Clarification please

[Hullygully]

So I come back to find that you have deleted my thread asking why my Santa thread was deleted.

Of course it was a thread about a thread, it was asking a question about the thread.

Wtf else is one supposed to do?

I put it in site stuff.

It was also a really nice friendly thread full of poetry and laughs. Why why why why was it deleted? What the hell is going on there?

Secondly, if one wants to talk about something, and that something has been deleted purely owing to others mischief, does that mean that one is never to talk about that subject again??

How mad is that?

[BIWI]

It does, Maryz.

[TantrumsAndBalloons]

That makes perfect sense MaryZ

But now you will be told you are mumsnet royalty and unfriendly and bullying to new members, since you have mentioned making friends on here which is not allowed

[IamtheZombie]

Zombie wishes she could foresee a happy conclusion to this, but sadly she can't.

Hully is, rightly in Zombie's opinion, aggrieved especially about her first thread in Site Stuff being deleted.

MNHQ acted under pressure in deleting her original thread and may or may not have made the right call. Deleting her first Site Stuff thread is more questionable. They are also, again rightly in Zombie's opinion, aggrieved that extremely nasty comments were directed at named HQ staff. That was appalling conduct by the posters concerned.

Trying to look ahead, Zombie hopes that locking threads will be used much more frequently in the future. This would allow both sides of an alleged bunfight time to cool down a bit and allow MNHQ to have a much closer look at the thread before making the delete / let it stand decision. Zombie thinks this is particularly important when the OP of a thread is known to be a target for reporting by certain other posters.

[ExitPursuedByAChristmasGrinch]

Locking threads is a great idea. But a great big claxon when they reopen would be helpful

[ChippingInLovesChristmasLights]

Exit - don't you use 'Threads I'm On' ?

[K8Middleton]

:( I was hoping this would all have been sorted out by now. It does all feel very personal and a bit unjust.

Usually MNHQ have held their hands up to something by this point, everyone starts apologising to everyone else in very British fashion... and then we all have gin.

[ExitPursuedByAChristmasGrinch]

Yes I do. But it didn't appear in the morning and then I had to do stuff. I need a claxon in my head !

[PacificDogwood]

Sadly, posters who stick their head above the parapet (Hully is not alone, how about Val and... oh crap now I cannot remember her name: v knowledgable woman on FWR, NN starting with D? ) and express opinions outwith the 'norm' (whatever that is) become noticable and memorable and attract 'followers' and 'enemies'.

You'd either have to have a very think skin to maintain the 'words on a screen' attitude (much as I in principle agree with it), have the patience of a Saint to never lose your rag or by a robot IMO.
I have never been provoked to the point of using breaking Talk Guidelines, I don't think I am that boring and predictable.

If anything can be taken from this I think it should be locking of threads before they go all hysterical might be a good idea, so MNHQ have a chance to look at them properly.

I wonder whether they might apologise to Hully by email, so it's not quite so public?

[K8Middleton]

Dittany? tbf I found her posting style was rude and narrow minded not very... inclusive. Although that doesn't excuse what happened to her.

I wouldn't put Hully in the same camp. She is always polite.

What I like about MNHQ is that they do hold their hands up and admit mistakes because they're just people like us. I also like that they can be questioned publicly and treat us, the users, as equals. I think this is missing a wee bit at the mo.

[ShreddedHoops]

Maryz - dunno, I don't think there's that much of a chasm between your experience of MN and mine. I'm on here all the bloody time far too much - I'd be embarrassed to say how much but it's a good chunk of my leisure time! And I have been here for donkey's. My experience differs, as a name changer I haven't 'made friends' on here, that's by choice, I do want some distance and often the freedom to rant about politics or whatever without it ever being traceable back to my rl. For many posters, that's important, I'm sure you understand that. I find it frustrating when name changers are labelled as 'cowardly' as they were on this thread or possibly the other one, and blamed for all sorts of nonsense. I do understand the emotional connection of MN, but, dunno, I do think well it's only a website. If I feel myself getting too heavily involved, I will see it through but then usually name change afterwards - every 6 weeks or so. It's a good way of interacting online, I think. And one that HQ not only allow, but I think they really recognise how important it is for a vast chunk of the community. MN isn't rl, and one of the things that I and many others like is the anonymity. more than that - the knowledge that you're being treated solely on the basis of the words you've typed, not for any persona you've built up. There are so many reasons why that can be valuable.

Sorry that ended up as a bit of a meander! I feel that for all you lot get upset at being called 'MN royalty' or whatever, maybe being recognised and treated differently, reported more or whatever, it's not on to slag off all the name changers, of whom I'd wager there are a gazillion who've been on here just as much as you lot, just as often, taken part in just as many emotional discussions and bunfights, but are genuinely anonymous. Don't think that our experience isn't just as deep. I'd be bereft if MN was to go bust or summat.

[ShreddedHoops]

The only thread I've ever reported a pa was that particular forthright FWR poster - called me a rape apologist I was genuinely upset, I don't consider it snitching.

[PacificDogwood]

Dittany! Yes, of course, Dittany.

No, I was not comparing Hully and D or anybody else, just saying it's easier to be anonymous when you are less memorable.

I know that D was... divisive but I did learn a lot.

I've said it before, but I am often genuinely puzzled that people don't find the 'off' switch when they are not enjoying themselves?
We have total control over what we respond to and how we respond (apart from when we lose our rag, that is, of course).

[K8Middleton]

divisive

[DazzleII]

Another great post, ShreddedHoops. All the above goes for me too, and for loads of other MNers I know.

[K8Middleton]

Arf at "loads of other MNers I know" in that context of anonymity

[Fairenuff]

I know it's going off on a tangent, but...

Isn't anonymity a great word. Lovely to say, just rolls off the tongue.

I wonder if they have that word in other languages.

[DazzleII]

I think they do, otherwise they would have no way to express the concept.

[DazzleII]

In many European languages, it's pretty much the same. But of course I can't reveal which ones I speak, or I would lose my anonymity.

[IamtheZombie]

Zombie agrees with MaryZ.

Zombie chooses not to name change. She enjoys making virtual friends - many of whom she subsequently meets in RL and they become RL friends.

But she fully understands that a lot of people name change regularly in order not to build up a searchable history and to maintain their privacy. She has absolutely no problem with that.

As MaryZ said, it's the ones who name change just to have a go at another poster and then immediately change back to their 'normal' nick name and carry on as though they haven't just been cowardly and nasty.

[DazzleII]

That's against Talk Guidelines, can easily be seen by MNHQ and would presumably lead to being banned PDQ. So it must be a very rare occurrence.

In any case you're describing personal attacks, which ditto.

[happytalk13]

I'm a name changer. Been here 3 years. I find it very frustrating to have the word coward levelled at me. Some here have said that their only problem with NC is to have a pop and then change back and I agree that is cowardly, but I'm afraid after seeing this discussion here on MN again and again there are quite a few regulars out there who call people who NC cowards a wider scope of reasons.

Privacy is important to me for a very good reason. I am not a coward.

[PacificDogwood]

I don't think anybody has a problem with 'innocent' NCing, have they?
I totally understand where the privacy/searchability problem might come from (and sometimes I worry about that, because I don't NC).
happytalk, NCing as such is not cowardly, but NCing to have a go or stir and goad, and then NC again, in effect running away cackling, is.