Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

DBF banning thread, part 2.

999 replies

Rhinestone · 08/11/2011 00:05

OCCUPY MUMSNET continues......

Justine, that was a little topical joke, please don't ban me! Grin

OP posts:
AitchTwoOh · 08/11/2011 13:48

agree broadly with normantebbit and cataliliesisters. don't think lebof did anything wrong at all in posting Val's post, though. it's up to HQ now to let it stand or not. i think it should stand, however, as unf. the lack of understanding shines through, and underlines the fact that with a last last last chance nothing would actually change.

Schnarkle · 08/11/2011 13:55

DBF was banned before, numerous warnings and now banned again. The final chance line has been well passed.

It's not up to DBF to save all the dogs in the mumsnet sphere, it's not her responsibility. People should be able to post without fear of fire.

Northernlurker · 08/11/2011 14:00

Of course the letter post should stand. DBF has been banned and other than that one post has no opportunity to respond. Bloody ironic that so many posters are applauding her banning by making personal attacks on her.

WinterIsComing · 08/11/2011 14:02

Nothing wrong with posting the open letter IMO and that, "I think more highly of HQ" comment was bloody clever Grin

SDTGisAnEvilWolefGenius · 08/11/2011 14:08

Silverfrog - I agree - a bullying and aggressive tone is not going to educate anyone.

FFS - if one of our dc's teachers was using this tone in order to educate the children in their class, we would be up in arms, and rightly so.

You catch more flies with honey than vinegar.

DooinMeCleanin · 08/11/2011 14:08

'it seems you are unable to own a dog unless it has been rescued, from a no-kill rescue, that it should be a staffie ....anyone else is very often completely shouted down -' Simply not true. It is very well known that I went against the advice of everyone on the DH (or pets as it was at the time) and got a terrier mix (not an ounce of staffy in him) directly from the pound, no homecheck, no interview, no where to take him back to. I was not shouted down and I regularly post there. My mistake is not held against me. Those who told me all that time ago I was making a mistake are still happy to help me with all my 'mistake's' issues.

It's also well known that my second dog was a puppy, Not a staff just a wee whippet and was taken in on a whim without a second thought as to whether we could afford her or what we would do with her. I am still happy to post in the DH and have not been shouted down at all.

pictish · 08/11/2011 14:09

MNHQ have already very kindly reneged on a ban on DBF.
Do you all really expect them to go back on another one?

Her very final chance has been issued already, and she spoiled it all by herself. That's all there is to it. Game over.

DooinMeCleanin · 08/11/2011 14:21

It would be fair Pictish if what she had posted on that thread was aggressive but it wasn't. The post that has been picked out as a personal attack against the OP was one where she defending herself against a personal attack on herself by the Op.

DBF was not the one who started making personal comments about the Op's cleanliness or children. In fact she stopped posting on the thread when it started going downhill and stopped being about the dog.

perfumedlife · 08/11/2011 14:28

A couple of months ago my mother asked me for help on rehoming her little dog, for the simple reason she and dad were never in the country, their lives have changed so much since retiring and she felt it was so unfair on the dog being put in kennels or shunted around while they were away. At first glance, this sounds rather selfish, but the dog was infact my brothers, who now has a child with severe allergies and so mum has ended up with the dog.

I looked in the DogHouse section, then thought 'not bloody likely'. I just felt I would have been shouted down before I could have explained the situation and wasn't prepared for the hassle. Some will say that wouldn't have happened, but the fact that this was the impression I drew from a quick look round is the problem with that forum. I'm not an idiot and am not prepared to be spoken to like I'm one. I have been on the receiving end of some very rude tonguelashings on here and it never fails to shock me. I love the sweary, no holds barred ethos of mn, but agression for agressions sake really unsettles me, and I'm no delicate flower.

It baffles me that anyone can think this hostile, harranging approach actually works. I'm not familiar with DBF so can't comment, just talking about the dog's house section in general. With regard to TLES, a lot of whats been said on here may be true, I think it probably is, but from what I've seen, she rarely if ever resorts to outright aggression, and therefor has freedom to post. Seems fair.

pictish · 08/11/2011 14:29

Two wrongs do not make a right etc.

Fwiw I would see them both banned. It is absolutely not my decision, but in truth that is what I think. They were both as bad as each other.

Given the previous ban and repeated warnings, then what, realistically and fairly, are MNHQ to do?

DreamsOfSteam · 08/11/2011 14:32

Well I took the whole tone of the thread to be aggressive not just one particular post. And if DBF had been warned/banned previously than maybe she should have stuck to her toned down replys.
I didn't think her (I think) first post on the thread to be particurly helpful, which pretty much said 'I told you so, You were warned'

zippadeedoodaa · 08/11/2011 14:46

I am still curious about TLES though in all of this she seems to have got aoff scot free.

GypsyMoth · 08/11/2011 14:46

Why is this thread being taken over by the feminist threads?

GypsyMoth · 08/11/2011 14:47

*posts

LeBOF · 08/11/2011 14:50

It's more of a side discussion, Tiff, about what sort of "personal attack" warrants banning. When somebody gets banned, it always throws up issues of why certain other people aren't.

Alouisee · 08/11/2011 14:51

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

zippadeedoodaa · 08/11/2011 14:52

See I could probably list half a dozen inflammatory twats who post the most awful stuff on here, get the odd deletion amd carry on posting Confused . I also know of at least 1 banned poster who was utterly vile but has been back.
I think it's the inconsistency that galls people.

pictish · 08/11/2011 14:52

It is not against the site rules to tell lies though is it? So it's irrelevant.

GrimmaTheNome · 08/11/2011 14:52

Just hit report on your own post, Alouise, then they'll read it. Smile

zippadeedoodaa · 08/11/2011 14:53

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

GrimmaTheNome · 08/11/2011 14:54

It is not against the site rules to tell lies though is it? So it's irrelevant
well, it might be relevant in this case if DBFs offence was calling her a liar.

Methe · 08/11/2011 14:54

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by Mumsnet.

LeBOF · 08/11/2011 14:55

If you lie in such a way that it undermines another poster's integrity and reputation, I am pretty sure that constitutes a personal attack, actually.

If a lie on its own was enough, half the board would close down.

JessieLeGrund · 08/11/2011 14:56

Anyone who things the Dog House is a scary topic has clearly never ventured into Style & Beauty. Bring back DBF and ban the style fascists, I say!

WinterIsComing · 08/11/2011 14:56

perfumed you are right. TLES is very calm in the face of outright aggression. I couldn't be!

Whether that is a good or bad thing I don't know but I do feel for her because of all the threads about her DS1 and the haranguing she had about her parenting then it turned out that her son has SN.