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.

I think the big difference between MN and other forums I have used is the subject matter. There is a constant stream of sensitive topics on here meaning handling deletion of troll hunting and trolling is massively important. I can appreciate your last post saying that you have to wait and watch sometimes but maybe there should be a mail to the reporter saying that?

I have reported threads and also waited several hours for a response (sometimes next day). The response has then been such, that the damage has been done (delay) and the troll hunting was quoted anyway in following posts (those were not deleted) so a vulnerable poster had to face seeing her life described as a pack of lies and disbelief. It felt a little like the opposite of we believe you and was ugly to witness. She was not found to be a troll. It was horrible to see someone needing support have her life laughed at, just because some posters couldn't imagine the mess she found herself in.

I'd really like a 'this one is cut and dried' button. Some stuff is quite obviously PA or troll hunting. A simple quick delete would nip a bun fight in the bud sooner.

IMO people sneeringly described as MN Royalty or regulars get a far harder time on here both by MNHQ and other posters.

I do think a system of 'lock and hide whilst investigating' would help it might mitigate a little what FrontForward has described in her second paragraph.

No worries
My times are an hour different to yours rowan, i guess thats cause of the clock change. But yep, that does all match up :)

I wonder if it would be handy to be emailed a copy of any of your own reports? So people know when they did report something, before they start moaning about it taking yeeeeears for hq to respond

Do people really worry about getting a reply from MNHQ? I don't, I'm really not bothered and think it must be a massive waste of their time. If I report someone breaking guidelines then I reckon I've done my community-minded bit and I forget about it.

Maybe there could be an option to tick a box that says whether a response is wanted or not? I can't imagine many people would rather MNHQ spend their time replying to reports than investigating them.... or am I just weird?

Technically they are guidelines.

You reminded me of this would make a lovely banner for the MN rules page imho

I quite like being told by MNHQ whether or not a suspicion/hunch I had was correct or not, particularly if I reported a thread I had not posted on. Needy, moi?!

Re 'royalty': I've hung out in the wilds of t'interweb enough that that concept does exist on many sites and forums, and there are posters here I recognise (and love or loathe, depending ). I will gladly consider advice on home improvement given by PigletJohn (I mention him by name because I consider him universally uncontroversial, lovely guy) even though he could of course be a nail technician from Milton Keynes for all I know. I would NOT take make-up tips from him though… Is he 'royalty'?
I don't think so. But I'd take his word over somebody else's on certain subjects.

I don't think that MN is particularly 'guilty' of making special allowances for longstanding members. But maybe I am not on here enough to see discrimination, positive and negative, happening… My children would be even more feral than they are if I spent even more time on MN than I do

another good point imo, Dinglethdragon. I'd ratehr MNHQ spent their time making the site a happier place to be than endlessly answering emails, or indeed time-wasting threads in Site Stuff. Although I concede that they're not all time-wasting.

Pacific, doesn't what happens to the thread or post, or whatever you've reported, tell you whether you were right or not, though?

Re Royalty, there were posters who were long standing members before I joined in 2005, whose names I had been seeing since I first started lurking several years before. They were almost royalty to me, and they treated each other as long-standing friends as indeed they were. I can't say I've ever noticed MNHQ treating anyone differently, and there are far too many of us now for any putative clique to have a great deal of influence on anyone but each other (and that's pretty normal for friends, isn't it?). The only time I've seen someone expecting special treatment simply because they'd been around for so long was a long time ago, and was what set off the mouldy stuff.

We are all just the same as musicians and actors, only as good as our last post performance. Or do I mean performance post?

Jux, I don't tend to 'watch' threads - I either post on them, then they are on TIO, or I report (say, for advertising) and forgeddabawdit. Sometimes I report OPs that sound really ludicrous, particularly if posted by a first-time poster called 'sharleen1988' without posting because I don't want to 'feed' the thread if it does turn out to be nonsense.
Out of sheer nosiness I'd like to know whether I was right. Or wrong: in which case I may wish to regale the thread with my immense wisdom

I agree though that MNHQ's time might be better spent than satisfying my idle curiosity…

Yy to us only being as 'good' as our last performance post

Moldiegate happened just after I had joined and I was most bemused how het up it all got

I've ploughed through this, I agree with PacificWerewolf's post that MNHQ can't please everybody all the time, can't cover every single eventuality and there are limits. Some of us troll-hunt despite being told not to , some of us like to feed the trolls despite it being the single most thick-witted thing to do and some of us just aren't great with following simple instructions .

I'd personally like the posters who change names just to be abusive to be named under their usual id when they do it... that would stop them in their tracks.

MNHQ own this site and have the right to say how it will be. Some non-breakable rules with any sanctions clearly communicated is probably the way to go.

I have a quick comment about suicide though, MNHQ... I used to post on an ebay forum and it seemed par for the course there that if somebody would start a thread and say that they were thinking of committing suicide, then posters would report and a 'pink' (mod) would pop onto the thread to say that the OP's details were being passed to the relevant authorities. It was standard operating practice, I believe and in several years of posting there, I don't think there were very many threats because people didn't want a visit from the police/ambulance service. As posters have to sign in with proper and verified details, there is culpability/responsibility for the posters to not abuse the forum.

I don't know how that would work here, MNHQ, but when I think of Wombat and what would have happened had her husband not been in time to find her, it's horrible. I agree with PumpkinMammaries that it shouldn't be the responsibility of posters to talk somebody down from suicidal intent.

Thanks for continuing to run a free site for us all, btw...

Yes, more thanks. We love it.

Completely agree with LyingWitchInTheWardrobe, I really don't understand all this talk of locking a thread and linking to the Samaritans, not when an Ambulance is what is required. Require all members to verify their details, and if a thread like that pops up the emergency services will deal with it.

Personally, I think that lying has been on the gin again...

And when the emergency services arrive at the (fictitious) address set up by Trolly McTroll?

Who pays for the unnecessary call out? HQ?

You might as well have a ticker tape running along the top of Active saying "Suicide Trolls, this way for a larf".

And, as has been said on a million other posts on this thread, even the Samaritans don't intervene with a bluelight if the person wants out. So how can HQ make that moral decision?

They can't. And mustn't.

What Sangria said

Christ it's all getting a tad grandiose on here.

Sangria... I think that's really relevant. I said that I didn't know if it would work - it does on ebay because it's linked with paypal and that is verifiable. Addresses cannot be bogus.

daisychain, I might be interested in something you post if it's not your sum contribution just to insult me. I'm teetotal, pick something more amusing perhaps?

Lying I think *daisychain was referring to the error in the last line of your last post.

Well pesonaly I think the Samaritans are wrong on that count, they should alert emergency services. Perhaps it's because I'm a trained St John first aider, and I'm thinking in terms of consent, capacity and risk to life and limb.

In my mind a trained professional should be deciding if somone has cpapcity to refuse help, not a volunteer on the end of the phone who has no knowledge of the persons health!

"I hate the regulars who keep there same name for years for notoriety"

Lovely.

If I hated "I hate the namechangers, they are all trolls" or "I hate all newbies, who do they think they are" I would be deleted and warned if not banned.

But attacks on regulars, calling them names, accusing them of all sorts - wanting notoriety, expecting special treatment, bullying, whatever, that's ok?

Just lovely.

Sorry that should say "if I posted" not "if I hated", though I'm considering hating too

So saying 'I hate the regulars who keep their same names for years' is ok is it.

You hate me do you?

Photo that's an absurd thing to hate. Plus I don't think people who don't namechange do it for the notoriety. I don't. Partly I can't be arsed, partly I'd pretty much say what I say on Mumsnet in real life.