Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Deletions - These are ludicrous

87 replies

Hullygully · 29/05/2012 09:26

Ok, that's enough now MNHQ

Stop it with the mad deleting.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:23

@BerryLellow

So...Justine says that you should be able to say a post is racist, but not someone? And yet tethers' blisteringly good simile about a burning cross did exactly that, but was deleted? Am I missing something?

As I understand it blistering cross was implying poster member of Klu Klux Clan yes - ie person is a racist. That would be why it was deleted I'd say.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:25

@AnyFucker

I was deleted for saying "I don't think it could have happened like that" to a frankly ridiculous OP

thread since been deleted in it's entirety (surprise, surprise)

Well not sure of the backstory but quite sure thread wouldn't have been deleted to cover up and error if that's what you are implying AF? - most likely deleted cos it became a bunfight...

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:26

Off to get more children. Back laters.

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:30

@TantrumsAndBalloons

I was deleted for saying i don't think that is actually the procedure, it doesn't sound quite right

I'm not sure who I was attacking with that statement but the person replied that I was an uneducated fool who clearly needs to live in the real world.

Funnily enough, that was not deleted.

Hi Tantrums,

Can you tell us when this was please as that should not have been removed?
We will happily have a look if you can tell us where it was.

tia

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:38

@Maryz

The trouble is Rebecca, that often we can't tell you because the post has been removed (and often on the really messy ones, the whole thread has gone).

yy Maryz, we will have a dig and should be able to find anything that was deleted, just asking as it really speeds things up if we can have a rough time frame [lazy]

For future ref, if a post of yours (or anyone's) is removed but the thread still stands, you can report the deleted post to us and we will always explain a deletion if it is unclear.

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:52

@Maryz

I've done that a few times, and you always come back with "it was a personal attack".

For example, the long heated thread about transgender appears to be gone. I was definitely deleted on that for saying "X, your post above makes you sound bigoted", I know that was the wording.

Is that a personal attack? Could I have said "your post is bigoted" or "the opinion you have expressed in your post is bigoted"? How can I say it.

I didn't say "X, you are a fucking bigot get off the thread", I was trying to have a discussion at the time.

We have found the mail that we sent you and you posted

"you are making yourself look very bigoted" and "You really don't sound nice on this thread" if you'd said, say, "I think your opinions are bigoted/not very nice", your posts would have been fine. It is a very fine line and we can be very pedantic about this.

Having said that, there are always exceptions to the 'rule' and context is important. Posting to inflame or goad for example.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:14

@Maryz

So, to be clear:

We ARE allowed to say a post is racist.

Are we allowed to say an opinion is racist - because I was deleted for saying "opinions like that are bigoted" Confused

I don't think that the instructions are clear enough.

Basically, are we allowed to disagree with the op - or can an op get everyone who disagrees with her deleted?

Yes, yes of course you can disagree - it's Mumsnet!

Ultimately, though, it's a futile exercise trying to pin down exactly what form of words is and isn't allowed because, as has been noted here several times, context is very important.

I think it's worth thinking about whether we all accept the core MN ideals - ie freedom of speech, polite and reasonable discourse, all posters treated the same, no trollhunting, no breaking the law etc etc - if you don't then that's clearly going to be a problem on the deletion front. If you do then there is a question of whether our talk guidelines are the best way to achieve them (and if not then what would work better) and if they are then are we implementing them consistently/sensibly...

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:22

@cardamomginger

So, if Hitler pitched up on a thread (bit of a thought experiment, him being dead and everything) and started going all Final Solution on us, I would only be allowed to say "I think your opinions are making you look bigoted".

No problem, there at all. Nope. None. Just dandy.

I like to think Hitler would be deleted and banned pretty quick, cardamomginger, for breaking our talk guidelines!

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:26

@LemarchandsBox

But....but Confused.....

Rebecca says MNHQ are pedantic and there is a fine line (giving examples of phrases falling either side of that line).

Justine says it is futile trying to pin down what is acceptable.

Who is right? Whose Guidelines do we follow?

The Talk guidelines!

I do understand why there's been some confusion here - there are some fine distinctions for sure - in short we hear you and we'll have a think about how we can offer clearer guidance to avoid unnecessary and annoying deletions. Thanks for raising it.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:31

@cardamomginger

Not so sure that some of us would agree! Freedom of speech and all that....

We delete posts that are racist break the law - even conceding we're not perfect I think Hitler would fall foul quite early - unless he was just on chicken keepers or something...

But joking aside - it is important for MNHQ to follow the spirit and not just the letter of the law (as it were) - if we start trying to define a form of words that's a necessary precursor of deletion, then it's always possible for clever unpleasant types to get around them...

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:40

@MardyBra

Justine, did you see my earlier post asking whether the deletions regime was being influenced by your marketing strategy?

I wonder whether
a) advertisers are shying away from being associated with a website with prevalent bunfights and
b) MN is trying to appeal to a wider target audience who might be scared by the outspoken nature of the site.

Nope deletions are categorically being driven by a marketing strategy (not sure we have a marketing strategy Smile)
But what is for sure is that we at MNHQ have been uncomfortable for some time about the following issuettes:

The level of aggression in AIBU
The level of trollhunting - and what that means for unfortunate newbies/namechangers who need help and get disbelieved.
The periodic surfacing of aggressive orthodoxies on certain boards - eg the Doghouse a while back.

If there are extra deletions (and we will review the evidence and revert!) then some might be down to the above factors - but again, we will analyse what's occurring and report back.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:42

@Maryz

Poor old WillowWhispers has been left off again Grin

Sorry I admit to being a bit slow but what is the criterion for being on the list?

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:49

@Maryz

You seem to be a lot more concerned at the moment about the level of trollhunting than you are about the level of trolls Sad.

That's not really fair Maryz. We really do put in lots of behind the scenes work on trolls and investigate any and all reports thoroughly - we just think tactically and strategically that it should occur off board and behind the scenes because we all know that trolls thrive on attention/causing trouble. What I am concerned about also is that fear of trolls leads people to mistrust genuine posters because then of course the trolls win...

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:53

@SecretNutellaFix

If you are so particularly concerned about The level of aggression in AIBU, then why not do as has been suggested on more than one occasion that I can remember, AND GET RID OF THE TOPIC!!!

Because we'd rather try to make it work better - it's a great idea in principle and many more folks like it than hate it. The real concern is that the whole of Mumsnet migrates onto there, so the more sensitive posts that would be better of in their topics, particularly by newbies - that's why we do the thread police thing.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:56

@Maryz

OK, Justine, I take your point it is unfair to say that you don't care about trolls.

But I think the current system isn't working. There are many (or probably actually only one or two with many threads) trolls that are just obvious - you know and I know and the dog in the streets know the threads are a load of bollocks. But you won't delete them without proof.

But you can never get proof.

I think you need to be stricter on them - if it looks like a troll, sounds like a troll and lives under a bridge it probably is a troll. And you should start emailing the op's and saying (before it descends into a riot), "I'm sorry, your thread is going to end up in a row so we are deleting it".

And you should allow people to say "I'm reporting the thread". And you should allow people to ask questions, to clarify the op.

Because the way it is going at the moment is just ridiculous.

So a friend of mine posted something very difficult and personal the other day and was widely-assumed to be a troll. I don't know if you can always be sure tbh Mary... but I take your Occam's Razor point - again we'll think on.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:57

@LunaticFringe

Read nearly 30 pages and want to get in before it gets full.

If the list is still going, please add me. On phone which is slow and clunky.

It occurs to me that if everyone starts reporting anything even vaguely controversial, rude or personal, then mnhq are going to drown in reported threads. Which means they will be unable to get through them and it'll result in a lot of stuff not being deleted. IYSWIM.

So we could go report button happy...

Gee thanks [packs bags].

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 20:59

@Blatherskite

But why does posting "I am reporting this thread" get you deleted?

It doesn't necessarily. It's a necessary but not sufficient condition.

Actually it's sometimes not necessary - I could just delete something without a report coming in, if I was of a mind to [cackle].

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:00

@Hullygully

But Justine, that's what we will have to do. Because the only people endlessly reporting and getting us all deleted are the moany humourless whinebag Po.

Nonoe of us bother reporting so we always end up madly deleted.

What choice do we have?

You don't get deleted just cos you've been reported - come on, you're exaggerating gals!

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:02

@Maryz

But as far as I remember loads of us have made suggestions to sort out the topics and nothing happens Sad

It is a work in progress, honest - Helen's been beavering away but it's not uncomplicated!

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:03

@Kahuna

JustineMumsnet (MNHQ) Tue 29-May-12 20:40:52

Nope deletions are categorically being driven by a marketing strategy

there we have it then, in Justine?s own words ? or is this just interpretation???

OOPs did I really miss out the NOT [shame]. I shall have to go and edit and everyone will think you're making that up Grin.

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:06

@CoteDAzur

Justine - I like you, I really do. But this just doesn't make sense:

But why does posting "I am reporting this thread" get you deleted?
It doesn't necessarily. It's a necessary but not sufficient condition.

It's... what?

What I mean is that deleting the post brings it to our attention - without bringing it to our attention we probably won't see and therefore delete a post. But we won't just delete it because it's been reported - it has to break our talk guidelines too. ie it's not sufficient to just report it...

(I like you too Cote Smile).

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:13

@SecretNutellaFix

If it didn't happen we wouldn't be saying it.

Are you calling us liars?

Erm... no I'm really not - I'm just saying that not every reported post gets deleted and I really don't have to check that to know it's not true... But in my first post and a few times since I've said that I hear what you're saying and we will certainly look into what's going on both with the level of deletions and the consistency and report back when we've done some analysis.
I can categorically say that our policy hasn't changed and that it's not about marketing (I know I categorically said it was about marketing before but that was an error. Wine?)

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:15

@rhondajean

Justine I think they a saying that the post saying the op was reported gets deleted, not the op?

I do appreciate it must be a hell of a job finding balance, but isn't it nice that we are all so invested in your baby website?Grin

Oh I see, sorry, gotcha! Ok well again it's hard to comment without context but I would guess that it's the implication that someone is faking/a troll that is being deleted? Would that make sense?

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:20

@CoteDAzur

Justine, you sound like you are trying to talk down the villagers with pitchforks and torches Grin

Gawd don't I know Grin.

Really though, I'm sorry that everyone is so exercised - clearly we do need to have a bit of a think but on the other hand I do know that the moderation team at MNHQ really do work extraordinarily hard at what is really a very difficult job at times and that their motives are really only to make MN the best board it can be. (They certainly don't do it for the cash Grin).

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 21:23

@Blatherskite

I think Justine missed the point of my question earlier, which may be why the reply made no sense it's either that or the booze. As Maryz has just said, people are being deleted for posting "I'm reporting this thread" on a thread.

Why?

Yes, yes, I did get the wrong end of the stick there, sorry. As I posted below it's hard to comment without context but I would guess that it's the implication that someone is faking/a troll that is being deleted? Would that make sense?"

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates