Caitlin177

[FourForksAche]

something ought to be done about her derailing of a thread that was supporting a grieving woman.

Many of us reported last night, the user is still at it.

I agree that nightwatch do, as they should, err on the side of cat

Or even caution...

cats usually are right

I thought all cats were bastards?

Hi all,

Many thanks for coming on and we are pleased to see you posting Waltzing.

The first report about this thread was received at 11.27pm. The day shift have logged off by this point and the volunteer nightwatch are around. Their job is to remove blatant spam, huge trolls and vile images, not to make judgement calls.

As soon as we logged in this morning, we posted on this thread and the other thread and dealt with it all.

We are sorry that it took us a while to get to and we do hope the OP of that thread is ok (we have mailed her now).

Caitlin177 has been banned from Mumsnet. We do not normally post to confirm that we have done this, but in this instance we wanted to reassure you that we don't take this sort of thing lightly.

Waltzing, we do hope you will stick with us and that you can see that the vast majority of posters have bags of support and guidance for you and we also hope that you have some RL support too.

Apologies again.

Thank you, Rebecca.

It's taken you 13 hours to mail me. It took night watch all of about 10 minutes to make a judgement which you claim they don't make and pull the other thread. I won't be back posting.

I do see what Rebecca is saying, but perhaps the nightshift should have pm'd or emailed Waltzingmary to explain that they couldn't delete the thread there and then, because it was a judgement call they are not allowed to make, but that it would be put at the top of the pile for the dayshift to deal with.

That way, at least Waltzingmary would have known that she had been heard and wasn't being ignored, whilst other, less important matters were appearing to be prioritised.

Better communication needed here, I think, MNHQ.

Glad to see you've taken serious action MNHQ

Thanks Rebecca, very fair explanation.

Walzing, I really think if the hardcore daytime crew had been on this would have been a different story. Hope you'll give us another chance.

I agree, a pm from night staff in cases like this might put someone feeling attacked a bit more at ease. It's a good idea for the future.

Yeah, I think a pm explaining would help in future then the op can hide the thread safe in the knowledge some action is imminent. Maybe deal with the fact that the worst trolling happens at night when there's minimal staff around to put a stop to things. Weird that.

wine o'clock.

I don't but all this judgement call stuff. The night crew have the ability to hide a thread until MN get a chance to look it over. THIS is why they are here.

That is the least that could have been done to stop it going the way it did.

maryz I didn't know they were volunteers. it's nice of them to do the job.

I'm not intending to criticise an individual. I think that suggestions have been made that could improve the system in future.

agree about the nightwatch.
But MNHQ have a whole in their system which they know about, but are not willing to presumably pay someone. So the loophole will keep being used.
imo, not fair to users.
But most seem happy about it, as there is not mush fuss being made?
Up to MNHQ I suppose.
But there are now 650,000 registered users apparently.

They are volunteers, they are just ordinary members.

I know that, but they are here for this purpose. They removed a thread calling caitlin177 some choice names because of what she was doing, it wouldn't have taken more than a few minutes to find the thread.

Sorry, but if you volunteer you have a job to do, and instead of just removing the thread criticising caitlin, they could have hidden the thread she was trolling on.

I have been a mod, it was a volunteer position, so I know how it works.

Of course the blame lies squarely on the troll who started all this, but there was more that can be done.

A grieving mother has walked away from somewhere she thought was safe & supportive.

I don't think that is acceptable.

I'm Caitlin17 (slightly ego - deflated by OwlCapone's comment she'd never seen that name. We have definitely posted on the same AIBUs !)

The other Caitlin was posting on a thread about name changes and said she had name-changed. I asked her 3 or 4 times, why given all the wildly imaginative, pun-tastic names on here, she had picked a name almost exactly the same as another poster. She never replied. I assumed she was someone I'd peed off and she was trying to get at me. Oh and thanks to EatShitDerek on that thread for raising the possibility of trolls.

I didn't see the thread which got the other Caitlin banned, but my thanks to those of you who pointed this out. It's a big shame someone in genuine need of advice ( rather than me just looking for a natter) got hurt.

Wait, the nightwatch are volunteers?

I remember the original thread where MNHQ called for these volunteers, and way back then a bunch of us made the point that night mods need to be paid staff precisely so they could make judgement calls and not be afraid of conflating their role-as-member and their role-as-mod.

So. Glad that didn't go badly, then.

Why are Caitlin177's posts still visible if she/he or it has been banned?

Strawdolly a ban does not mean all prev posts removed it means that person can not post from now on

I get that, Deep, but would it not make sense to remove whatever they've said? I know it might be confusing to people reading the thread later but I don't feel it's fair that they are still being allowed an audience for what they've said so far, especially if it warranted the poster being banned