OFFICIAL MNHQ THREAD on posts about suicide, troll-hunting and related matters

[RowanMumsnet]

Hello

There have been so many threads about this over the past few days, and so many divergent points of view - and so much upset - that we'd really like to have the discussion in one place rather than in many different threads all over the boards.

For those who haven't heard yet: we are actively reviewing our policy about threads regarding suicidal feelings and suicidal intent. We are seeking expert input from outside organisations including the Samaritans. Once we have that we will come back and have a further discussion with MNers about the way forward.

We'll be here to talk on the thread throughout the day, but do please note that we WILL delete troll-hunting posts for all the obvious reasons. So PLEASE do not use this thread to make insinuations about identifiable posters - keep it general please.

Re: Wombat: we understand that some reporters had concerns, but at the same time this poster had been around for years with a very consistent posting history. We absolutely do not have any concrete reason to disbelieve her. However, her thread had been immensely upsetting and triggering for many users, and has prompted a site-wide discussion about how we handle these threads. Once her husband had posted that she was at home with him and under the care of RL professionals it really seemed best all round to delete the thread.

We contacted Wombat at the time to explain our deletion and we still feel that for many very good reasons this is best sorted out off-board between us and her; we've asked her again to reply to our email and we will happily take it from there.

We also think that this whole case is a very good illustration of why we have no-trollhunting rules. We understand that some of you find them frustrating, but for every correct troll-call, there's an incorrect one. Being called a troll in public when you're giving an honest account of deeply upsetting real-life circumstances can be devastating for people.

Equally, we do 'get' that there are a lot posters and threads at the moment that seem deeply suspicious. We are on the front foot with this and have been being pretty pro-active at closing things down when they are reported to us and when we can see that things aren't adding up, particularly if they are new users.

So we need you to keep reporting and NOT break troll-hunting rules on the boards unless MNHQ itself has said publicly that we are confident that someone was a deliberate trouble-maker.

The namechange/sock-puppeting thing is extremely easy for us to spot when it's reported. It's not a judgement call - it's black and white and it's the work of a moment for us to spot it and deal with it.

And: "Do, please, resist the urge to 'trollhunt' on the boards: in our experience, trolls thrive on attention the more dramatically other posters react, the more likely they are to stick around and cause mayhem. Ignore their posts and, usually, they'll go away."

Troll hunting does not feed trolls.

If I was going to troll MN, my aim would be for every gullible person on this website to believe my story.

No point trolling if everyone knows you are talking bollocks, really.

up to date with how forums like this work

Telephone helplines of all kinds need suicide procedures for callers at high risk of completing suicide (details of risk assessment below) and, the policy is usually one of the following:

Option one: We will remain with the caller on the phone and we will only summon help for her with her permission. This might mean listening to the caller die.

Option two: We will remain on the phone with the caller but with or without the caller's permission we will summon help using any identifying details we have. The caller will be told this. This might mean listening to the caller die if we can't get help to her in time.

Option three: We not attempt to support callers who are at high risk of completing suicide. We will ask if they would like us to summon help for them and we will encourage them to call the Samaritans but then we will terminate the call (hang up the phone).

These options are all hard to do but you need to be crystal clear on your policy and use it every time.

The equivalent choices for Mumsnet would be:

Option one: We will allow the poster to continue posting we will only summon help for her with her permission. This might mean the poster continues to post throughout their suicide I.e. They post until they become unconscious (which, in my experience of taking suicide calls, can include details of their physical sensations as their body becomes rapidly iller)

Option two: We will allow the poster to continue posting but with or without the poster's permission we will summon help using any identifying details we have (for example by raking through the posting history in all usernames to find identifying details and by informing the police). The poster would be told this. As above this might mean the poster continues to post through their suicide.

Option three: We will not allow posters to post if they are at high risk of completing suicide imminently. We will ask if they would like us to summon help for them and we will encourage them to call the Samaritans but then we will lock or remove the thread.

NB - Moving the thread doesn't negate the need to choose a policy and asking the poster to post again without mentioning their suicidal feelings could be more damaging. Many helplines (inc Samaritans) ask every caller whether they are feeling suicidal because being able to talk about it is one factor which may help someone choose not to kill themselves.

Finally, please note the what I have written relates to posters at high risk of completing suicide imminently Those at lower risk should be allowed to discuss suicidal feelings. Samaritans offer excellent training in risk assessment but briefly:

• poster feels suicidal but has no plan for how they would kill themselves. Poster is not at high risk of imminent suicide (although still at risk and still needing support - it's a myth that people who talk about suicide don't do it - in fact the majority of people who complete suicide have given clear indications of their intentions).

• poster feels suicidal AND has a plan but has not gathered the things they need to begin suicide. E.g. "I'm going to hang myself from the tree in the garden once I've bought a rope". This poster is at greater risk.

• poster feels suicidal AND has a plan AND has what they need to carry out the plan. E.g. "I'm going to take all the tablets in the house". This poster is at even higher risk.

• poster feels suicidal AND has a plan AND has what they need to carry out the plan AND has begun to harm themselves (such as she has cut her wrists or taken an overdose). This poster it at very high risk.

So for posters who have begun a suicide attempt and then posted and possibly for those who haven't begun an attempt but who have gathered what they need, Mumsnet needs to choose a policy and stick to it. All of this requires staff/vols available 24/7 with the ability to carry out the policy rapidly.

Best of luck - it's a tough one.

"I'd be inclined to trust MNHQ on what feeds trolls. They are up to date with how forums like this work, they exchange best practice with the HQs of other similar forums, they know the latest research. Facts and all that." riiight. So that's why mn is pretty much the only site where suicide note style threads are allowed to stand then? (Confused) that's why they're only now seeking guidance on this even though posters have been calling for this to be changed for years? (Hmm)

I didn't see the Wombat thread but I read the subsequent TAAT where people were frequently talking about Daisy, who I assume was a troll hunter. I just hope people don't start associating Daisy with other people with a similar user name . As I often get shortened to Daisy.

Maybe that's another reason for not having TAATs when there is a risk that facts may be read out of context.

Mary I don't think that the troll hunting/trolling refers just to that thread but is linked to that type of thread and part of a general topic which is being discussed

I think MN is unusual in the admin team engaging with posters to find out opinion before acting. They will never satisfy everyone obviously so there will always be shouts of nothing was done...

Totally agree with DingleDragon.

This thread should have been locked at 6.30pm and reinstated once HQ were back in the morning.

I think there are two different kinds of troll. The ones who thrive on shocking people and causing bunfights, in which case, yes, troll hunting will give them the attention they want so ignoring them will make them go away.

The other kind are a kind of grief troll though who make up sad stories in order to get lots of attention and sympathy. People are sucked in and share lots of personal things or become distressed or even meet with troll and are severely affected (cvq) I think these are the trolls people try to warn others about by "troll hunting" and the usual talk guidelines don't quite apply to these trolls as much as the immature fighting ones.

Mumsnetters should not be risk be rushing assessing suicidal posters..

They should be referred to an appropriate service where this can be handled by professionals.

Ambulance/police need to be involved if necessary. What if this person has children in the house? What if they are attempting suicide in a way that puts others at risk? Their dr also needs to be informed about deterioration of symptoms.

Thinking about it, it's utterly voyeuristic and pointless having live suicide threads. Kind of one of those satirical suggestions for what might happen on channel five.
This is a parenting and chat forum and there should be clear boundaries. I'm also sick of the knee jerk derailing that goes on the moment anyone posts anything controversial or unpopular and the troll hunting rules should be implemented heavily. Might stop people. Also needs to be coupled with a swift response to reports.
But some posters do seem to feel some ownership and investment in the site which is probably unhealthy/unproductive.

Already on this thread there have been two completely contrasting edicts about What One Should Say on a suicide thread.

Someone said (linking I believe to the Sams) that what one must NOT do, is guilt trip them by talking about their babies etc. Someone else said one SHOULD remind them of what they have to live for, ie their babies.

It can't be both can it?

So how the hell is the common or garden MNer going to know what the best thing to say is?

They're clearly not. Which is why the threads should go.

And to posit asking the Sams to just pop over and deal with all this shit on MN's behalf is just risible. Because they've nothing else to do, surely....

And back to the trolling, although this is starting to feel like Groundhog Day. The worst trolls are long term, well known members, Wannabe has listed just a couple of them upthread. Trolls create a history before they deliver the slam dunk.

And all these well known names who are trollhunters, as someone has said, perhaps you just start to get a feel for the bullshit after a while. It really is that simple. And in the eleventy billion threads about her since Sunday, I have seen ONE poster calling troll and that was in one of the TAATs.

I would think the ins and outs of managing to work out a system where a trained Samaritan can pop onto MN to support a poster is beyond both tech and volunteer capacities (speaking as one who manned the volunteer rota for her local Sams branch for 18 months - there are never enough volunteers!)

I would also add to Mooesy's post by saying that:

1. Samaritan's DO NOT try to stop people ending their life.
2. We attempt to give them a safe space where they can talk about their feelings and hope this gives them a way forward and hope.

3.We do not give advice.

1. We go through a stringent recruitment, selection and training process that equips us to deal with the emotions that go with, again as Mooesy states, in a worst case scenario, hearing someone die whilst they're on the phone to us.
2. We have significant support and a mandatory debrief after every shift, to allow us to manage our emotions about calls.
3. We do not have special powers to decide whether a caller is 'genuine' or 'trolling' and we have to manage every call as it is presented to us.
4. We accept that everyone has the right to self-determination, i.e. the right to decide to end their own life. This is the hardest and most important point

IMO, suicidal threads should be deleted and the Samaritans contact number PM'd to the OP and possibly as part of the deletion message.

I didnt see the original thread and feel that I have missed something big. I can see why "live" threads with people expressing suicidal feelings may be seen as "entertainment" but the very fact they have posted here suggests they are looking for help, albeit full of confusion and doubt. In my experience people who have made the final decision to end their lives rarely tell anyone.

And all the savers would do well to read and remember those 7 points Elle highlights and put their energy into that rather than slagging off the soi-disant trollhunters.

Could MNHQ answer a question about the Night Watch, please?

What time do they take over & if you see a dodgy post, be it trolling, spamming or whatever, do you press the report button on the post or do you have to go to the Night Watch thread to report it?

Thanks.

What does it matter if an OP is a troll? If people respond with honest and helpful replies then the thread will benefit others who are reading anyway. If an Op is dodgy and people are investing too much in a thread then MNHQs timely interventions of "don't invest more than you can afford to give" will be triggered by people REPORTING it rather than making snide comments on thread. I will repeat (it's late and I'm tired) it's the vigilante gangs that are a bigger problem.

No-one is defending trolls - you're setting up a straw man. Ignore if you think they are trolls -don't give them the attention - why would you feed a troll ? That's bizarre ! People who think a poster is genuine will post helpful replies, those who think its a troll will report.if enough people report MNHQ will post a reminder, if they agree that it's a troll they will pull the thread. It's a good system if people use it - the problem is I think the troll hunters actually like the drama they create by their cryptic messages and snide comments.

This ^ x 100.

There are plenty of warnings in place about over investing yourself. Why anybody is becoming friends off board is a mystery to me, nobody here can who know anybody is. MN does not operate in a vacuum, there are organisations run by properly trained people who are linked to countlessly on threads where people need support.

I can't see any reason why someone would call troll on a thread, unless it's to try to make themselves look 'in the know'. Just report it, all the "I'm calling bullshit" surely is just entertaining to a troll.

And yet another post defending trolls and slagging off those who out them.

World. Gone. Mad.

it's official.

But carry on, and don't forget to nominate Trolly McTroll for the Christmas Secret Santa! (you do all realise that's another of the reasons why half the threads in active at the moment are complete and utter bollocks, right? Please tell me you do?)

Thank you Elle and moose for taking the time to post those useful and informative posts

Yes. The amount of sad stories does indeed increase exponentially in run up to Christmas.

I do think troll hunters like to think of themselves as being in the know - they are effectively saying 'I'm so sensitive and clever that Sherlock would bow down before me'

I do not doubt that some people have great trolldar and can spot them when others can't - some those people need to park their egos and simply report their suspicions. If they continue to flaunt their disregard of site guidelines they should be banned. Every other poster who continues to CONSISTENTLY break the site guidelines gets banned - troll hunters are not a special case - and I'm getting fed up seeing them treated as a special case and defended.

From reading this thread carefully, it seems to me that the best policy is to close a thread once it is clear that a poster is threatening an imminent suicide attempt and post a link to emergency help. Partially because there does seem to be the potential to cause a ripple effect amongst those who are feeling more vulnerable themselves at that point and partially because the affect it can have if the poster is subsequently found to have committed suicide can be very profound - people often blame themselves for what they said/didn't say.

(apologies if I have muddled my affects and effects!)

The tricky part I think is knowing when to shut a thread. Bad things happen to all of us and mental health issues can affect anyone. What can be a 'I'm feeling very low' thread can slip into a 'I'm feeling so low, that I want this to end and I dont know the best way for it to end' thread. Mn can be a hugely supportive place and I dont want it to become the sort of place where we can only talk about happy things - but sad times come on a sliding scale - when do we pull the plug and say this is beyond the capability of mn to help and support?