Can we have a 'three strikes and you're out' policy for troll hunters?

[BlameItOnTheBogey]

I'm so fed up of seeing threads being derailed by people crying troll. The mumsnet rules on this are clear; don't engage and report the thread if you are suspicious. But this never seems to happen. I'm sure that a lot of times people are right. But a lot of time, the troll-hunters are wrong too. I'd rather see a few people duped on a fake thread than see genuine posters put off asking for help when they most need it because a handful of people are convinced that they aren't telling the truth.

But there doesn't seem to be any real sanction for troll-hunters. How about a three-strikes-and-you're-out kind of thing. Not permanently but maybe account blocked for 24 hours or something. Anyone else agree?

but yeh but that thread about the thing the other day where the babysitters were shafted, that was on for like DAYS before HQ turned up with anything.

I read the entire thing yesterday thinking 'if this wasn't real it'd have gone poof by now' then got to the end and oh, HQ posted and it was a pile of crap.

I mean they need to be faster if they want the job innit.

Tyr wrote "only an internet forum and the sort of saddo that reports posts needs to get a life"

So you're in favour of complete meltdown, writs, and site closures?

I report when I feel the need. Obviously there's no guarantee a thread or post will be pulled / deleted, but it certainly brings some attention to a thread and allows MNHQ to decide wrongly sometimes whether to let it continue without any comment... whether to comment and then monitor it... or whether it needs immediate action.

I don't prescribe massive levels of censorship, nor moderators who act like over-zealous prefects, who start empire building and throwing their weight around (until such time as their fellow moderators make their errors known to them), but some level of control is needed, and individuals should be expected to do their bit when they see content which goes against the site owners' guidelines, partly to keep the site clear of libel, and to show the site maintains some standards. MN is perhaps one of the minority sites where swearing of even the crudest kind is mostly tolerated without sanction but personal attacks and extreme views which would tar the reputation of MN are not. To keep it like that, lest the media reports on some outrageous content, does require a modicum of control, and as MN members we are the spotters on behalf of MNHQ.

I guess you are under half my age (easy, really), so can be excused your views.

Networkguy,

I'm at the end of my fifth decade now so possibly old enough to be your father; certainly old enough to know where censorship leads.
I also happen to know the law on libel and vicarious liability and the posts I have seen being deleted (having read a lot of them before they were reported) would not cause any legal problems whatsoever.
For someone who admits to reporting posts, your last sentence is a personal and rather peety attack on me which, as far as I am aware, is against the talk guidelines.
No double standards there, then........

p.s "petty," not "peety" which is the result of typing on a train...

Hi Tyr... while you are older than I thought, but still younger than me, I suspect we have different views on where censorship (as in that done by MNHQ) leads.

As for my final comment in my earlier post, you explain the 'attack' and you will get an apology... but for my part it was indicating why you might have different views, and while I have (clearly) different views, I can accept there being some reasons, age being one, for example, to indulge your differing views, rather than waste any time to argue further.

:)

3 strikes and out if shout troll would close feminist topics down in anhour on busy topic.they love a good is you a troll?

Two months weeks blocked from posting sounds like it would make MN policy 'sink in' for those miscreants who like to play at Troll hunting...

it would be tumbleweed round some parts of mn if you banned for 2wk for troll accusations. its the scratching around and faux moralising to prove some point - in lot of cases troll hunters worse than alleged trolls. when they start searching previous pots and postint triumphantly as if ta-da caught ya.is all
..
so,2005 spoke of budgie
now NO mention of said budgie. J'accuse...

If what you say is correct, it might give others a chance to post without the anxiety of a 'self-appointed troll hunter' popping up to tear their first post apart with such an accusation ... sounds like a good thing to me to have some respite from the most prolific posters if they are also in the sub-set of 's-a-t-hunters' too.

I don't think its the troll hunters who are a problem, I think its the troll-hunter hunters who are. They are the ones that create the song and dance and derail threads.....nothing some folk like more than a holier than thou platform. bah.

I love the troll hunters (whoever they are).