what the actual is that facebook like button doing there?

[CarolCervix]

has it always been there? or has it moved? and does that mean if someone 'likes' that thread it will be posted to their fb page?

In effect the same thing?

MistleTobyLeWolef I am not on facebook so I don't know about people posting links there. But I am on twitter and I can say with certainty that the amount of people who post mn links on there is huge. And they're not all posted from the buttons - it is common for relationships topics etc to be linked there as well. Plus mn hq link to threads on mn all the time on twitter. so IMO this isn't going to change anything.

Yes, so a link to the whole thread, including your posts.

FFS.

Just a response to helenmumsnet presenting it as different when it isn't.

"facebook is our public 'face', MN is our private one." tbh I think it's deeply worrying that anyone thinks like that. It should be the other way around. You have full control over what people on your facebook can see. there are numerous filters in place to prevent contacts etc from reading certain parts of what you post there. Whereas when you post on mn you have absolutely no control over who sees it or has access to it.

It is IMO really concerning that anyone sees mn as private - it isn't.

Oh god but people could read your posts anyway! When they find mumsnet which is discussed on every major news outlet come election time or hell any given morning on the Wright Stuff. This is a public site. This is not the school house gates with a couple of friends.

Or was that not at me Mistle?

Yes, wannabe, I know that loads of threads are linked to twitter and FB and posters on the threads ripped to shreds , which of course cannot be stopped, but for MNHQ to enable and encourage it just seems a bit different to me.

The privacy thing is one issue, however what is more pertinent to me is the fact that MN doesn't seem to want to encourage debate on their own site, and seems to want to pander to those people who don't want to engage in debate here, but just wants to 'like' something and encourage discussion of threads elsewhere. It just seems to be the opposite of MN's ethos as I have always understood it.

Like I have said, there was a great big long thread only last week, and many people asked MNHQ why they wanted to encourage linking, and they didn't really answer, other than to say that it was something a bit new, some people had asked for it, and it is something for the lurkers. Whi

fuckinell

Which is, imo, disingenuous.

lets all start our own private forum

@Theonewiththehair

Just a response to helenmumsnet presenting it as different when it isn't.

I wasn't, honestly.

I read your post as saying your posts would be visible on the FB page of someone who liked the thread. They wouldn't.

The thread title would and a link back to MN. To see your posts (and everyone else's) people would have to click on the thread link on the FB page.

Perhaps you think I'm being a bit of hair-splitter but I genuinely thought you didn't understand.

From 12.51
StupidLikeButton: "So you're not getting rid of the actul button then HelenMN"
HelenMN "I'm afraid it's not my decision to make so I can't answer that one."

Well, with all due respect, can we talk to the person who does make the decisions. It's somewhat disingenuous and rather unfair to Helen for MNHQ to put her into the firing line when she is only able to say, "sorry, rules is rules".

I haven't read the whole thread, but I intensely dislike this feature, for the reason that GetOrf has just articulated so well. MN is a place to talk, and there is no clear reason why MNHQ would need to facilitate talking about MN. Obviously people do, but I can't see why on earth it's something the site would want to propose as part of its purpose.

Down with this sort of thing.

I'm confused, theonewiththehair, but my FFS was directed at the 'HelenMN presenting it as different when it isn't' thing.

The whole thing is incredibly disingenuous. Pretty underhanded, IMO.

Lots of people post links which appear on my fb newsfeed I rarely click them

Most people ignore them tbh

Lots of people saying disingenuous, I notice.

How many times will the word 'disingenuous' appear in this thread before it is full? I say 33.

:)

Give me my spoon back!

:) at hairsplitting.

Sorry Mistle I misunderstood.

as I said in an earlier post - this kind of thing (linking, for the purposes of shit stirring, trolling, calling in mates or point-and-snigger) already goes on. I have seen it on my wall, and have (briefly) been part of a group where it also went on a lot.

why on earth MNHQ would want to encourage this behaviour, and make it any easier, is utterly beyond me. I thought the point of MN was (for posters, obv, not MNHQ) a place where people came to talk about stuff. Not a place where people talked about stuff, and other people muttered about it in small bitchy groups.

BIzarre.

@Get0rf

fuckinell

Which is, imo, disingenuous.

Well, it really wasn't meant to be disingenuous, GetOrf. Twas the truth. We do think we probably shouldn't turn up our noses at "modern" stuff just because. And, of course, we are not going to dismiss anything that might spread the word about Mumsnet - that would be a bit counter-intuitive.

But the last thing we want to do is discourage discussion. Blimey, Mumsnet wouldn't be Mumsnet without that.

I love the word disingenuous.

It is a cracking word to use whilst having a mini-row with a teenager, and they are fudging the issue. It makes steam come out my daughter's ears

Right. For all those who want a non-FB linked forum, let's go elsewhere. I know - lets have a vote on those who will be welcome

I think MNHQ are all sitting at their desks with their fingers in their ears, all collectively going 'la la la la la'.

Once again - if it's not your decision HelenMN, then whose decision is it and when are they going to come and talk to us?