could do is put up a cautionary statement but it won't stop people tweeting or using FB to link to threads.

I agree with iCod - don't post what you really wouldn't be happy telling the world - because that's what you do when you post on MN anyway.

but wwifn there is no reciprical agreement between mn/twitter/fb. Mn have a twitter account (there are very few terms that apply to twitter and pretty much anything goes), and equally they have a fb page (I believe, but I don't follow it so I could be wrong.

Twitter and fb are run out of the US where freedom of speech very much applies. They're simply not interested in someone's private business being touted all over twitter - that's what the site is there for in fact.

This is now the age we live in. Mn needs as much exposure as it can get, and it will do whatever it has to to get that exposure. Not having links to twitter/fb would leave it behind the times, and ultimately how would you determine what is and isn't of a sensitive nature? I could post about some hideous part of my life in chat because I wanted it to disappear in however many days it takes for that to happen, but as it's not in a sensitive area of the site it wouldn't be deamed sensitive enough and therefore would be tweetable? vs someone posting about their latest dildo in relationships for a light-hearted thread but there would be no buttons. Who would be in charge of what is considered appropriate for further discussion beyond mn and how could they possibly police it/act upon violation of the policy?

I think MN could request that people don't tweet topic areas without the tweet button, like the rest of MN it's up to posters to adhere to this and be named and shamed if they don't.

Only like a troll policy.

But Posie that wouldn't really help with naming and shaming.

My Twitter name is the same as MN, true. But not everyone's is.

If I'm Tee2072 here and Whooohooo999775 over there, how on earth would MN know that what Whoohoooo999775 tweeted should be traced back to Tee2072?

no its the internet
poeple talk about it... er on the internet

you are being ridiculous

youll just C and P it if you want it.

posy how are mn hq going to name and shame me if I tweet threads? My twitter username is nothing like my mn username. Yes I have posted it here in the past but in chat so I assume it's gone now, but even if it isn't who is going to trawl through all my posts to find it? And if I hadn't posted it here (to try to gain followers) no-one would know it was me?

And let's be honest - the troll policy doesn't really work does it?

It is the Internet, the world wide web, and it's called that for a reason!

If you don't want 'it' out there then you shouldn't post 'it' anywhere on the Internet. Naive to think otherwise.

and bottom line is, mn want people to talk about threads on twitter. Because the more people talk about them the more chance there is of people coming to mn, clicking on the threads, generating revenue for the site. I imagine the only reason why the tweet buttons were removed from certain topics was to placate some of the users. They didn't remove the "follow us on twitter/facebook" links from the top of those topics so the twitter/fb inference was still there anyway.

The only reason any of the non Tweeters knew i had posted it was because I TOLD YOU

How many threads have been pasted onto twitter before now??? You have no idea, one of the most recent ones that MNTowers linked was about the Epidurals and how people were talked out of them.....Now that's personal. Who went on there and discussed their vagina and their tears?

I think some people post here though to get a mums perspective and may not want it discussed elsewhere.Obviously it is out three once you push send and we all know that but I think for sensitive subjects some consideration should be given.One persons distress may be another's entertainment but it doesn't make it right

this is boring

if you don't want it spoken about on the internet

dont use the internet