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

mn hq, can we have an explanation - jess - and maybe re other trolls in future?

999 replies

wannaBe · 20/02/2012 13:40

I am aware that you can't divulge the means by which you determine whether or not a poster is genuine, predominantly because if you make that common knowledge then posters will know how to avoid being detected in the future.

but jess (long ongoing eleven weeks abortion threads) threads have now been deleted for being a troll, and I was wondering if, given it's the site users who usually report these things, we could perhaps have a bit more by way of explanation?

e.g. when sassysusan was banned, mn hq confirmed that she had previously posted as washwithcare, and users were able to identify.

There has been some speculation that jess was dizzymare, and I wondered whether this was the case?

Also, these threads have been ongoing for over a month now. How is it that it takes quite this long to determine that someone isn't actually all they seem?

OP posts:
bibbitybobbityhat · 22/02/2012 14:06

Oh lawks, am actually busy today, haven't got time to read all today's posts but have been here throughout until today, as this is a subject close to my heart. Can anyone pretty please post a summary, or pm me? Mary?? Paggy??? will love you forevernevertopart Thanks.

TheRhubarb · 22/02/2012 14:07

BeerTricks, true this is not The Samaritans after all. But I can understand that if your baby has just died for instance and you are posting for support, to be called a liar or have it implied that you are a troll just because you are new and shit at spelling (as I've seen) is not on either. Imagine how upsetting that must be?

I think all MNHQ can do is revise their talk policy and make sure that posters fully understand that trolls do exist and do post on Mumsnet so they need to take precautions. Because some posters being upset because of a troll does not amount to a bereaved mother being upset at being called a liar when she asked for support.

Pinot · 22/02/2012 14:07

Rhubs that assumes MN is their last lifeline. Which isn't right...this site isn't the Samaritans with wine and biscuits.

Gah! I don't want to argue with you Rhubs mate, you almost certainly know miles more about this than I do. I just think HQ hasn't changed their stance on trolls and yet the internet has changed.

BIWI · 22/02/2012 14:07

Rhubarb - the point of it would be to act as an alert. I know that I have sometimes pulled back a little bit from committing if someone else has raised a concern. It doesn't mean I'm not prepared to offer help and support, but it does mean that I do so with more consideration of my own needs, so that I don't get suckered in.

IME, newbies who aren't trolls who have met with these kind of retorts respond in a totally different way to someone who is a troll - who just ignores them.

LeBOF · 22/02/2012 14:08

I think we should just restrict all threads to mockery of Peter Andre. To be on the safe side.

Pinot · 22/02/2012 14:08

xpost Rhubs

MNHQ
HelenMumsnet · 22/02/2012 14:11

@BIWI

But, but, but ....

I agree/accept that troll-hunting isn't A Good Thing. But why can't we post in such a way to alert others if we think that trolling is going on/others are being sucked in? (As well, obviously, as reporting to MNHQ).

Stuff like 'interesting first post' or 'welcome to Mumsnet' can be all that's needed to alert people to beware. And if the OP is genuine, they can easily reply and say 'I'm not new, I've n/changed: Mouldies, nice ham, cube of poo....' etc.

Actually, no, BIWI, saying 'interesting first post' or 'welcome to Mumsnet' is trollhunting, really. Everyone knows it's code for 'I think you're probably a troll'. And, as we said earlier, it does lob a hand-grenade of trollhunty bunfightiness into a thread.

TheRhubarb · 22/02/2012 14:12

Pinot, now there I do agree. Trolls are much more prevalent and I did say that they need to change their talk policy if it hasn't been updated in 10 years.

I'm not saying that Mumsnet is someone's last lifeline but I can understand why people come on here for that support and what I'm saying is that if that support is not only taken away but that person is also called a liar, how would that make them feel?

There are lots of ways to alert posters and to bring up inconsistences without coming right out and saying it. It seems that people want to be able to tell an OP that they've reported their thread or to tell them straight that they are drip feeding and that these accusations should not be deleted.

LeBOF · 22/02/2012 14:12

Bibbity :-

Trolls are bad, people are stupid, Helen is God, and God is good.

I think that's about it.

TheRhubarb · 22/02/2012 14:15

Just asking the OP to clear things up or explain confusing points is NOT accusing them of trollery and will not be deleted, so I don't get why people can't just do that? Why are they so determined to want to tell others that they suspect that person is a troll? I'm sure if you asked them to clarify certain points then others would be able to make their own mind up based on the OPs answer. If you are still not happy then report.

MNHQ
HelenMumsnet · 22/02/2012 14:16

@LeBOF

Bibbity :-

Trolls are bad, people are stupid, Helen is God, and God is good.

I think that's about it.

Liking your style, BOF

BeerTricksP0tter · 22/02/2012 14:16

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheOneWithTheHair · 22/02/2012 14:17

Um I didn't know that Helen and I'm quite new so I don't have a great trolldar. I think newer posters are the ones most likely to be vulnerable to trolls so it wouldn't help anyway.

hathorinareddress · 22/02/2012 14:18

TheRhubarb - that I do agree with - the internet has changed in the last 10 years and I think MN should look at their policy.

But in my case on that thread, the only post I had deleted was the one where I said "is it trollhunting if" - not the posts where I had actually asked the questions iyswim? And the you are all a bunch of nasty trollhunters posts were allowed to stand, which I think is unfair - if you can't defend yourself from accusations, which are left to stand, then I for one won't be posting here any longer not that anyone would miss me because I talk a load of shite

MNHQ
HelenMumsnet · 22/02/2012 14:18

@TheRhubarb

If you are still not happy then report.

And it might interest you to know how seldom people who post things like "interesting first post" or "there are other life lines out there" actually then report the thread to us.

We know you get frustrated with how slowly you think we sometimes react to a potential troll thread but, sometimes, we're genuinely not aware of them.

Pinot · 22/02/2012 14:20

OK so person A is genuine, posts their thread and gets repeated advice from wise MNers. Ignores this advice and the thread is stopped with an email saying "Contact XYZ for further, your thread has been archived as it's repeating itself and we have to respect all users of this site"

Person A then can decide to listen to MNers advice (still visible) or contact XYZ as HQ said, or to contact another forum for further repeated advice.

Person B is a troll, same scenario. Same advice, same email, same thread archived.

Person B can then decide the MN is not a place for trolling as they don't get attention-fed and will go elsewhere.

So genuine posters still get their advice, and yet HQ are protecting MNers from trolls.

Wine
MNHQ
HelenMumsnet · 22/02/2012 14:20

@hathorinareddress

TheRhubarb - that I do agree with - the internet has changed in the last 10 years and I think MN should look at their policy.

But in my case on that thread, the only post I had deleted was the one where I said "is it trollhunting if" - not the posts where I had actually asked the questions iyswim? And the you are all a bunch of nasty trollhunters posts were allowed to stand, which I think is unfair - if you can't defend yourself from accusations, which are left to stand, then I for one won't be posting here any longer not that anyone would miss me because I talk a load of shite

Hathor, are any of those posts still standing? Do report them to us if they are.

hathorinareddress · 22/02/2012 14:23

No Helen, they were on the deleted thread. But they were left to stand after my post was deleted, which is why I am so upset. I (and others) was accused of trolling, and I put up a post which said "is it troll hunting if xyz and that is the case" and used 4 or 5 examples including the one Rebecca referred to up this thread at 10-whatever am - that was deleted, yet the nasty "you are all horrible trollhunters" posts were let stand.

And it feels to me like what that means is that you have no right of reply.

TheRhubarb · 22/02/2012 14:24

I can believe that Helen, I think some posters just want the satisfaction of proving their troll-dar.

Hathor - I think we both agree that both the troll hunting posts and the condemning of troll hunting posts should be deleted as both make it quite clear that the OP has been accused of lying. So if MNHQ want to give the benefit of doubt to posters, they need to delete references that the poster has been called a troll. Otherwise what's the point? It just gives everyone the opportunity to either demonstrate their own troll-dar or join in with the angry peasants holding flaming torches.

And I'm sure that leaving Mumsnet is not necessary. At least here you know you can swear and talk shite and no-one will bat an eyelid Grin

LovesBeingWearingSkinnyJeans · 22/02/2012 14:24

TheRhubarb - it isn't that simple though, I was deleted. Did I say age was a troll, no. Did I say she was a bullshitter, no. I didn't even say I didn't believe her. I copy and pasted a piece of tge op and directed to a pRticular person because they had missed it and were under the impression she had said she was keeping tge baby. I was told I was troll hunting and mocking, I certainly wasn't.

Pagwaatch · 22/02/2012 14:25

Oi Helenmumsnet, c'mon - what about my point upthread about deleting 'you are troll hunting' posts too.

I never post about trolls. I don't think I have ever accused anyone. Nor do I use 'interesting first post' etc.

But my recent deletion was a bit like this...

Poster 1 - but this all sounds so unlikely? I simply can't understand what you say about x . Why would you not act?
Poster 2 - troll
Poster 3 - yes. I think this must be trolling because it sounds like bollocks
Pagwatch - I would prefer it was because otherwise the situation is just awful. Op I can't understand why you won't do as many others have suggested.
Poster 5- you bloody troll hunters are picking on the poor op.

So all of those get deleted except the last. Looking at it later it appears as if a swathe of posters randomly attacked the op for no reason but that was not how the thread plays out.

Deleting all troll references instead of just the ones that you associate with troll speculation would make the threads less sullied.

What do you think?

Pagwaatch · 22/02/2012 14:25

X-posted I think.

hathorinareddress · 22/02/2012 14:25

But Rhubs - sorry to labour the point - I wasn't trollhunting on that thread. I had been accused of it and I was defending myself - thence both posts should have been deleted - the accusations as well as mine iyswim?

LovesBeingWearingSkinnyJeans · 22/02/2012 14:26

Opps pressed post!

But reading it I would like like I had done that, even others posters didn't understand why that had been deleted.

hathorinareddress · 22/02/2012 14:26

Oh and what Pag said is exactly what happened on the thread that got deleted this morning.