Troll-hunting and subsequent Thread-ruining

[oneofsuesylvesterscheerios]

Yes, in some ways this is a thread about a thread, although its actually an interesting general point too. Plus, I don't want to carry on the discussion on the actual thread as it would be too damaging and would take it off in a completely different direction.

So... If a poster broke the rules and shouted troll, and then they were chastised (rightly) and the post removed, unless the offending surrounding comments reacting to the troll-hunt are removed too, the damage has been done surely?

We assume when someone posts regarding a personal trauma that they are telling the truth (well I hope we do) and if we suspect anything, we surely just ignore these days: we know the MN guidelines, etc.

And we know that certain situations in life happen to a lot of people (bereavement, loss, break-ups, etc). So when someone goes through a horrible time, the beauty of MN is that we don't just get sympathy and unmumsnetty hugs; we get empathy from folk who have been there themselves. We also often get bloody good advice, practical and emotional.

A thread that contains an accusation of troll-hunting is blindingly obvious even when the offending poster's comments have been removed. And thus, the damage is done.

When my dad died last I had some fantastic support from mnetters who'd suffered the loss of a parent and knew how 'rootless' it can make you. I'd have been confused and beyond upset if anyone had questioned my grief online. It doesn't matter how many positive posters there are on thread; just one snarky comment and the wave of a pitchfork is enough to send the OP packing, at a time when they might need the 'anonymous' support of MN most.

So, what I'm asking MN Towers is: if troll-hunting is banned, and it's fully acknowledged how damaging this could be on a thread that offers support to lots of people, often not just the OP, shouldn't all references and posts regarding an accusation be completely removed so the thread can remain intact and totally focused on the thread subject? Otherwise, it seems pointless.

I feel as if I can't comment on any post without saying I know the poster now.

I always thought it was ok to comment on all posts as if they were real, and to be sympathetic. Are you saying that's not ok and should be deleted?

I'm sorry, but I don't have the time or inclination - or understanding - to work out if someone is a 'troll' or not. I had no idea it was considered wrong to question a poster's reactions. Don't you think suggesting people can't question a grief process is, well, wrong? It might help you to hear what they think. It certainly won't help you to insist that only posters who fit your ideas of what is suitable, can post. Many posters on here have been through horrific experiences, and they know what they are talking about. Let them say what they want to say. If you don't like it, I do see that is awful for you - but you perhaps need to look to specific topics like 'bereavement', rather than telling people how not to post.

I wanted to call troll on that thread, but kept my mouth shut .

It was shocking to see so many people dragged into it.

I always miss the exciting stuff.

what TSC said. too many people are misdirecting their anger at those calling troll, when its the trolls who are the problem.

I'm torn here. I understand the need for an OP to be believed and offered the appropriate support. On the other hand, when it's a troll, it's sickening and horrible to watch people being sucked in.

If MNHQ were always available on every thread to respond immediately, then there wouldn't be so much of a problem, IMO. But sometimes it can take a while (especially at the weekend) - and in that situation, even though it's against Talk Guidelines, I think sometimes it is important to say something that might make other posters think a little about whether the OP is real or not.

When someone calls troll then, do we automatically assume they are a troll then?

I'm not sure which thread is being referred to by TheSecondComing: if she says it was a crock of shit, and it was 'obvious', then the stock answer (usually) is 'trot on' etc and it hopefully gets ignored. if it's obvious because it's based on previous trolling on other sites and abusing the support of others in a sick way, then -again- I get it. Previous threads like this have been reported and dealt with by MN.

I just don't get it when a cry of 'troll' is made seemingly out of nowhere, based on the fact the poster hasn't returned within a certain time limit, for example. If there's a chance that it's a genuine thread made by an unhappy poster seeking advice, then isn't it better to err on the side of caution and not disrupt the thread with a troll-hunt? Can't the 'hunter' report to MN and let them investigate?

Well, that's what you're suppose to do; report the suspected troll to HQ. But I would imagine it's hard to sit there and watch people support someone you are positive is a troll.

This is a good example of why it would be good to be able to PM multiple posters. To spread suspicions of trolls to people who appear to be sucked in.

well I am going through a horrendous time, I am terrified of being outed in RL, so I am constantly name changing and changing small details here and there, so no one has a chance of recognising me and if they do, of following me about mumsnet.

I am terrified of troll being shouted at me, because I am genuine, I have been here for years and I need the support but I wouldnt be able to defend myself.

It is off putting somewhat (but not enough to make me go elsewhere).

Yes, sadly, they think it's funny or clever or what have you.

And still the best thing to do is report them to HQ.

Yep, SecondComing, I can see exactly why that thread would be deleted, and rightly so.

But where there is no hint of the 'story' not adding up, and it being a (sadly) quite common problem amongst mnetters that this thread was about, I can see no benefit at all in keeping all refs to the troll hunt on the thread. It would make it impossible for the OP to return to update/seek more help when they see the evidence of what's been discussed.

Just think it's a real shame.

I think Therewasatime puts the dilemma very well.

It is a really difficult situation.

It is awful to be called a troll or a sockpuppet when you are genuinely posting about a very delicate, personal issue.

No one called troll on last nights thread . MN just came on to say it was being deleted.

It was obvious to me it was a troll , and tbh I felt bad for not being able to say , hang on this sounds a bit odd.

Those are extreme examples, though.

Agree.

Sorry - agree with what TSC said.

You're right in thinking troll hunting on the boards isn't allowed and we would much rather your suspicions be reported to us, as finger pointing can cause a lot of upset if the poster is actually genuine.

We try our best to zap replies, it would help us greatly if posts that are missed are reported to us. You might have noticed that we have new shiny message for deleted posts say that replies may be deleted too.

@TheSecondComing

I wonder if there could be 2 'report' types? One for 'quick-check this out it's horrible' and one for 'oh fgs what an arse' type threads?

Thanks for the suggestion, I'll raise it with The Powers That Be and see what their verdict is.

My point is though, the other thread I saw was truly upsetting for the OP, but not a not uncommon situation, which a lot of posters could identify with and offer good, sensible emotional and practical support.

Some dickhead shouted troll for no good reason; their posts were deleted but the reaction remained. So if/when this OP returns to the thread, the fallout will be there for all to see.