Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

mn hq, is it really wise to have topics that are deamed so agressive/scary that most members don't want to post there?

429 replies

wannaBe · 29/08/2011 13:40

have just read a thread in the doghouse topic, and posts from a few posters saying that they never post there due to the agressive responses there.

Now, I know that hiding a topic could always be an option, but is it really in the spirit of mn to have separate topics that are deamed so unwelcoming/agressive that few posters actually want to post there?

I can of course see the need for certain sections, conception/sn/relationships, but it just seems against everything that mn stands for to let a topic exist that is frequented only by a few individuals while the majority feel that the responses there are agressive enough to warrant not feeling comfortable there.

Why can't we just go back to having a pets topic?

OP posts:
Empusa · 30/08/2011 19:48

Really? There are more users regularly using the DH than there are people saying they wont on this thread and we can't "safely" say there are more?

Yes there are some threads which are awful, on the other hand, there are a lot of supportive threads too.

OverthehillsandfarawayNL · 30/08/2011 19:52

No you can't say that because you have no way of sampling the mn poulation at large and finding out who reads TDH, who posts and who won't under any circs.

Yes there are supportive threads - and they stay that way as long as the posters are carrying out their canine acitivities in an approved manner. As soon as something else comes up the vitriol starts.

silverfrog · 30/08/2011 19:52

I don't think you can assume that, tbh, Empusa.

you can assume that there are many more posters who haven't joined htis thread - that is an easily proven fact.

but at assuning they must all be ardent supporters of the doghouse. I should imagine the vast majority of them have no idea it even exists.

Empusa · 30/08/2011 19:54

silver I assume that if they are using the DH frequently they probably don't have massive issues with it. Seems logical to me.

ChickensHaveNoEyebrows · 30/08/2011 19:54

I do think that if a significant number of posters state that they find a particular board to be unwelcoming, it makes sense for the contributing members of that board to take a step back and reassess. No one wants to be part of something that has a bad reputation, do they?

silverfrog · 30/08/2011 20:01

well, just imagine how busy and thriving it could be if only it were just the teensiest bit welcoming...

having a core of posters who all think and react in the same way does not mean that the prevailing attitude is right.

it just means that there is a clique. who are happy with the status quo.

but to generate the amount of complaints it has here, and on other threads, then I wouldnt be proud to be part of a board like that, tbh.

MynameisnotEarl · 30/08/2011 20:09

having a core of posters who all think and react in the same way does not mean that the prevailing attitude is right.

it just means that there is a clique. who are happy with the status quo.

Also applies to the feminist topic. I consider myself to be a non-militant feminist, ie wouldn't judge or condemn anyone else for holding different views.

But when I challenged someone's blatant sexism on a thread, I got such an aggressive response it was comical. I don't even read it now, which is a real shame.

LoopyLoopsPussInBoots · 30/08/2011 21:08

"having a core of posters who all think and react in the same way does not mean that the prevailing attitude is right."

Exactly. Just because the average MN doesn't give two hoots about animal welfare doesn't make it any less important. Back to my imaginary child-selling MN, if that was the status quo, imagine being one of the few posters who challenged that idea. You would start off gently, then, after repeating yourself hundreds of times, would start to get frustrated by the fact that to hundreds of MN, your plight is simply an irritation.

gregssausageroll · 31/08/2011 07:43

Silverfrog has said it for me.

I have been pondering a complaint for a few days now having been part of a few threads recently but I hadn't realised this was here. Hopefully MNHQ will deal with as they see appropriate.

I'd never go anywhere near thedoghouse for information on a dog.

theyoungvisiter · 31/08/2011 08:07

I don't own a dog and I don't post on the Doghouse but I've stumbled on the odd thread and I agree that some of the comments and attitudes on there are shocking. It's far, far more aggressive than breast and bottle or AIBU or any other corner of MN, and there is often no recognition at all of the fact that there is a human being, possibly a vulnerable one, on the other side of the screen.

And for all those people saying "well they also give great advice" - brilliant. Super. Lovely. But isn't it possible to give good advice without calling people cunts, murderers and lots of Angry faces? Other topics seem to manage.

Besides which, there's no point in giving great advice if people are too scared to go and seek it out because of flying bullets.

exoticfruits · 31/08/2011 08:13

having a core of posters who all think and react in the same way does not mean that the prevailing attitude is right.

it just means that there is a clique. who are happy with the status quo

This is very true. I have never been in the doghouse, not having a dog but it equally applies to other subjects.
There are subjects where you will meet abuse if you do not agree with the very vocal majority. It appears that they speak for everyone, they do not, many people just get frightened off. I have been on 3 very contentious threads where I have had supportive emails from those who have seen the unpleasantness.

HallnotOates · 31/08/2011 08:50

All I'll say is you never get this shit with cat owners

And, of course, WOOF
HTH

TheRealMBJ · 31/08/2011 08:52

No you definitely don't Hall

That is because one does not own cats, but are tolerated by them. Totally different dynamic.

HallnotOates · 31/08/2011 08:56

Plus cats don't STINK. Like dogs do. And the owners cars. Ew

Pinot · 31/08/2011 09:37

Vizsla's don't have a dog smell. So ner.

kerrymumbles · 31/08/2011 09:44

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
wannaBe · 31/08/2011 10:35

well inteligence has proven the point beautifully on this thread.

And there is a vast difference between being an animal lover and putting animals at the same level as people.

BIt is IMO similar to the difference between being a christian/muslim/ who lives happily with their faith without imposing it on others, and a fundamentalist nutter who feels their word is or should be law, and anyone who disagrees is clearly wrong and not worthy...

OP posts:
esselle · 31/08/2011 12:19

Well this thread has proved one of my theories about MN.

You can come on here and complain about your DC, DH, MIL, boss, neighbours, chatty till operators at Tesco - call them all bastards and be agreed with.

BUT if you have a little moan about your dog well then you had better be wearing a hard hat!! You will be destroyed!

MonsterBookOfTysons · 31/08/2011 12:32

I made a post earlier and have just checked up on the thread I was trying to defend.
I was wrong. I have just re read abit of that thread and the op was not being very cool.
I am sorry to try and defend the thread in question and have no other issues about the dog house. I personally as I said before find it a brilliant part of mn. :)

DooinMeCleanin · 31/08/2011 13:15

Oh for the love of God. Really? How many times do we have to have this thread?

Imo the doghouse is not aggressive. Honest, yes, aggressive, no. Unfortunately the truth when it comes to dog welfare is more often than not not very pretty at all.

Posters are not asked not to rehome their dogs via Gumtree or their dogwalker for the sake of being nasty. It's to aviod situations where the dog ends up in the wrong hands. I read a story on the net about a dog being rehomed privately. I can't find it now, it was on a local forum somewhere. Not long after rehoming the dog came back to the original owners in a dire state. He died at the vets, suspected poisoning. The 'buyer' had only wanted a stud dog to put with his bitch. When the rehomed dog would not 'perform' he was beaten, burnt and poisoned and eventually returned to the original owners. You might think this is rare. I wish it was. Unfortunately it is all too common. I know of two dogs personally who have faced similar abuse in private rehomes gone wrong.

People do have strong opinions on rescue vs breeders, mainly because they work with rescue dogs and face the reality of what happens to abandoned pets day in day out. It's a job I could not do. I help from a distance via fostering and fundraising. I could not cope with being on the front line, trying and failing to get dogs out of pounds where they are to be killed and into rescues, where space is short.

I do not know of a single poster who would berate someone for buying a Pedigree puppy from a reputable breeder. I know which poster most of you are referring to and I have seen her point people in the direction of god breeders despite her personal beliefs. I have seen her offer advise to pedigree pup owners, without mentioning the fact that the pup is a pedigree.

When it comes to the likes of buying off Gumtree etc. posters are advised not to do this for their own safety as much as anything else. When it comes to freeads, puppy farmers and backyard breeders it is not a case of differing opinions. Buying from any of the above is a danger to both the buyer and the puppy. There are only two ways to safely accquire a dog, this is either via a reputable rescue or a reputable breeder. This is not just my opinion. It is fact.

The doghouse is full of support. Any poster would be supported on any issue, even rehoming. No-one will be supported in making a choice which could potentially harm their dog. Why should they be?

TheRealMBJ · 31/08/2011 13:20

Really? The thread bought up in question here was about rehoming 2 pups for their sake and although the OP did get some advice eventually it was only after quite a few angry faces and censure at her even letting the bitch fall pregnant.

Didn't look very supportive to me.

MonsterBookOfTysons · 31/08/2011 13:29

It did start off abit irrate yes, but not enough to call the other posters bitches and to follow on with another argument on a seperate thread and link it.
I think it has all gone to far tbh. If you ask for advice you have to take the good and the bad.
I got flamed pretty bad on the doghouse once when talking about rehoming a pup of mine, but I have also been flamed on AIBU, Chat and other 'harmless' boards. It is not just the doghouse that can be 'scary' IYKWIM. :)

DooinMeCleanin · 31/08/2011 13:31

I can only see a link to one thread and it's the one where the poster was offered a shed load of advise on how to rehome her dog safely, ignored it all and rehomed to a home that was wholly unsuitable because they were willining to pay £££ and a rescue could not have afforded to and then came back expecting sympathy. When she got none she cried "Oh but I am a widow" half of MN who had not seen the original thread then jumped to her defense, ignoring the fact that she had placed not only her own puppy in a precarious position, but also the existing dog in the home, all for the sake of a few pounds.

Where is the other thread?

gregssausageroll · 31/08/2011 13:34

Dooin so you think it is acceptable for a bereaved widow to be spoken to in the manner in which she was (per the link earlier in the thread?). Mind you most of the comments in question have now been deleted by mumsnet.

MonsterBookOfTysons · 31/08/2011 13:37

Sorry DooIn think I got the wrong end of the stick Blush
Still feeling Confused by it all tbh.
I feel ill too so blame that Wink