Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

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

833 replies

RowanMumsnet · 23/10/2014 10:10

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.

OP posts:
Corestrategy · 29/10/2014 14:50

Thanks for the explanation, Rowan. I do like a hot debate no matter how controversial it is - and the more outrageous the points of view, the better ;) However, I understand your reasons for deleting that one.

BeyondPreparedForHell · 29/10/2014 16:34

All i have to say on the matter...

If troll hunting is not allowed then neither should troll-hunter-hunting be. Same rule should apply, report and wait til the next day for a response.

If someone just can't resist troll-hunter-hunting, theyre probably more alike than they like to think. Apart from the actual trolls, neither the hunters or the hunter-hunters (anyone else finding this hard to read?!) are acting out of malice, both are trying to help the situation they see developing.

emotionsecho · 29/10/2014 16:41

Just wanted to say the the latest deletion message from MNHQ regarding inconsistencies with the OP was good. Also, people on the thread drew attention to the inconsistencies without the usual flame balls of 'troll hunter' being lobbed. It was imo perfectly valid for posters to point out on thread the inconsistencies between the OP in question's two recent threads.

BeyondPreparedForHell · 29/10/2014 16:41

Oh and i agree that 'live' suicide threads should go. Support threads fine.
But i hide suicide threads, if i clicked on one unwittingly i would be very badly affected.

ScaryZ · 29/10/2014 16:52

That would definitely be the ideal (no troll hunting, no troll-hunter-hunting, no derailing the thread for an argy bargy).

There would be no need forsceptical faces or "are you new" messages if it's allowed to actually discuss things reasonably, to chat, to ask questions (no, I'm not saying that people are allowed to demand mother's maiden name and pin no) and ask the op to engage.

Though I also think YeGods has a very good point upthread.

asking for personal information which the OP doesn't want to share online can result in the OP feeling unsupported and rejected or making stuff up as a way round the obstacles being thrown at them

I've seen this mentioned on a couple of other threads recently and it never occurred to me before but I think it's a very valid point. An op starts a genuine thread, but then feels pressurised by all the "you go girl" and "have you done it/told them/left him yet?" and "why are you just sitting there doing nothing" - posts that are meant to be encouraging but may well be just too much for someone going through a shitty patch who can't just make the decision to say no/leave/whatever.

They feel backed into a corner and so make something up to just shut everyone up, and the story explodes. And then because it isn't true, it's inconsistent, and people think it's a pile of shite, whereas it may well not have started out that way.

The pressure on op's to do what they are told in difficult situations can I suspect be very great. Especially if they best way to get support is to agree to do what other posters demand.

WannaBe · 29/10/2014 17:04

"pressure on op's to do what they are told in difficult situations can I suspect be very great. Especially if they best way to get support is to agree to do what other posters demand." and I think it's fair to say that there's a lot of that that goes on on e.g. relationships. In fact there have been threads about it. I've seen posters pretty much be flamed if they don't e.g. confront/leave a cheating partner and support turn to flames if they don't do what is being suggested, even using such language as "listen to x, she knows what she is talking about/you are not listening to all the wonderful women on this thread/carry on deluding yourself." etc etc.

It's perhaps a discussion for another thread (and one which has been had in the past) but might easily explain why troll threads are so much more prevalent in those topics where there is an abundance of posters with too high a sense of their own self importance/expertise.

2shoeprintsintheblood · 29/10/2014 17:04

surely accusing someone of being a TH(I don't like the hunter in it and am bored with typing it) it is a PA and should be deleted as such.

WannaBe · 29/10/2014 17:08

"pressure on op's to do what they are told in difficult situations can I suspect be very great. Especially if they best way to get support is to agree to do what other posters demand." and I think it's fair to say that there's a lot of that that goes on on e.g. relationships. In fact there have been threads about it. I've seen posters pretty much be flamed if they don't e.g. confront/leave a cheating partner and support turn to flames if they don't do what is being suggested, even using such language as "listen to x, she knows what she is talking about/you are not listening to all the wonderful women on this thread/carry on deluding yourself." etc etc.

It's perhaps a discussion for another thread (and one which has been had in the past) but might easily explain why troll threads are so much more prevalent in those topics where there is an abundance of posters with too high a sense of their own self importance/expertees

Modestine · 29/10/2014 17:26

"I've seen posters pretty much be flamed if they don't e.g. confront/leave a cheating partner and support turn to flames if they don't do what is being suggested, even using such language as "listen to x, she knows what she is talking about/you are not listening to all the wonderful women on this thread/carry on deluding yourself." etc etc. ....more prevalent in those topics where there is an abundance of posters with too high a sense of their own self importance/expertees [sic]" - absolutely right.

BeyondPreparedForHell · 29/10/2014 17:31

Yy to all that

LittleBearPad · 29/10/2014 18:47

Agree Wannabe. You also get people posting for an update, weeks later, and then being pissy when the OP doesn't respond. It's like they think the thread's an episode of eastenders for their entertainment. Not really on topic but it pisses me off

Corestrategy · 29/10/2014 19:42

Yeah. "The OP has disappeared."

Shock horror!

Modestine · 29/10/2014 19:52

Read as: "The OP has very sensibly left her own thread, because she doesn't wanted to be hunted any more."

PacificWerewolf · 29/10/2014 19:54

Oh my, 'troll-hunter-hunters' Grin

What about 'troll-hunter-hunter-hunters'??

No, just kidding, I get your point and don't disagree.

I think though that this thread right here is going in circles a bit: some of us are more trigger-happy and more stringent deleting, others want less; some want certain things deleted but not others, etc etc.

I really think MNHQ need to be the 'parent' here, make a decision and then we all have to like it or lump it Grin

Nice as it is to be listened to (Thanks MNHQ), you'll never please ALL of us ALL of the time, so just grow a pair be brave and Tell Us How It's Going To Be

emotionsecho · 29/10/2014 20:00

Agree Wannabe & LittleBear

BiWitched · 29/10/2014 20:01

The problem, I think, is that you don't have enough people to respond to reports quickly enough. I'm surprised, Rowan, that you would say that you do. It's really obvious at the weekend, and late at night, that trolls take advantage of this. The night watch simply doesn't have the powers or doesn't react quickly enough.

I've never understood why you don't employ people in Australia/New Zealand to do the community bit during their day/our night, so that there's a good 24 hour coverage.

It's the lack of response from MNHQ which leads to so much 'welcome to Mumsnet' type of posts, IMVHO.

Modestine · 29/10/2014 20:06

Quite right, Pacific. Set the rules and stick to them. Ban those who won't.

SplatTheScaryCat · 29/10/2014 21:32

i think its ridiculous, and i have done for a long time that a forum like this relies on volunteers and has 9-5 staff..

and please dont belittle us by perpetuating the lie that you're not.. its glaringly obvious to anyone who's been here as long as some of us has that reporting at the weekends and after 5pm is a complete waste of time!

Nerf · 29/10/2014 21:44

That's,what I suggested initially to a lukewarm response Pacific and modestine but I really think it's the only solution.

Modestine · 29/10/2014 21:47

Nerf, I've been emboldened by the fact that so many MNers are saying the same thing. We all sign up to the site's Terms and Conditions, and it's reasonable to expect them to be kept to.

Nerf · 29/10/2014 23:07

I agree. I get the light moderation, bit of humour, bit of leeway ideal but I don't think it will work with so many users now, I think it will lead to confusion, Royalty accusations etc

PuddingandPie1 · 30/10/2014 08:06

I agree with Modestine "We all sign up to the site's Terms and Conditions, and it's reasonable to expect them to be kept to."

The habitual troll-hunters (and/or the Mumsnet Royalty) who ignore any and all rules when it suits them need to stop or leave the site.

PacificWerewolf · 30/10/2014 08:31

Oh, please, stop with the 'Royalty' - just because a poster has been here for a long time/is well known/has an area of 'expertise' does not make them royalty and of course they should not be treated any differently from anybody else. And IME they aren't.

MrsHathaway · 30/10/2014 09:04

MNHQ have said that they consider a poster's history when deciding if they're trolling/THing, etc. Tbh it's nearly impossible not to with familiar names (a more neutral term than royalty).And it is totally reasonable to distrust new posters if they are being very inflammatory.

If you don't think the concept of royalty/VIPs/familiar names makes a difference, I am going to assume you don't know much about the Internet and forums generally.

JustScreamNobHurts · 30/10/2014 09:24

Technically they are guidelines.

A site for grown ups shouldn't need rules to enforce grown up behaviour, like good manners and common sense.

The guidelines have always been a statement of how Mumsnet would like people to conduct themselves on the site.

And no, it doesn't MATTER who the poster is, it's the content that is usually what offends. Rowan and others have REPEATEDLY said they look at posting HISTORY, not WHO the poster is to try and establish matters before deciding whether to delete.