Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Site stuff

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

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Flip

1 2

Original poster

Is there a reason why HQ only contact us via email?

26 replies

WorraLiberty · 13/08/2015 23:37

I'm just wondering why if we report posts, we get a reply to our email addresses, rather than our inboxes here on MN?

Wouldn't it be much easier if you could reply here?

I never remember to log into my email that I use for Mumsnet, so when I eventually do, I often come across replies to my reports that are 'outdated' by the time I read them.

Is there a reason why this is not possible?

What does everyone else think. Would you find it easier if HQ replied here in your inbox, or do you check your email accounts regularly anyway?

OP posts:

EatShitDerek · 13/08/2015 23:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LettuceLaughton · 13/08/2015 23:39

It does seem a bit odd! Probably just a hangover from CAT, most posters didn;t have that.

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 13/08/2015 23:42

Oh can you refresh my memory about CAT?

I think I learned what it was once and then instantly forgot

I probably spotted a shiny object and got distracted

OP posts:

LettuceLaughton · 13/08/2015 23:45

It was, I think, Contact A Talker. Possibly. Cost a fiver a year or some such. You were here then, surely?

Gruach · 13/08/2015 23:50

I thought the point was that no one else on MN knows your email (unless you've given it to them) so you can be certain that an email from MNHQ is genuine.

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 13/08/2015 23:56

Oh thanks Lettuce. No, I've only been here about 4 years...so I'm a mere MN virgin

Gruach I don't know. I've been on other forums where the moderators contact your inbox. It seems the easiest and quickest way to contact a member.

OP posts:

cozietoesie · 14/08/2015 00:13

I'd prefer messages in the Inbox. There seem to be a good many MumsNetters who don't go to their registered email as a matter of regularity and who might miss a perhaps time-sensitive message for that reason.

(It's a doubler as well because if you do get an Inbox message, there's an alert to your registered email to advise you of that fact so if you have an email you do actually use regularly, you're reminded to log in to MN to view the message itself.)

DarkEvilMoon · 14/08/2015 00:15

I prefer the email. Like Gruach said it can be certain that it is definitely HQ.

But also it is not dependant on who is on duty, where as pms would be. For example: I have contacted HQ, got a response from 1 HQer, replied and then got a follow up response from a different HQer. Which would be more difficult to manage as each HQer has their own posting ID and thus pm inbox and thus there could be a longer wait/things being missed. I know to check my email for emails from HQ so I do so if I want feed back on a report, even if I wouldn't have done otherwise.

DarkEvilMoon · 14/08/2015 00:16

I prefer the email. Like Gruach said it can be certain that it is definitely HQ.

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 14/08/2015 00:21

I get what you mean, but if I reported a post and got an inbox back from HQ, with a copy of the reported post saying, "Hi Worra, thanks for bringing this post to our attention...blah blah blah", it would have to be from HQ surely?

Because who else would have access to the reported post in my inbox?

OP posts:

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 14/08/2015 00:30

And actually, come to think of it...

There has been a bit of a hoo-haa (have I spelt that right??) in the past where posters have been suspended/banned from MN.

MNHQ have said that they've given them warnings first, but if they haven't been told to check, how would they know?

If someone is mid argument conversation and their inbox lights up, telling them to calm down or they'll get suspended/banned, surely that's the best way of warning them?

If you don't use you regular email address (and given the various hackings, who would?) then you're not going to see the warning until it's too late, probably?

OP posts:

DarkEvilMoon · 14/08/2015 01:10

But deletions and banned is often done in hindsight and having reviewed the information. only very obvious trolls tend to get banned straight away. So if those decisions are being made after the event than the inbox would not really be received when it would prevent further discretions anyway. And thus sending it to the inbox and not email would be pointless as it would not be received.

MrsHathaway · 14/08/2015 07:42

I don't like the emails. I object to being addressed by my screen name in email, when MNHQ has my real name. I mostly MN from my phone which doesn't receive emails anyway.

I think inbox would be better, because it would send an email notification anyway.

Egosumquisum · 14/08/2015 09:07

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TantrumsAndBalloons · 14/08/2015 09:10

I use a seperate email for MN than my day to day email.
I do check it but not regularly so yeah I agree, an inbox message would be easier to keep an eye on.

MNHQ

RebeccaMumsnet · 14/08/2015 10:09

Hi all,

Thanks for the feedback.

Here at MNHQ we get around 2,500 emails and reports a week and we have a large team who work in the office and from home. The best way to manage a large volume of mails and reports is via a mailing system, which is what we have.

The MN inbox, is good for what it does but would not be suitable, without considerable Tech work, to deal with that volume of communication (just ask the Woolly Huggers about the search function )

There is also the added complication about having lots of people working shifts and PMs falling through the cracks.

It is certainly something we can have a think about but at this time, a proper mailing system is the best way for us to make sure we are as responsive as possible.

Hope that helps to clarify?

cozietoesie · 14/08/2015 10:19

So you're not closed off to the idea, Rebecca? I think it could be good for certain functions at least - and if occasionally utilised, there likely wouldn't be a spate of 'Help - I got an Inbox message from MNHQ, is it genuine?' threads.

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 14/08/2015 11:16

Ahh ok thanks Rebecca.

I just got a pang of guilt yesterday when I received a chatty reply, date last week. I felt like I was being ignorant

OP posts:

Original poster

WorraLiberty · 14/08/2015 11:16

*dated

I'm not dating anyone from MNHQ!

OP posts:

cozietoesie · 14/08/2015 11:33

MNHQ

TheOnlyOliviaMumsnet · 14/08/2015 13:12

@WorraLiberty

Ahh ok thanks Rebecca.

I just got a pang of guilt yesterday when I received a chatty reply, date last week. I felt like I was being ignorant

It's all good - sometimes we are feeling chatty, sometimes when it's a bit fecking trolly, less so

bumbleymummy · 14/08/2015 18:59

Worra (and others) I completely agree that certain posts from MNHQ should go to Inbox eg warnings to calm down/step away - although they can be inconsistent about that as well! I have actually suggested this before but had been given the reason about PMs potentially falling through the cracks reason as to why it wouldn't work.

I'm glad that it's something other people have noticed and that MNHQ will consider it.

ViewFromThe4thFloor · 14/08/2015 23:56

I prefer it by email too Dark.

usualsuspect333 · 15/08/2015 00:00

I forget to check the email I use for MN.

I could a MN calling telling off and not know for weeks.

usualsuspect333 · 15/08/2015 00:01

YY, a PM from Olivia saying 'step away from the thread usual' would work

Flip

1 2

Swipe left for the next trending thread