Hey MNHQ. Would it be possible to have a discussion about how SN issues/threads are handled on the main boards.

[Pagwatch]

I know you are fire fighting a bit and I'm not trying to stir things up.

I just think that there are endless threads that require you to get involved and try to (for the sake of a better word) mediate between pissed of posters with no real experience of SN/disability and pissed off member of the SN/disability community.

I think you try really really hard to be fair and even handed. It's an understandable response but I have growing doubts about it.
There have been half a dozen threads recently where posters I recognise as living with SN/disability issues deal with a continuous stream of posts from any random who pops up on a thread making the same stupid, ill informed or frankly goady post.
It's like swimming through a tidal wave of shit.
Then, as posters get increasingly exasperated by each arriving poster saying 'well I'm not putting my buggy away if my baby is asleep' or 'why can't I use the disabled toilet if it's empty' or 'but people with SN can be violent. I know of stabbing someone and attacks all the time' they get rude and the thread descends into eurrgh.

I'm still reading constant posts where anyone affected by disability is berated if they are angry, the message being 'be nice, be grateful or we don't have to be fair'

It seems to me that the status quo of 'fairness' is simply unfair.
Posters already dealing with immense difficulty shouldn't be forced to defend themselves against every person who turns up and says unpleasant things under the umbrella of debate. You said a long time ago it was not our responsibility to educate but the reality is that, with no palpable support from you guys, we are endlessly having to educate.

I am not pretending to have the answer but is it possible to contemplate methods by which you could actually say to posters saying 'if someone in a wheelchair can't use their space because I'm not putting my buggy away' that their comments are wrong and not in the spirit of the site?

You link to the This Is My Child campaign but the posters who are the problem won't care and won't read it.

I don't know - I just wonder if you could think about this.
Sometimes there are not two sides to a debate because only one side is directly affected, exhausted, distressed and having their lives and their children's lives made harder.

There is lots of publicly preening parenting here on mn - many posts criticising other people's children's behaviour and self congratulating about how their children don't behave like that. There is also a tendency to apply adult values and decision making to all childrens behaviour and react accordingly. So a child with behaviour that isn't judged as "normal" or "good" is immediately judged as deliberately and consciously behaving badly - and suddenly everyone is giving them what for, calling the police etc. It's a very mn thing at the moment - putting people in "their place". I see lots of comments like "your child isn't special you know OP" and its worse and worse every day. It's interesting to me how many posters wept and supported the child in the "Oliver's army" troll thread because he was a brave little soldier, but when faced with a real child's behaviours, they recoil and judge. We seem to like meek, stoically brave, passive victims rather than real life behaviours that may sometimes be very raw.

But I owe an apology here - like previous posters I haven't (up to now) had direct experience of children with sen and have sighed and hidden many threads when the posters are "just" twats with no empathy. I've ignored the idiotic ones too where they post about a child they apparently barely know from school then state they know the child definitely doesn't have special needs "before the special needs brigade turn up". I've not got involved and I should do as I'm part of this community so should challenge the shitty attitudes and not leave it to those directly involved to fight every time. As posters have said clearly here, we wouldn't let racist posts stand so we shouldn't assume insidious drip, drip, drip disablist comments are just twats. I will make a stand when I see this in future.

Thefamilyvonstrop

That's a great post. I totally agree with the increase in posters congratulating themselves on their child not doing X y or z.

It's entirely possible to post 'my DC don't do that. What happens if you try and do this' -and suggesting something that worked with your child. Without the awful 'my child would never do that. You need to get a grip '

The comments about Oliver's army are too. The irony always strikes me that they weep for a child with an illness or in an accident but, a few days later they are looking at a mum with a child in a wheelchair thinking 'fuck off . I'm not taking my child out of his buggy'
Ditto war veteran, accident victims.
Once you are out on the street and not a part of their breathless heartbreaking 'we are right here op. Praying with you' they don't give a shit.

Shamless place marking.

what is that number stuff about. is itjust hoards of trolls

It appears to be new users are being assigned default usernames like this but the new registration system (not sure when it came in) is making it hard for them to change their username from the default.

It's causing a LOT of confusion and troll hunting because users are confusing users with similar numbers.

Agree the usernames eleventy million and one is not helping matters.

I've just looked at a couple of threads I've been on recently and the "three strikes and you're out" MNHQ said they have in place is definitely not being adhered to. And of course, with a couple of whole threads being deleted it's very hard to prove.

The problem is also that MNHQ always seem to be running to stand still IYSWIM. I do think they try very hard and sometime walk a difficult line but there's only so long "sorry we have been so busy so disablist posts have been up for longer than they should" can be used before people get riled, and I think we are at this point.

All this is also playing with symptoms - the problem is the disablist posters and they should be banned. They make the disablist posts, they make MN look like an unwelcoming place, they start arguments when people pull them up...

I really think MNHQ need to stop deleting whole threads as " bunfights", they need to refer to disablism rather than breaking talk guidelines on post deletions, and they need to take action against people who post disablist posts including taking away their ability to name change.

At the moment there seems to be no consequences at all for either goady fuckers or disablist arses. I know TSSDNCOP but it's clear when you see the same names popping up that have been offensive but MNers can't "prove " it when reporting as their other bloody posts are gone!

Ideally I would like to see name change banned or certainly restricted anyway ATM, and posts left up as proof (with the warning on post from MNHQ it contains disablism).

I would like to see an extra sentence in the talk guidelines clarifying what the difference between free speech and 'racist, sexist, disablist, ageist, homophobic or transphobic' is.

The following from Wikipedia excerpt touches on the sort of wording that could be used:

... intended not to offend or disadvantage any particular group of people in society.

I think the line 'Posts that are intended to offend or disadvantage any particular group of society will be removed'.

The thread linked from this thread, deleted yesterday, which was started with an OP who may well have been intentionally goady but on another day it could have been someone genuinely a bit miffed and not knowing how to handle this is typical of many of the posts we see. It can also be a good learning platform for many observers and a chance for some people to have their view tweaked (something that I'll hold my hands up to that I need sometimes too).

I have a slightly similar real life query about racism that I wouldn't post as an OP at present but in the interests of this discussion will post it here...

My DD (5) who takes a very literal understanding of things has come home from school talking about her Irish twin friends (everyone she talks to is her friend). She has Irish twin cousins i.e. their father and grandparents are Irish. These girls are neither Irish nor twins.

The term isn't one I'm familiar with so I asked her what she meant. She got herself very confused as she explained they'd told her they were and they weren't Irish or siblings or in the same academic year.

I've googled and learnt that it's a term sometimes used to describe siblings born with 12 months of each other but also could be a derogatory term.

In this instance, I believe that Irish is being used in a derogatory way and DD is now of the understanding that she's not to call people Irish twins when they're not twins or Irish!

So if I'd posted DD has come home from school talking about Irish twins anyone any clues what she's on about? which posts would be okay in a similar scenario to the original thread and which wouldn't?

If a poster said Irish twins are siblings born within 12 months of each other, then they're posting one scenario with no intention to offend.

If a poster says, twins that are Irish, again no intention to offend

If a poster says they're using Irish in a derogatory way then there's no intention to offend just inform.

If someone makes a joke of it saying well they probably are Irish twins if ... then their post is racist?

If a poster says just let it go, children say all sorts (true of course) then is letting those comments stand as acceptable or casual racism?

A lot of the casual stuff, the not so blatant on the surface, that actually disadvantages society in the same way we struggle with brigade and PC comments because without societies support we don't move forwards in acceptance.

This is the bit I think MNHQ have the biggest struggle with. This is where whole thread removal is quick but leaves no forward movement in understanding, just pain in those insulted and complacency in those (the majority) who read or joined in without fully engaging their brains and thinking through the effect of their comments.

It's funny I read quite a bit of the thread that led to the coining of the potato people term last night while ds was awake - it is a frustrating read, more so because of the calm reasoned tone of the original potato posts, many of which don't break the talk guidelines, but are just the very opposite of the idea of inclusion and equality eg "it boils down to my notion of looking after the majority. At times it makes life harder for an individual but sadly, it can't be helped. "

I think in future when there are threads like last nights, or the buggy one, or gawd knows any number of threads over the last few weeks, I might state my objection and then post - 'I am with the brigade', and if anyone wants to show solidarity to the people and families who have to put up with this sort of regular shitstorm, they too can just post, 'I am with the brigade' (in my head we will have uniforms with braid on the shoulders and a goat mascot and everything)

Thefamilyvonstrop - yes, I feel as though more and more on here there are posts like

well my child eats what is put in front them they have no choice
I wouldn't allow my child to wake that early
my child learnt to sit and eat in a restaurant from an early age with no ipads etc.

it's all very 'well you just have to teach them and if a child is fussy/has a meltdown/can't sit for 5 minutes quietly....then it must be because the parent hasn't taught them.

"it boils down to my notion of looking after the majority. At times it makes life harder for an individual but sadly, it can't be helped. "

that kind of sums it up for me.

I did just smirk at I'm with the brigade. Don't know if I've got the confidence. Funnily enough in real life I would call people out on things and intervene.

I'm losing motivation for the time being. I think expecting mnhq to change their approach is wishful thinking.

Flouncey

I'm of Irish descent and I would know what 'Irish twins' meant if it was two children close in age but not actually twins.
But if you said 'oh my daughter is friends with the Irish twins' then it would mean twins of Irish descent.

The Irish twins joke is a joke about lots of children in quick succession and being a bit stupid. [meh]
I'm not bothered because I don't give a shit about Irish humour because I'm not in anyway affected by being Irish .
More importantly I am not bothered about the ambiguous or tricky situations.
If we screen out the 90% of threads that are disablist or racist or just fucking rude dressed up as a query or scenario then I have enough energy to deal with the 10% that actually are discussion worthy.
If that makes sense.

Sadly in the ten years ive been here i have seen so many of these threads.
As with this one mn hq are pretty silent.
Do they care ? Who knows. But it seems they don't

Samcro
I have had an email from MNHQ - I assume because it's my thread - saying they are going to discuss it this week.

In spite of becoming very frustrated last night I did mean what I said earlier which is that I would rather they consider a response rather than just fire something off.

I've been here a decade too and I'm cynical too,( born of disappointment ) but I do think that MNHQ want to do the right thing. I think penis gate has left them miles behind the curve.

penis gate?

Mr dds were often called Irish twins, as they are a year apart. And my dad (who is Irish) used to call him and his brother and sister (a year apart either side) The Irish Triplets. Actually all his siblings (7 of them) were approx a year apart (my poor knackered nan!), and I always assumed the Irish twins thing was due to the Catholicism, large families, no contraception thing. It is not something I would say, because I don't know if someone would find it offensive.

I agree, Pagwatch, I hope and I think that Mumsnet, try to do the right thing, but doing the right thing has to be well thought out, in the tricksy world of Internet forums.

If you don't know, Jason, then you don't want to know.

You're probably right.

A considered response is the right way. A form of the deletion message posted yesterday would be ideal.

Ideally more explicit reasons would be given when individual posts are deleted - not just the generic "breaking talk guidelines" but something like "this post was deleted because it was disablist/goady etc" (to include racist, sexist etc too). But I accept that is probably a huge technical and resources issue - and leads to a much more heavily moderated site than MN has always been.

So I'd at least settle for much more intervention in at least deleting posts which are clearly (to us, and anyone else enlightened or just not nasty) goady, offensive, disablist cuntishness. So e.g. some of those posts which are so disingenuous but clearly bloody goady, which currently are left to stand. As well as those overtly just plain cultish ("well I'm not moving my buggy", "SN or no SN the kid just needs to learn manners" type ones).

I can see why that could potentially be a minefield for MN. But if, for example, posters here can give examples of comments which do promote or condone everyday kinds discrimination, it could give MN some sort of basic checklist - if they need it. And a much more visible awareness campaign would be useful too.

seeing that mn hq can "be funny" when they delete threads, I am sure they can manage to put delete because its disablist.

What I mean is when deleting indivisible posts rather than whole threads - don't know whether MN is geared up technically to put individual messages on each deleted post?

I know it's not the mumsnet way (and I'm not sure I want it) but you know how facebook has the like button mumsnets equivalent would be goady, offensive, disabilist, sexist etc flags all around a post so it'd light up like a Christmas tree.

Maybe a more immediate move forwards would be when we (the site users) report there could be a few more drop down options so we select a specific and if MNHQ agree or otherwise that there is a standard equivalent auto response as the deletion message.

or the easy answer.
mnhq stop saying they are busy and deal quickly with a report of disablism.
they don't need a 100 reports to read a post and see its disablist.

Maybe a more immediate move forwards would be when we (the site users) report there could be a few more drop down options so we select a specific and if MNHQ agree or otherwise that there is a standard equivalent auto response as the deletion message."

^^That sounds like a really good idea.

It's disappointing to see MNHQ haven't come back to us. I know they are busy but it does sort of give the impression that the disablism lots of us are experiencing on MN at the moment just doesn't come that high up their priority list.