Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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

Reply to Justine

776 replies

TheOriginalFAB · 18/12/2011 18:46

The first objection I'm afraid I can't really buy - Most of the UK population uses Facebook. Most Mumsnetters use facebook. It's a bit mad to object to facebook on principle - it's like objecting to people.

This is just daft and is irrelevant whether you buy it or not. Just because "most of ths population" use FB doesn't mean everyone on MN is going to like it. It is like saying you don't buy that some people won't eat meat as the majority of the population are not vegetarian/vegan. And it is nothing like objecting to people Hmm

The second objection I just think is misguided, as I've explained. Users' privacy is no more compromised by this button than it ever was.

It might not be "no more compromised" than before but the point is it is much more visable now and before people might not have been aware of the link button but now they are and they don't like it.

So should we change something because some people on this thread dislike it even if we think they are mistaken to dislike it? Even though what they are objecting to is already in place?

You may think we are mistaken not to like it but we are part of MN and without posters you just have a website with adverts no one sees. And the fact that it is already in place is not the issue. Before lots of posters weren't aware of it so couldn't object.

I've been doing this long enough to know that new things are never well-received - but it doesn't always mean they are bad.

That comes across as patronising and lots of posters are telling you this is a "bad" idea and lots of people don't like it.

For me this is a huge loss as I feel unable to discuss something I would have appreciated help with and that makes me feel sad. And namechanging doesn't work for me as someone always guesses who I am and outs me.

OP posts:
LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 08:31

But the share buttons have been there for yonks. Even if you hid it yourself, others hadn't. Not even considering threads that had been mentioned in status, or linked to through c&p. How many threads had other posters pile on from chat over on fb? And I ask again, how many people have accidentally pressed the big like button clearly visible at the top of the page? I'm sure we would have heard it by now. I'm not for the button, but I don't see why suddenly people are freaking out about their privacy being compromised. None of this is new, its just a slightly newer way.

MmeLindor. · 20/12/2011 08:43

Agree with Lissie.

At least now you can see that 22 people have this thread. Before you would not have known and as many, if not more could have linked to a thread.

And think about this - the chance of someone discovering your MN identity on FB is less than antoher mum from school realising she knows you. Considering that 99.9% of MNetters are mothers, most of them with school children.

There has to be at least one mum in every school in UK who posts on MN.

And if she recognises you, the least of your worries if facebook.

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 08:50

Exactly mme.

Akiram · 20/12/2011 08:55

Mme I have said the same. You now know your thread has been linked (well to FB at least, you still have no idea where else it has been linked to).
I do think the way it has been handled has been wrong (eg wrong info, the button going live just before the weekend and then denying any problems plus only the bare minimum response from MNHQ).

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:04

and to expand on mme's link. if on the thread you had said that, say, you once had a torrid affair with your FIL, your BIL and the postman and your 7 dc's might not be your dh's. that thread gets liked by 22 people, you can email mnhq and ask that your posts be removed because you dont want fellow mners' farmville close personal friends reading what you had written about their wrinkly bollocks, just in case. you at least get a heads up that the thread is somewhere other than on mn.

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:05

mme's point, not link, point.

MmeLindor. · 20/12/2011 09:05

Agree, Akiram.

But you know, MNHQ are only human and they make mistakes. It has been pointed out to them, and they are trying to resolve it.

And I guess their default mode when introducing changes is to pat heads and say "there there" because there is always so much fuss and flouncing when they do something new, and two weeks later it is all forgotten.

We only have ourselves to blame, if they did not take this seriously at first.

MmeLindor. · 20/12/2011 09:06

Lissie
How much of the alcohol is going into the pud?

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:08

I drenched the mix in half a bottle of bandy on top of the fruit that had been soaking in brandy and sugar for 3 months

Trills · 20/12/2011 09:09

It's our website and we'll "like" it if we want to

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:10

I think the problem is that people forget that mn is an open forum. it may provide support etc, but its not in a secret corner of the web. anyone can read that support.

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:11

trills Xmas Grin

noddyholder · 20/12/2011 09:11

I only use fb for family and v old friends I don,t want them reading some of my MN stuff. I have never before had a link to here on my fb page I now have 2. Thiscjust means I have to time deleting anyone from MN from facebook. Hassle but I will do it.

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:16

but noddy, its only an issue if you press the button yourself. if your sister, for example, is a mner and she likes a mn thread, noone will know that you are also a mner unless you say so.

LissTheSeasonLouBeJollie · 20/12/2011 09:17

right, hospital today so I need a shower. toodle-pip.

BobbinRobin · 20/12/2011 09:18

"I think the problem is that people forget that mn is an open forum."

I don't agree - I think most people are perfectly aware of it, I certainly am anyway.

Of course people conveniently forget at times, or get carried away, I've done that too.

But this button thing really is a whole different issue to the fact that you've always been able to cut and paste threads to FB. Cutting and pasting is a deliberate act - and if people want to do it then there's nothing stopping them.

BUT the whole thing about this Like button is that:

a) a lot of people don't really understand what it does (as evidenced by some of the posts on this and other related threads)

b) it's far too easy to hit accidentally, with potentially devastating consequences

And just because lots of people haven't come back on here going 'oh shit, I accidentally hit the Like button and now my husband is divorcing me' doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Not everyone's first reaction is to come back and post their life on MN.

Akiram · 20/12/2011 09:19

Noddy how have you got 2 MN threads on your FB wall?

jaffababy · 20/12/2011 09:22

I think it's a mistake for MN to make it easier to interact with Facebook, because there's a fundamentally different user model, and messing with the MN user model will damage the reason why I might choose MN. I interact w FB as the real me, and I don't on MN. If MN makes it easier to interact as the real me, I might as well be on FB to begin with. So I think it's a silly business model that dilutes a key strength of MN.

wannaBe · 20/12/2011 09:22

dear God is this still going?

The reactions to this aren't showing mn in a bad light, they're showing the nutters upset posters in a bad light.

I've said this before but I'll say it again. Mumsnet is a public website visited by over a million people a day. If you genuinely think you're anonymous here you are deluded.

People who post publically identifyable information on an open forum have only themselves to blame if they are then recognized by someone they know.

And having a like button on fb hasn't suddenly made that chance greater - someone who didn't read mn before isn't any more likely to do so just because someone "liked" it on fb.

And as mme or lissie (I can't remember which) said, at least you can now see how many people have "liked" the thread. How many others do you think have posted about it elsewhere? How many people do you think are laughing about your reactions to this function on twitter and elsewhere? I can tell you that the numbers are considerable, yet you have no idea how many times this thread has been copied and pasted elsewhere. And it's no harder to copy and paste a thread than it is to "like" it.

Akiram · 20/12/2011 09:23

Bobbin There are some things I don't understand, maybe its because I just have a desk top PC. But those who are making (valid as far as I can tell) points about a button pressing even when just being hovered over rather than being clicked on - is that an MN problem or a problem for whoever designs FB or whoever designs the ipad/iphone/phone etc. Genuine query.

BobbinRobin · 20/12/2011 09:27

"And having a like button on fb hasn't suddenly made that chance greater - someone who didn't read mn before isn't any more likely to do so just because someone "liked" it on fb."

I think you'll find that's the whole point of the button.

wannaBe · 20/12/2011 09:29

"a) a lot of people don't really understand what it does (as evidenced by some of the posts on this and other related threads)" But that's not mn's fault, is it? If people don't understand the technology that's their own issue to get over.

There are "like this content on facebook" buttons all over the internet. On shopping websites, news articles, other forums - in fact mn is about two years behind on that score.

It's not as if mn have implimented a new technology - this function is old news. Just because people aren't technologicaly savvy enough to know what it does doesn't make it mn's responsibility to make them so.

BobbinRobin · 20/12/2011 09:31

However I don't think it's right to vilify MNHQ over this, the 'one click' appears to be a genuine mistake.

I don't like the fact that the button will be there even when it's a two-click system though. There's still too much potential for people not really realising what clicking it means, or clicking it by accident on a smartphone.

Furball · 20/12/2011 09:31

But wannabe would you seriously mind your fil or mil or next door neighbour, work colleagues actually working out who you are on here as you have led them to a particular thread accidentally?

You may not have posted anything personally identifying you, but if you didit a few times, they could work it out, do a search if they wished and realise that you have posted stuff that is not for their eyes.

It's one thing saying it's a public forum - yes we know it is, but it's another thing actually knowing that you are my great aunts sisters cousins IYSWIM?

Akiram · 20/12/2011 09:31

But whose fault is it if the button is clicked by someone just hovering over it? Because if its not MNs fault then a large proportion of these complaints shouldn't be aimed at MN? Am I being thick? Please someone explain to me!