I have just seen this post by another Mner. Now she was talking about a separate issue but a lot of what she describes is ver much how i feel about the posts with disability bashing, casual racism and well basic trollery in general really.
here -
WhenwillIfeelnormal Sun 12-Jun-11 13:39:52
Having been alerted to this thread by a few Mumsnetters, I've decided it's a good idea to state my position, although my intention was not to make any further posts on this forum - and still is. I got back from my holiday after half-term, but decided to leave just before I went. I kept my registration open purely to respond to PMs from posters who were badly affected by the fall-out from the thread referred to.
My decision to leave Mumsnet is solely because of the site itself and its ethics.
As others have pointed out, this is a forum where people solicit advice. They do so in good faith and trust that people will be open about what informs the advice they receive. For my part, I have never once name-changed, claimed to have expertise other than the experience I have gleaned in RL (not just through my own personal experiences) and of course, the experience we ALL gain on here, from helping people through similar situations. When we post prolifically on any forum, we gain insights from threads. It would be absurd to discount what we all learn from people on this forum. As has been explained so eloquently by posters on this and other threads - OPs use their own wisdom and judgement about the advice that they want to take.
However, MNHQ has a policy on namechanging that it unfortunately doesn't enforce. The thread that caused so many problems was yet another example of MNHQ allowing a few vocal posters to use several usernames at once on the same forum, with the intention to mislead and inflame. Therefore, posters innocently asking for advice are put at an immediate disadvantage - not knowing whether that advice is coming from someone who has the courage to admit to their own experiences of the issue - or whether respondents in fact have a very different agenda.
The concept is simple. While I have deeply held views about infidelity, it is abundantly clear why I hold them, but would add that this isn't just because of my own personal experience. Those views have been formed by lots of things - experiences on here and many in a fairly long RL.
The posters who on the other hand take the view that deceit and lying are often justifiable, without admitting that they are defending that behaviour because it has been their own - are wholly disingenuous.
For a poster reading responses, it's no longer a level playing field. I can understand a poster reading my words and thinking "well she would think that" and I support their right to do that, hence my honesty. Unfortunately other posters wishing to hide their own agendas, fail to state them openly. They often stop helping a poster and it becomes an attempt to defend their own position and undisclosed choices.
I have been perfectly happy to debate my views with anyone on a thread, as long as the rules of engagement in a forum of this kind are adhered to. On the thread referred to, despite my (now confirmed) suspicions that posters were hiding behind namechanges to disguise their own infidelity - and therefore their reasons for having the view that affairs are justifiable, I complied with the MN policy of reporting my suspicions and not engaging in accusations on the thread.
However, that thread then deteriorated into personal attacks about my relationship, my mental health, the veracity of my persona - and by that time, the normal rules of engagement on a forum had been completely abandoned.
My response was still to comply with the rules - I stayed away from the thread, didn't engage in response attacks and exposures. I trusted MNHQ to deal with it in the way that they promise. MNHQ's response was piece-meal. After many hours of personal insults, they started to delete some posts but not all - and it was a couple of days before a MNHQ warning went out on the thread, only after the attacks had started up again, in fact.
When I last posted on that thread, I still had some faith that MNHQ would investigate the breaches to their own policy, take action against the namechangers and people making personal attacks. I thought they'd have the courage to put their hands up and say "We got this one wrong". Unfortunately, that did not happen and hence, I can no longer be part of a forum that has those ethics and fails to protect posters who post in good faith and follow the rules.
One of my deeply held misgivings about this forum now is that MNHQ has lost sight of its objectives. This is meant to be a forum that exists to support parents. Instead, it has become a forum that in fact causes great harm to some posters. MNHQ realise I'm sure, by the success of this site, that the words posted here are never "words on a screen" to people. If MNHQ believed that, they would never have included sensitive advice boards. With the right to have a successful business and increased traffic to the site, comes the responsibility to protect its users and show them a duty of care during their participation in making that business profitable.
MNHQ has failed in that duty, in this case and several others recently.
I didn't leave because of people disagreeing with me. I'm perfectly capable of arguing my point and have done so several times with these very posters, under all their various usernames. I have also always understood why they hold their positions; they have a lot invested in their beliefs and I'm sure it helps them deal with their own life choices. However, this wasn't a debate by any decent standards. It was a personal witch-hunt and what many people haven't realised is that the fall-out was much more harmful to lurkers and some respondents on that thread.
What those posters had to say didn't harm me personally; deeply unpleasant though it was. I knew their agendas and I know my own truth. Fortunately too, I am now resilient enough to cope with that.
Others were not so fortunate - and in my view, MNHQ failed in its duty of care to me and numerous others who were hurt by what was written.
Now i am aware she was talking specifically about one particular thread, but i think her points are relevant to this thread also. I thought her post may have been missed over there and as i know HQ are already on this thread i would raise her points here.