Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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

is Iamwhateveryousayiam back yet?

68 replies

YouAreMyRain · 03/03/2016 11:28

Hi MNHQ,
Just wondering if the OP of this thread

Did you know that men are being given women's awards and leadership positions??
www.mumsnet.com/Talk/_chat/2581275-Did-you-know-that-men-are-being-given-womens-awards-and-leadership-positions

Is still banned, when their posts haven't been removed and no one can see any reason to ban them?

It would be awful if women's voices were being censored and silenced on the Trans debate, which is happening everywhere else, wouldn't it?

OP posts:
RiverTam · 03/03/2016 20:36

exLtdEve only MNHQ banned the OP without knowing she was a pbp. So what I want to know if, why did they ban her at the point when they did (Sunday, was it?). Because it wasn't for being a pbp at that point. And all I can see is that MNHQ are starting to get trigger happy on trans threads. Which is not a good thing for the many women who post on this site. Women are being silenced left and right on the Internet for speaking the truth. I had hoped MN was somewhere where truths such as 'a women is a biological female, therefore a transwoman is not and cannot be a woman' would be respected. Some clarity from MN on this point would be useful.

GooseberryRoolz · 03/03/2016 20:53

It is very easy for MN to check posting history against ISP addresses. I would expect that someone reported her, which led MNHQ to check ISP, which led to discovery of previous ban, which led to this ban.

We know that it wasn't that sequence of events, don't we?

exLtEveDallas · 03/03/2016 21:10

MNHQ posted on the other thread that her banning wasn't necessarily anything to do with that thread. There is every chance that the poster was a wanker on a completely different thread, that led to them checking into her, that led them into seeing she was a PBP...yada yada yada.

Nowhere has MNHQ stated that she was banned because of a trans thread. There is no reason for you to believe that she was...unless that is what she is telling you, and, well...you know that classic riposte to that.

Shutthatdoor · 03/03/2016 21:21

Nowhere has MNHQ stated that she was banned because of a trans thread. There is no reason for you to believe that she was...unless that is what she is telling you, and, well...you know that classic riposte to that.

I agree.

There seem to be a lot of assumptions going on here.

GooseberryRoolz · 03/03/2016 21:38

Eve MNHQ themselves said on this thread that;

Because the details the poster supplied us with demonstrate that she is a previously banned poster...

The details SHE HERSELF supplied when protesting the banning.

So;

a) Why are you inventing speculative series of events about ISPs being checked in response to a report?

And b) Clearly SHE HERSELF thought that the info she supplied would help her case rather than lead to an automatic ban, which suggests that any previous ban was a long time ago, she'd forgotten it, something along those lines.

Nottodaythankyouorever · 03/03/2016 21:44

which suggests that any previous ban was a long time ago, she'd forgotten it

Or maybe they were trying their luck.

exLtEveDallas · 03/03/2016 21:50

I'm not inventing anything.

People that are speculating that she was banned due to a trans thread are inventing a series of events. Nowhere does MNHQ confirm that. If they do, I'll hold my hands up, but they haven't done that.

ISPs do get checked. I report some times with a simple "PBP?" And more often than not MNHQ later confirm.

As for someone 'forgetting' they were banned - don't make me laugh. You have to seriously cross the line to get a ban. You are hardly likely to forget when you were such a wanker you got banned for it.

(Actually that's not always true. Sometimes you have to be 'too forthright' and have another poster blatently lie. Then you get banned. But trust me, you don't forget that either)

GooseberryRoolz · 03/03/2016 22:48

It is strange, isn't it, that someone would volunteer the information that would identify them as a PBP?

AdriftOnMemoryBliss · 03/03/2016 23:34

i dont get the outrage.

she was a pbp, therefore a fucking troll who shouldn't have been posting in the first place, the timeline of her ban this time is really fucking irrelevant.

Stop whining.

ThenLaterWhenItGotDark · 04/03/2016 06:12

"I'm getting all anxious now, what if mnhq know she is actually a hairy handed trucker with twentyseven accounts banned already?! And we are talking to her in our real names thnking she is just another mner. Shit "

....and we bemoan our children's naivety on the web.....sheesh.

There is no such thing as "just another MNer". This site if full of very nice mums. It's also full of lying trolls, and politico trolls and activists very much pretending to be "just another MNer" in order to reel people in to their hate agendas. Not just on the kind of thread mentioned in the OP.

As someone who used to be famed round these parts would say, trust nae fucker.

SoupDragon · 04/03/2016 06:21

But they banned her before she provided them with that information.

I imagine that what the actually did was suspend her account whilst they investigated. Then they banned her for being a PBP.

SoupDragon · 04/03/2016 06:24

Why are you inventing speculative series of events about ISPs being checked in response to a report?

I find this amusing given you then go on to invent a speculative series of events whereby the PBP forgot she was banned :)

MNHQ have always been upfront about the fact that they have many behind the scenes ways of spotting these posters, ISP addresses will be one of them. They never explain what these methods are because that would simply give the PBPs and trolls information they need to avoid detection.

SoupDragon · 04/03/2016 06:26

It seems MNHQ can't win. They get stuck for doing nothing, they get stick for doing something, stick for being too slow, stick for being too hasty...

NeedAScarfForMyGiraffe · 04/03/2016 07:33

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

NeedAScarfForMyGiraffe · 04/03/2016 07:36

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Shutthatdoor · 04/03/2016 07:37

i dont get the outrage.

Nor me.

TrojanWhore · 04/03/2016 07:49

"This site if full of very nice mums. It's also full of lying trolls, and politico trolls and activists very much pretending to be "just another MNer" in order to reel people in to their agendas".

"I don't get the outrage"

Perhaps it's because they have been reeled in?

In which case, it's not a pleasant realisation that you share a viewpoint with a banned troll. And the 'agenda' they espoused might not be all that it seems.

And those who are friends (assuming RL friends, not just referencing other cyber-contact) might be finding it shocking in other ways too.

I think that the thread should go at some point. There's no reason it needs to be kept (there are significantly more interesting threads on the whole range of topics auto-extinguishing in chat all the time); and definitely and permanently banned posters usually have all posts deleted (I remember the problem when this included a long running bereavement support thread). I hope this troll will be deleted like his/her/its predecessors.

Sarah715 · 04/03/2016 08:02

Thenlater - did you get my PM?

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread