Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk

Back to thread
Original poster

Deletions - These are ludicrous

87 replies

Hullygully · 29/05/2012 09:26

Ok, that's enough now MNHQ

Stop it with the mad deleting.

Go to post
MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 29/05/2012 11:55

Hi there,

Follow our guidelines = No deletions!

Job done Smile

Hope you're all enjoying the sunshine. x

Best
Sandy
MNHQ

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 14:22

Hello all,

As you know, our Talk guidelines have not changed very much at all in over 10 years because we think that they work pretty well - you may beg to differ Grin

We are NOT deleting more than usual at all, although we may have been deleting posts on bigger threads of late, so you may have noticed it more.

Our guidelines are fairly straight forward and we have no plans to change them. Here is the link again if you want to have a quick refresher but in short:

No personal attacks
No posts that break the law
No trolling, goading or misleading
No trollhunting
No spamming
MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 14:27

@Hullygully

Are you saying, Rebecca, that we are collectively insane and all imagining it then?

Hully, insane? Shock no, most certainly not.
But you could well be seeing it more on the longer, shall we say, more contentious threads Hully.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 14:35

@Pan

That's utter bollocks Rebecca, if you don't mind me saying so.....Smile. 9 out 10 old gimmer posters say so....

Sorry Pan, we try our best not to be peddlers of bollocks
We are responding to reports and reading through threads and removing posts as we have always done.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 14:38

@tethersend

"No personal attacks No posts that break the law No trolling, goading or misleading No trollhunting No spamming"

Helen, why then did I get deleted for saying someone's point shone like a burning cross on a lawn?

Mail in tethers, we will happily explain contactus @ mumsnet.com

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 14:56

@tethersend

Thanks Rebecca, but I am happy to have the explanation here if that's ok?

Hi Tethers, we removed this post as it was reported for being racist.

We agreed, apologies if the inference was wrong but it read as fairly clear to us at the time and due to the subject matter of the thread.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:04

@MyNameIsntFUCKINGWarren

How is it RACIST to infer that someone's point is like the KKK?

Do mnhq need to borrow my dictionary? It's here on my shelf next to my Bumper Book of Bollocks.

Apologies, badly worded on my part. It was removed as tethers was inferring that another poster was a racist, therefore it was a personal attack.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:06

@ShirleyKnot

So if someone is being racist then it's a personal attack to say that they're being racist?

yes, tell us and we will delete and have a word. There is no need to call someone racist on a thread. Ignore and report.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:11

@Thumbwitch

Dear Rebecca - tethers was implying, you were inferring. I know that another lovely PP has already had this discussion with Honeydragon earlier - it's a bugbear of mine too. :)
Blush
MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:16

@TantrumsAndBalloons

Yes tethers, you must ignore the allegedly racist person(they were racist btw) leave the thread and report. Then the thread would be full of ignorant, racist twats agreeing with each

Isn't that much better?

And then all the people who think its ok for your partner to have sex with you whilst you are asleep can all be on another thread agreeing with each other.
And so on....

Of course there will be no debate, no conflicting points of view, no actual advice but deletions either.

That reminds me of another parenting website......

We firmly believe that there can be great debate without personally attacking others.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:18

@get0rfm0iland

PLEASE can someone explain the deletion for 'disingenuous'.

I cannot report the post or thread because both were bastarding deleted.

Can you tell us roughly when getorf and we can look it up? Many deletions are dependent on context and we can have a look from our end and try to explain.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:40

@Hullygully

Me too Shirl.

I am going to follow the guidelines To The Letter.

I expect we all are, aren't we?

Please do Hully.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:48

@CharminglyOdd

I was staying well clear of this but now I'm totally confused. I reported something a while back* for being a clearly goading probably trolling thread and received a reply stating that MNHQ could see the person was starting a bunfight but that (paraphrasing) they prefer to let members sort out their difference of opinions onthread.

But when people attempt to do this (according to the example cited here) they get deleted? I can see that a thread full of people jumping on someone is unpleasant but I don't see why it's wrong to call a racist a racist.

Hi CharminglyOdd,
We would be interested in seeing that mail if you still have it?

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 15:51

@ShirleyKnot

I wouldn't mind a reply to my point about the posts that vaguely or directly target and attack "regular" or "prolific" or "well known" posters but don't name names.

Are they OK? Are those posters "fair game" for personal attacks then?

No, nobody is 'fair game' for personal attacks and if you report these posts/threads, we will take a look.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 16:02

@mistlethrush

Trouble is, it appears that certain posters are using the 'report' button to their advantage so that only their side of the picture remains up. And its the side that's being deleted who was all up for having a debate about the rights and wrongs of something that are getting deleted. This doesn't lead to an appropriate discussion.

And at times its almost more important to get something on the thread to confirm that it isn't acceptable to use racist names, or to condone rape within a relationship for instance than it is to report the post then sit on your hands for the next several hours whilst the post in question continues to be up there without being challenged.

We are not saying that you shouldn't challenge unhealthy POV, but we think that this can be done without breaking the Talk guidelines.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 16:09

@AnyFucker

I have rarely reported stuff against myself either

And yet, in a stand up argument disagreement (where all are giving as good as they get), mine go almost as soon as I type them

it's a conspiracy, I tells ye

No conspiracy AF, if folks are reporting you but you aren't reporting them, then we are more likely to delete you and not them on the grounds that we won't see their posts unless they are on the same thread or your post is a direct response to them.

We get over 30,000 post per day, we cannot read them all - please report stuff against you and we will take a look.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 16:20

@AnyFucker

but I don't wanna report stuff, Rebecca

I want the tool's post to stand and I want mine to stand

So you want a site that doesn't delete anything ? Mumsnet has always removed posts that break our guidelines if reported, that hasn't changed since the dawn of time beginning of Mumsnet.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 16:24

@ThisWeekonFancyPuffin

I think what MNHQ are saying by repeating the 30,000 post a day point, is that, if something is reported they automatically delete it without reading it looking at context.

No, not at all.
We read all reports and make a judgement call on each one. Sometimes we get it wrong, sometimes our judgement differs from others but we try our best to be consistent and to answer questions when they arise.

We do reinstate posts from time to time when we have been a bit fat fingered about deletions.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:31

Hello, hello. Have been alerted to this thread by RebeccaMumsnet who's a bit knackered and has retired for a well-earned tumbler of gin.

Ok so first off there's clearly a lot of strong feeling about this issue from a lot of MNetters so we shall, absolutely, take note and have a think about the way we are implementing things and how we could do things better/fairer/most consistently.

That said, let's be clear there hasn't been any change in policy - we've always considered posts like "You are a twat" to be a personal attack and deleted them when reported. We also do always aim to take note of context and if we are deleting a post in a tit-for-tat exchange we should be deleting the tat as well as the tit (as it were). (If/when we are not, it's an error though, not a change in policy.)

We do, and always have taken a dim view of troll hunting - as ever that's because we'd rather err on the side of giving folks the benefit of the doubt than mistrust or be unwelcoming to someone who needs genuine support. Sometimes this means we can all be taken in, but I feel really strongly that that is a price worth paying and if we slipped into knee-jerk suspicion of newbies MN would be half the place it is. From time to time we see people that have genuine needs and issues being doubted and it is really uncomfortable and unpleasant watching and not what MN is here for (See more on our troll policy here - its been the same for about 10 years!)

We are, of course, aiming for polite and reasonable discourse wherever possible and strongly believe that we are a forum for grown ups, so folks should be able to disagree and debate without resorting to insults. In short, if you don't want to be deleted the safest thing to do is not to be rude to someone (yes, even if you think they are deeply unpleasant you can make your point without calling them a twat) and not to troll hunt.

There will, of course, be inconsistencies and there always have been - most obviously because we don't and can't read every post so there are probably loads in existence that amount to "you are a twat" but which have not been reported. I'm afraid that's a function of the sheer size and rudeness of Mumsnet. But our community team do do their damnedest to apply the rules consistently. That said, they are human and they are making often quite fine judgements that require interpretation, sometimes under great pressure - inevitably they sometimes get things wrong.

Anyways, as said, we will have a careful look at everyone's contributions to this thread and make sure we are doing our very best to to apply our very few rules fairly and consistently and that we've aren't getting too trigger happy. Thanks for everyone's thoughts please keep them coming.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:37

@rhondajean

With apologies for not managing to read this entire thread I am very glad it's come up.

The one and only time I was deleted was for challenging someone who posted making a fool of other people.

MNHQ I raised it at the time that it was disgraceful that you deleted me but allowed the original posting to stand. Now it appears it's happening time and again.

If someone is expressing a view point which is discriminatory and offensive towards others I do not care what anyone says, while I will happily report to you I will also publicly challenge as that is my moral obligation to do so. If I see racist etc comments I'm going to stand up and say that is wrong.

I'm more than happy to discuss this by email but I actually think it deserves an open airing.

We have absolutely no problem with you publicly challenging discriminatory/ offensive views, we actively encourage it.

However, we will delete posts that break our guidelines.

As we said up thread (or down depending on how you are reading MN) we believe that it is entirely possible to have a debate without personally attacking another poster, no matter how vile you think their opinion is.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:45

@thisisyesterday

Hmmmm interesting.

I was on a thread a while back, where a poster called another persons teenage son a rapist.

I reported it, MN said it had to stand

so... implying someone is racist is against the rules. calling someone's son a rapist is not?

maybe you could clarify this MN?

Can't comment for sure as not seen the posts but broadly calling someone a rapist sounds like a personal attack - and potentially libellous - as does calling someone a racist. But obviously context is important.

The real point is whether folks buy into the idea that they are liable to be deleted if they make a personal attack - no one likes being deleted, naturally, but do we accept the principle that we are aiming for debate and discussion without hurling insults about?

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:48

@KatieMiddleton

Is it like one of those games where you have to tell somebody something only without saying what it is? So although we can see the racist and read the posts we are not allowed to tell them they are being a racist, while at the same time educating them on the fact that they are, in fact, a racist? But without letting on that they are a racist?

What a paradox! (is it paradox? or is an Oxy-moron? Certainly if the above is true there is definitely a moron somewhere, not that I would ever call anyone a moron because that would be a personal attack unless I were to couch it by saying a whole group of people are morons. Apparently. I think. I think I think?)

Confused

No I think you should be able to say "i think what you're saying sounds racist - here's why..." but you can't say "You're a racist" (not without clear cause anyway)

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:51

@Meglet

Well, I haven't had time to read this properly but I'd rather no deletions than what's currently going on. At least if you leave nasty stuff up it shows the poster up in all their twattish glory and the resulting posts where they get torn a new asshole.

I've only reported a couple of posts for being really nasty since I've been here (and I've read a lot of tetchy stuff), more often I just report stuff for advertising or being a troll.

Honestly think no deletions would lead to hell on earth - particularly around the trollhunting - we have always aimed to treat newbies on a par with oldies - I think it's the thing that keeps Mumsnet vibrant and comparatively un-cliquey. But interested to hear if folks think different (ps apols in advance for radio silence from this point - have to rush out to pick up children but will be back on later).

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 29/05/2012 18:55

@SecretNutellaFix

So why is enforcement suddenly so much more obvious?

Mumsnet is supposed to be a more or less unmoderated site, and that is the appeal. We are all supposed to be adults and most of us have the attitude of "IF you can't take it, then don't dish it out"
It is now no longer the free and easy place it was even a year ago, because of constant deletions and interference from HQ on our freedom of the language able to be used.

MN is not unmoderated - never unmoderated - but post-moderated, yes. But I agree that you've pin pointed the key question.
If there have been more deletions of late it's one of two things...

  1. More reported posts
  2. Different interpretation of reported posts

We will do some analysis on a) whether there have been more deletions and if so what's the cause and get back to you forthwith... (really going now, v late for children...)

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 29/05/2012 19:10

@LtEveDallas

Justine, if you have a minute it would be great if you could comment on my posts above. I would love to know why my post was deleted, and why a post I reported (long time ago) that made me feel attacked (upset/angry) was allowed to stand if the rules have my changed.

I'll find them if you want Smile

Sorry LtEve, we are taking a look and will be in touch asap.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates