When all this has calmed down, can we have a proper chat about what MNHQ, actually want please?

[HoneyDragonFucker]

I'd like to know whether the site is moving in another direction. And what that means for some of our important supportive boards.

I've seen some awful threads and posts left up for far to long. I'm also cynical of the IF you report it gets dealt with party line. As it doesn't. The trolling and goading that occurs in Bereavement, FWR, SN and Relationships, is left far too long after it has been reported.

Yet it is very obvious that some posters are either being monitored or targeted by reporters as they are deleted with alarming speed and precision.

With respect it's your site, but I'm buggered if I know what I can and can't say anymore.

[MaryZombie]

Nope, I didn't mean it that way at all. I don't think my opinion is worth more than anyone else. But I do get pissed off that these days being here for a few years seems to make a poster either a target for varying accusations, or a sad person with no life. Or both.

[HoneyDragon]

I think ultimately it's not us it's Them

I think up in HQ Mumsnet are at at odds.

They want to keep the media going with their wimmin are clever too, look at our campaigns, look at what mnetters do for each other spiel.

But

That is at odds with what they want to present to advertisers, who want fluffy. So then comes in the sanitisation, and telling off on threads of being girls.

I just think the natural bland of no bullshit, strong opinions and viper fluffiness is now being picked apart, they are trying to turn it into a marketing formula, when it was something very organic.

This is why now I think you get two lots of disgruntled newbies. Which trot out the following phrases with, I think, concerning regularity.

I just came here as I was told this was a nice place for support and you are all horrible.

And

I came here because you are all supposed to be clever, I thought this was a place for robust debate and opinions why are you all running off to the mods reporting me.

Now. Justine's been very quick to say of late that they have never presented Mnet as a safe place yada, yada, yada. And it's not its on the Internet and a forum.

But if you need to talk wouldn't do it at the forum that has very public campaigns against the abuse of women?

This is navel gazing, I'm not obsessing over it, it's just casual observation.

And moderation doesn't have to be consistent, it rarely is. And if you get deleted, and people go "eh why?" A post can be reinstated. But moderation has to be consistent in the sense that, it can just be from 8am to 9:30pm, if the site is used for 24 hours.

[HoneyDragon]

This is not navel gazing

[HoneyDragon]

Cannot be from

[ButThereAgain]

I really don't think the moderation issues are to do with sanitising mn for the advertisers. I don't think advertisers dont want fluffy, in that sense. I think 'straight talking', 'robustness' etc is something that they want to piggyback on: they come out of their ads on the side of the screen into sponsored threads in order to parasitise that air of authenticity in conversation , which is precisely what old style adverts lack.

For example, MNHQ is STILL hammering the decidedly non-fluffy penisbeaker stuff (by starting a thread on that idiotic Telegraph story about sex on mn). That doesn't sanitise mn for advertisers, unless its ann summers hq wants to court. It does seem degenerate, though, as if mnhq realise they've got all the publicity they can from campaigning and from women-as-political and now have to scrape around from a sleazier barrel. (Still, at least that means that we are less exposed to the morally challenging spectacle of mn political campaigning functioning as a front window promotion of mn to advertisers -- I'm much happier with penis beakers taking on that role.)

I think the way they tackle the moderation issues is largely to do with making the site work as a conversation space -- work for its users. But I think that the problems are just going to get worse, largely because of the mission for constant expansion that presumably motivates all the publicity. That's the point at which the dependence on advertisers corrupts things.

Now thay

[ButThereAgain]

Second sentence should be 'I dont think the advertisers do want fluffy'

[ButThereAgain]

God, its terrible trying to type thoughtfully on a tablet. Makes me feel like a neanderthal articulating with my fists.

[ButThereAgain]

ought just to add, i think all the campaigning stuff mn does is genuinely motivated as a service to users too, like the moderation, its just that it also unavoidably functions in a shaping commercial context.

[MaryZombie]

I think you have summed it up well Honey.

It can't, it seems, be fluffy and robust.

[sunbathe]

At the risk of annoying people, I've been here since 2004 (under various guises) and remember the volunteer peer modding we had.

It worked really well, imo. And having respected regulars who did it, really did seem to pour oil on troubled waters.

It would be great if we could return to that.

[Anyfuckergate]

I remember too sunbathe and really feel that returning to that sort of system that helps to resolve conflict as well as bridging the gap between mnhq and members. Moderators that can move/close threads etc (edit/delete posts, at least take action unroll someone from mnhq can take a look), help new members to find their feet, trouble shoot, do peace keeping, engage members when clearly they are having a bad hair day (and have acted out on a thread, due to external stresses) etc, is a really good idea. I feel it would help with the nurturing side to mn. Mods can keep abreast through mod channels and I think this would give more consistent care to the site itself.

Off to think of a new name

[MilllyMollyMully]

Well, Hulababy and cod are still here. So they can slot straight back in. Seriously, think it's a great idea.

They can also explain the Talk Guidelines on threads, cf in the OP "I'm buggered if I know what I can and can't say anymore".

[Trills]

The advertisers want will spend money and sometimes they want quotable - I dnon't think fluffy comes into it.

[MilllyMollyMully]

Might start a Bring Back Hulababy as Mod campaign.

[Theoldhag]

Hehe YES! Millly

I do hope that something is changed as the more sensitive boards really need a helping hand in maintaining a supportive atmosphere.

Viper love and un mn hugs to all on this blustery and tempestuous day
Anyfuckergate

[HoneyDragon]

Ok, maybe not fluffy, but it was the best word I could come up with to get the gist across, of the juxtaposition in Mumsnet's own directions.

[MilllyMollyMully]

I agree about the sensitive boards needing a helping hand, oldhag.

[BringBackHulababyDaMod]

If she's willing.

There is a very big question about who will appoint mods, and how will they be managed. But it sounds like MNHQ have got that taped.

[MooncupGoddess]

Why did they end the volunteer modding system?

[BringBackHulababyDaMod]

Good question. Anybody?

[trish5000]

Havr they ended it? I thought they were going to be using volunteers at night very soon.

[BringBackHulababyDaMod]

Yes, but it used to be daytime modding too. Site was very small then, though. Still, if it were daytime modding for sensitive boards, that would be fairly small too.

[TheLateKateSMumsnet]

Hello everyone,

Sorry we've been silent on this thread thus far, we can see you folks have a lot of issues you'd like addressed.

We'll be doing a webchat at some point next week, we'll announce it properly when we have the dates firmed up.