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
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

Original poster

a Vote then...post here for a total ban

31 replies

Blandmum · 25/05/2006 19:12

I feel a blanket ban would be the best way forward to help prevent future misunderstandings, and misreadings of posts. The internet is a potentialy 'blunt' form of communication, since inflection and context can be difficult to determine.

I vote for a total ban on discussing the person and her methods.

If you agree please post here....i will set up another post for the alternate view

OP posts:
Piffle · 25/05/2006 19:13

yes indeed neither condemn no recommend

gothicmama · 25/05/2006 19:14

makes sense no shades of grey then

tamum · 25/05/2006 19:14

Mb, I just mentioned on the other thread- we strongly advocated this a few weeks ago, but Justine said she thought it was a silly idea, so I'm not sure we can do it other than as a self-imposed ban. I would personally like to discuss her quite a bit at the moment... [angry}

Saggarmakersbottomknocker · 25/05/2006 19:14

Yes

tamum · 25/05/2006 19:14

I'm so angry I can't do emoticons any more...

JoolsToo · 25/05/2006 19:14

wot about newbies and trolls?

tamum · 25/05/2006 19:16

I think that was part of the argument JT- it would be on ongoing problem unless there was a clear statement at the top of the discussion boards for all to see, but MN Towers are clearly not going to do that.

Crystaltips · 25/05/2006 19:17

MB - not too sure what you are making a reference to .... Blush
What are you wanting banned ??

Have I missed something ? Blush

Angeliz · 25/05/2006 19:18

Absolutely i'm in favour of a total ban. If we can only say positive things then it's very misleading.
(iyswim!Blush Grin )

PiccadillyCircus · 25/05/2006 19:19

Have a look at a long discussion in Site Stuff. Should make things clear.

Crystaltips · 25/05/2006 19:19

ooops ... just clicked ... not really interested in her - so missed all the hoohah .... will skulk off and read the thread Grin

Crystaltips · 25/05/2006 19:19

x-posts

snafu · 25/05/2006 19:20

I think it would be fairly easy to police this wrt newbies. Trolls, well, someone will always try it on but the response will just have to be the same.

I am so angry that it has come to this but I am even angrier about the idea of giving this woman any publicity at all. So, yes, I support a ban.

SaintGeorge · 25/05/2006 19:22

Yes to total ban. Newbies and trolls can be policed and advised by regular posters and swift use of the ! facility.

tamum · 25/05/2006 19:22

I would just like to make it clear that I totally support this personally.

MissChief · 25/05/2006 19:22

don't agree, I'm afraid - I know it's been a complete hassle for MN, but she who cannot be mentioned is so influential whether you agree with her methods or not. All the fundamental stuff of early parenthood - feeding/routines/sleeping/sleeping through/weaning/potty-training etc is there in the books. Even if people haven't read them firsthand they tend to be aware of the methods adovcated and will discuss whether they're "pro" or "con". It would be a real restriction to ban this!

LucyJones · 25/05/2006 19:24

agree wiht MisChief - as far as i can tell she's not sking that we stop criticising her methods, just stop attacking her personally. We should still be allowed to debate her methods on a parenting site

Original poster
Blandmum · 25/05/2006 19:24

('fort so Grin )

I am unaware of any law that states that a discussion group has to discuss someone.

She cannot complain if no comment is made. Far safer for MN towers.

A shame for those mother who need to get information on this method....not having read or used it myself I cannot comment on its use. But there you go, can't make an omlette without cracking a few eggs.

OP posts:
snafu · 25/05/2006 19:26

MissChief, it's too much of a grey area, though, that's the problem. Nothing 'derogatory' can be said, not just 'defamatory' or libellous, and postings on a website are notoriously hard to judge re: tone, intention etc.

So, if that's the case, where will the debate be? It will be incredibly biased and one-sided. Better to not mention her at all, and let people decide for themselves why that should have to be the case...

Piffle · 25/05/2006 19:26

If they need to discuss something unpalletable to others
They may take it to email or msn Grin

Original poster
Blandmum · 25/05/2006 19:27

Miss chief.

For eample

If someone posted saying

I think this book is the greatest thing since sliced bread'

and another said

'yes, right'

How do you decide if the second post is in agreement or is being sarcastic?

OP posts:
Tinker · 25/05/2006 19:28

But her method polarise people so much. Some people feel very emotional about them that it's quite risky to even allow just discussion of them.

LucyJones · 25/05/2006 19:28

but MB surely it is the personal attacks she is bothered about, not the 'yes right' coments.

Original poster
Blandmum · 25/05/2006 19:30

But how could you tell that the 'yes right was not derogatory?

She is expecting that as well as banning defamatory threads (which FWIW I think is fair)

OP posts:
Jessajam · 25/05/2006 19:31

LJ she is concerned by derogatory comments so someone coudl say
"I don't agree with the methods, I trie dthem and it didn't work"
and be ok
but soemone else coudl say
"she" doesn't know what she is talking about, I trie dthis and it didn't work"
and be a bit of a grey area...