Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk

Back to thread
Original poster

MN allows racism to stand

11 replies

amillionyears · 13/11/2012 14:50

I have reported it 3 times today, 1 before 9am.
Heard nothing from them.

Go to post
MNHQ

RowanMumsnet · 13/11/2012 16:28

Sorry that it took us a while - inbox is on fire today

We most certainly do NOT only check reports a couple of times a day; we check them constantly. But how quickly we can deal with them depends on how big our inbox is - and it's been a bit humongous today

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 13/11/2012 16:53

@amillionyears

I realise there are some other posts that would take priority. RowanMumsnet has just said that they check reports constantly. How far down the priority is racism?

We're a bit confused here, amillionyears. From what we can see, the posts you reported were personal attack - someone calling someone else "mad as a box of frogs".

Obviously, they merit deletion (for being personal attacks) but, given that the thread wasn't about French people but about the failings of Mumsnet and the person being attacked had made no mention of being French, we didn't see any racist intent in the posts.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 13/11/2012 17:15

OK, OK, let's not turn this into a personal attack on amillionyears. She was quite right to report to us posts that concerned her and that she thought might break our guidelines. We always welcome reports like this.

We just wanted to make it clear that, while we were obviously a bit tardy to delete those personal attacks, we would never let racist posts stand for a moment longer than we could possibly manage.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 13/11/2012 17:19

@LRDtheFeministDragon

Crikey. MNHQ often takes days to get back to me, clearly I should be steaming mad (as opposed to realizing they have millions of users and a free site and I'd sound like a twat to assume mine was the only complaint they had to check ...).

OTOH (see how I'm slipping this in after defending you, HQ? It's not really very subtle, but ...), they did over the weekend tell me that it's not homophobic to liken gay people getting married to underage children having sex.

And I queried, and they've not replied.

I would like to point out actually, yes, it is homophobic, on account of how gay adults are not in quite the same position as children, and comparing the two is a tiny, tiny bit like implying gay adults aren't in the same position as straight adults but are rather more like children breaking the law ...

As you were.

Sorry you didn't get a reply. LRD. We'll look into that.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:15

@EmpressOfTheSevenOceans

I was quite surprised that HQ even accepted that being a personal attack really.

OK, just to clear this one up...

A personal attack is an attack on another poster that focuses on their person, rather than their opinion.

It doesn't have to include swearing. Although it might.

So:

"You are a cow, HelenMumsnet" = personal attack

"You are a fucking cow, HelenMumsnet" = personal attack

"Your opinions are ridiculous, HelenMumsnet" = NOT a personal attack

"Your opinions are fucking ridiculous, HelenMumsnet" = NOT a personal attack

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:28

@BOFingSanta

What about "That makes you sound like a poo-poo head, HelenMumsnet"?

Depends on the context, BOFingSanta. Only a poo thread, for example...

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:30

@AlienRefluxovermypoppy

Yes, but mad as a box of frogs?? Is that really an insult even? Esp, when she was !!

"You are as mad as a box of frogs" = personal attack (unless context makes it clear it's meant affectionately or summat)

"Your opinions on this issue are as mad as a box of frogs" = NOT a personal attack.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:31

@HoneyDragon

What about,

I think Bof was correct in her assumption you are a poo poo head

Is that a stealth attack by proxy or is it allowed? Grin

Even if I am a poo poo head, it's a personal attack to call me one.

So, I could be as ugly as sin but "You ugly cow, HelenMumsnet" is still deletable.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:33

@EmpressOfTheSevenOceans

I get that, Helen. And thank you for coming on the thread.

If I want to express negative opinions I'm very careful to use Justine's "Your post makes you sound like [simile of choice] and here's why."

But honestly, mad as a box of frogs? When it wasn't even the froggee who objected?

Does that mean that if we were messing around in the Puddle and I called State or Bonkey or someone norty, and some random poster noticed it & objected, it would get deleted?

No, cos (hopefully) we'd see that the context was affectionate and jokey and not personal attacky

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:48

@EmpressOfTheSevenOceans

Ok. And I bet you're very beautiful.

But I still think being called an ugly cow is a lot more upsetting than being called mad as a box of frogs.

Yes, we see that. But it's perfectly possible that others may say it's more upsetting to be called mad than ugly.

If we start getting into degrees of upset-ness, it would be a minefield.

Much simpler, and hopefully clearer all round, to have a blanket rule that all personal attacks, wherever they feature on anyone's personal scale of offensiveness, break our guidelines, and will be deleted when reported.

MNHQ

HelenMumsnet · 14/11/2012 13:54

@EmpressOfTheSevenOceans

That makes sense, thank you.

While we're on the subject of personal attacks, could you go & look at this? It's the nastiest one I've seen in ages.

Already done.

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread

Back to thread