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.

Well I don't know, I would have thought common decency would prevent someone scandalously tweeting or fbing a sensitive issue. We're a curious bunch and this recent MN episode is another mutation of MN and what it offers it's posters/members. It certainly will stop me posting stuff in the future, but then I suppose there had to be a first 'posted' tweet that lead to upset.

This is the internet and sometimes we all need reminding.

Alouiseg, I am really trying to steer clear of repeatedly naming you. I like you, I 'follow' you and hope, even though you feel justified, that you are a little sorry that the OP was offended.

I agree posie just because its online and you can link to anywhere it doesn't mean common decency and consideration go completely out the window!

The op wasnt named! She has a changeable user name, no profile, no pictures.

Its a nameless, faceless story.

If the op does a search for "dad found wanking in the garden" she's more likely to unearth her mothers family expose, not my c&p tweet.

Garden??? I meant bathroom!!

Alouiseg, I can see where you're coming from but the OP was offended by your actions and whether it was done with the full consideration and realisation of consequences, or lack of, or not it really doesn't matter.

And what you do in your 'garden' is your business!

but the op posted about it on a public discussion forum. The clue is in there - once you post about it it's up for discussion. And let's be honest - that thread wasn't all about the op's distress - it predominantly turned into a point-scoring, who-can-shout-the-loudest-and-make-the-most-agressive-point contest, which is why it was tweeted in the first place iirc.

I can understand the opposing point of view I really can, it makes perfect sense. But the truth is, however naively, people post very personal things on the boards and the culture that MN has grown from is one where each poster is a person...not a persona. Therefore each poster is armed with feelings that can be hurt when trotted out like carcrash TV.

It seems to need saying again. This is not about privacy, but about behaving decently to another human being - and Mumsnet's policy on how we might achieve that on their site.

I make an active choice not to use Twitter, but don't need to be a user to trust MNHQ's motives for linking a thread about the difficulties women face, trying to access epidurals. It seems obvious that the motive comes from the right place, alerting more women to their rights in childbirth. I am also presuming that the "Epidural" thread was on a board with the FB and Twitter links.

If however a thread on the "link-removed" boards has been cut and pasted onto Twitter and the accompanying dialogue from the tweeter conveys entirely dishonourable motives, then I think MNHQ should do everything in their power to discourage that activity, because it is indefensible.

On twitter, incidentally, you can block people and stop people retweeting your posts.

The thing is MN has not always been viewed as a discussion forum more a support and advice network

WWIFN I agree with you.

If there's no twitter/FB button on the thread, and people tweet/FB anyway, they should be banned from MN. Sure, they won't always get caught doing it, but they should know that they are going against MN policy if they do.

It's not about anonymity, the poster had kept her anonymous status.

The story may be "nameless and faceless" but it still has a person behind it.

The support will disappear won't it? the more taboo the post, and therefore benefiting from the anonymity, the least likely people will come here for support....just in case they're the next twitter trend.

the less likely.

Posie, you and i see lots of things very differently...I dont think i have anything to apologise for.

If im honest the original scenario amused me, then it was compounded by the "lack of respect" brigade and the total denial merchants it was bordering on a bad sit com at some points.

But that is irrelevant because only a few short weeks ago Riven posted a thread and it went viral in hours. That should have reinforced what we're actually doing on here?

Well yes, I agree. We should have all been warned and although many wanted to help Riven, many just wanted to be involved in something bigger than our own little lives.

If my daughter is enjoying a fabulous dance in the living room and accidentally hits her brother, she still says sorry for hurting even if she didn't mean it......

Mumsnet post up threads on twitter every day

The OP was completely annonymous

The only links that I know of are between Facebook and twitter, and I know that because someone in RL popped up to follow me

Everything on here is public
Mathew Wright often demonstrates this and there's nothing you can do about that

Apart from having a slightly sweary name so you never get quoted

May changed to ThewanktwatPosiecuntprickfuckParker

change....bad typing.

but it is not anonimous.

And again, how do you expect mn to ban people who retweet threads. How do you expect them to know who it is tweeting vs their posting name?

Thats how we differ Posie, I would be inclined to let the little brother know that's what happens if he doesnt think and gets in the way!

like it Posie
has a certain ring to it

Me? I don't think anything can be done about this at all. As for banning people? Nah, no point. Especially as you don't have to be a member to see threads, perhaps that would change, depends upon whether or not it affects MN revenue. Although perhaps unless your a member you can't see posting names? Again may achieve nothing and would serve to give people false security.

Well I still love ya, Alouiseg. Being different is goooood.

I like MN because it doesn't have lots of rules, I can name change as often as I like to talk about something sensitive, I can swear..... and I can tweet about threads I find interesting