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

Back to thread
Original poster

dear mn hq, please could something be done about the anti sn posts on mn

34 replies

2shoes · 10/09/2011 23:45

as I know you are aware(I have the emails) people from the sn community have left this week, due to the vile things that have been said to the/or about SN.
isn't it time that mn hq took some steps to eradicate this, as you do with trolls? surely disablist/anti sn/ personal attacks should be deleted and something done about the posters.
or do we just keep loosing well informed, SN educated people from mn.
(no I can't link to a thread as there has been too many)

Go to post
MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 11/09/2011 11:26

Hi all,

We are aware of this thread and we will have a look tomorrow when we are all back in the office.

Please do keep posting, we always appreciate feedback both good and bad.

Best
MNHQ

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 13:58

Hello.

Thanks for all your comments on this thread.

Just to be really clear: we have specifically amended our Talk Guidelines to say that we will remove posts we consider to be disablist - and our position hasn't changed one jot.

We're sorry that we were a bit slow to go through Glitter's thread (that's being done now) and the baby with the elastic band thread (that's been done). We're also glad to see that WidowWadman has apologised for her "unspecialneedsy" comment both here and on the thread where it was originally posted.

And we're very sorry that all this has meant some of you have decided to leave MN/are thinking about leaving MN.

We'd like to underline how much we value all Mumsnetters who post in our Special Needs section and who have contributed so much to making Mumsnet such a valuable source of advice and support for any parent with a child with special needs. The last thing we'd want is for you to think we don't place as much value on your opinions and concerns as on those of other Mumsnetters - that couldn't be further from the truth.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:01

And, obviously, if there are any other threads where you feel there are disablist posts, please do report them to us.

Fanjo: if you still reading, do please mail us (contactus at mumsnet dot com). We'd like to have some more details, please, on the posters who've been following you round the boards - that's really not on.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:05

@Peachy

Will pass that on to Fanjo

Thank you, Peachy.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:23

@tethersend

Helen, I am still a bit confused as to why noddy's post on glitter's thread calling kidzrfreaky an idiot (and mine and subsequent posts clarifying/quoting it) and the trolling still stands.

I have no wish to silence an opposing POV, but when people come on a thread and make things up to get a rise out of other posters... Why is that not trolling?

As I said, we're still going through that thread. Please bear with us.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:35

No, self-policing means that we ask you to report to us any posts that break our guidelines.

It doesn't mean attacking other posters on the thread - however much you think they may deserve it - because that would be breaking our Guidelines, too.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:50

@tethersend

I did report, Helen. "self policing" was the response I got to reporting. I didn't break any guidelines; when kidz asked what noddy meant, I said that she called her a fool.

Tethersend, I'm sure the MNHQer who replied to you was talking about "self-policing" the same way I am - ie thanks for reporting this, this is just the sort of self-policing that helps.

But we will go back and have another look at your report, and double-check. It may take us a little while but we will check.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 14:54

@Pagwatch

Fair enough Smile

The trouble is that self policing via reporting seems to involve a lot of posts which are upsetting people being left to stand. So self policing as you deem it is leaving people feeling isolated and attacked while trolls and people trying to be vile can continue.

Perhaps there would be slightly less retaliation (for want of a better word) if 'retard' were deleted as swiftly as racist slurs would be.

I am not sure that is the case.

Possibly I am wrong. But lots of people I like seem to feel in a bunker so something is not quite working is it?

Completely understand your feelings, Pagwatch - and it sounds like we need to look at our responsiveness to reports, especially ones that are flagged as being disablist, and see if we can improve that - but we do have to apply our Talk Guidelines equally to all.

Even if Poster A is possibly a troll and Poster B is a lovely regular MNer, if B tells A to 'fuck off', B is breaking our Guidelines. Doesn't mean we won't investigate A (if she's reported to us) and take whatever action is needed, though.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:01

@Pagwatch

Thanks.

To be completely honest I personally prefer comments to stand because I like to know who the arses are. But the number of posters from such a vulnerable community feeling attacked is not reflecting well on this site - and I am bothered by that.

Think it's pretty obvious who the arses are - whether their comments are deleted or not, tbh Wink

But, seriously, try as we might (and we do try) we can't monitor every thread on MN every hour of the day. We do rely on you and other MNers to report stuff to us so we can come and look and investigate/delete/warn/ban/whatever.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:12

@tethersend

Thanks for considering, Helen- I am (for the first time actually) quite confused by MNHQ's response.

This is the response I got from MNHQ to my reporting kidz' post- I apologise if I should not be CnPing emails; please delete this post if I have done wrong by doing so:

We agree that this thread/post is in poor taste but we don't tend to delete on those grounds because it would be really hard to know where to draw the line.

The truth is, we don't think we should be the arbiters of what people should find offensive and what they shouldn't. On the whole, we think it's better to let the boards self police in these instances, as it's very rare that a tasteless comment is left unchallenged and we can see that others have done just that on this thread.

As ever, we do rely on members like you to help us monitor the boards and we'd like to reassure you that we do consider all reported posts carefully. We shall be keeping a close eye on this thread.

Can you see why I remain confused?

Ok in this context, we are using "self-policing" to mean calling a poster on their (possibly) ignorant opinions by engaging them in a (non-Guidelines-breaking) way to show them the extent of their ignorance.
Apols, tethersend

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:13

@Pagwatch

In fairness I am quite an arse

I hope you haven't taken time out to email me to explain to me why my cunt posts were deleted. I can figure it out Grin

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:14

@5inthebed

I agree with Herbie on this one, why delete their posts but not the ones that were causing all the offence?

I can only assume that these posts (Herbie's included) were either personal attacks or accusing someone of being a troll.

But Herbie - if you report it to us, we'd be happy to check and come back to you personally with an explanation.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:16

@Peachy

So MNHW what about something on here explaining different diagnoses and the challenges that can be a result (eg queing / rude comments from a children with ASD, need for extra sapce for a car with a ramp for a child using a chair etc) written by the aprents but in a proper informed style that you could link to or we could when education is needed?

That's a good idea, Peachy. If we haven't already got it covered in our SN content area, we'll definitely suggest it to the editorial team.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:27

@Empjusa

"I can only assume that these posts (Herbie's included) were either personal attacks or accusing someone of being a troll. "

The problem with this is that the trolls (and I use the standard internet definition of, "someone posting in order to offend/cause controversy") know that as long as they don't say anything that can be described as a "personal attack" then their posts will stand, and continue to do the damage they intended.

All it takes is careful phrasing and they've beaten your system.

Whereas the posters who aren't stopping to wonder how they can trick you are getting deleted.

That seems a little unbalanced to me.

If we believe people to be trolling, Empusa, we will ban them. Whether they post personal attacks or not.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:27

@Peachy

The glossary in Sn is fine but very dictionary definition IYKWIM; I think a small piece written by someone living with the disorder in their family would be better.

OK, we'll definitely suggest it, Peachy.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:48

@2shoes

so have i got this right mn hq are going through the threads mentioned and deleted the attacks on the anti sn posters? but leaving the anti sn posts...... is that right?

No, that's not right.
Glitter's thread is still being gone through, afaik - we would not leave a disablist post and delete a personal attack. Both should be deleted.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 15:50

@Empjusa

"If we believe people to be trolling, Empusa, we will ban them. Whether they post personal attacks or not."

I'm sorry Helen, I'm a little sceptical.

What is the MN definition of troll? Because, as far as I am aware, it is possible to post trolling comments without being a troll. (Which on MN the unofficial definition of a troll seems to be "someone pretending to be someone else")

We define a troll here "someone who poses as someone else in order to stir up trouble, fulfil their own perverted agenda, or just for the hell of it"

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 16:49

@4madboys

btw, other than on here, has anyone heard back from mnhq today? i have reported several posts, (including one of my own, to get it edited) and i havent heard anything? i am guessing because its a sunday.

Hello. Sorry to hear you haven't hear back from us yet, 4madboys. We're sure you'll be hearing soon - reckon there might be a bit of a backlog!

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 20:08

Evening. Apologies for not keeping up with this thread today (it's my day off - wibble) but we really cannot emphasise enough that it is - and remains - our policy to delete disablist posts (once we know about them) and ban/warn those who continue to flout our Talk Guidelines by posting disablism (once we know about them).

The fact that, over the past couple of days, we were not as fast as we should have been to do this (we do apologise for that) does not mean we have changed our policy or that we have somehow gone soft on disablist postings.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 11/09/2011 20:20

[quote MmeLindor]

I reported a poster with the name R***Rus but since heard that the poster was still posting. That is not on.

No, it's not on. Nobody who was reported to us for having a nickname like that would be able to continue posting.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 12/09/2011 11:22

@herbietea

Did people see the news on Daybreak this morning which said that disability hate crime rose by 21% in 2010? I have first hand experience of this (I have been harrasssed by local families, called a S**z, and had a firework thrown at my open bedroom window). That is why I am upset and angry about the fact that MNHQ allow these posts to stand ,and it is not just the last few days Helen.

herbietea, that's awful Sad and Shock

But, just to be clear, those posts have not been allowed to stand (though we were slow to act in the first place, as we've already acknowledged).

And if there were others before the last few days, we'd like to know about them please.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 12/09/2011 11:23

@LRDTheFeministDragon

'I find it incredibly offensive that a generalised comment about a specific group of people is deemed "inoffensive" simply because no individual was named. That isn't how insults work and its disingenuous to state otherwise.'

This.

People who get their kicks by mocking and winding up people with special needs or their parents and carers should be warned, then banned. Not just deleted every time they trot out the same offensive rubbish.

They are warned, LRD - and, if they persist, they are banned.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 12/09/2011 11:54

Ok, yes you're right, LBD, that we don't want to reveal too much of our behind-the-scenes goings on. Wink

But - and we hope this answers your latest post, Peachy, too - we can say that the more you help us by reporting posters who are behaving like this, the faster we can act (if it turns out we need to).

Please feel free to tell us what you think a poster might be up to when you report them (eg: "I know this particular post by this poster doesn't break your guidelines but I've noticed this poster repeatedly does/says x,y or z")

In short, the more aware we are of possible troublemakers and the more info we have, the faster we can build up a picture of their posting history - and then take whatever action is necessary.

Sometimes, trolls/troublemakers are immediately obvious to us; sometimes, it takes a lot more digging/checking/monitoring.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 12/09/2011 11:59

Our pleasure Smile

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 12/09/2011 13:41

Hi Lenin,
The problem with hide poster is that we just think it will cause terrible confusion. Folks reading threads won't necessarily be reading the same thread as some posts might be hidden and it could lead to all sorts of problems from a moderation pov imho [acronym overload]. I know reporting and ignoring isn't a perfect solution and it can be frustrating at times but we really think it's the best solution.
Thanks for the input as ever.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates