Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

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

Mumsnet moderation policy

543 replies

JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 15:59

If you've visited Site Stuff in recent times you'll know there's been a fair bit of grousing about our moderation policy. There have been lot of calls from the SN boards in particular but elsewhere too for us to delete many more posts than we are doing at the moment. Equally some on the feminism boards have been particularly angered by the position we've adopted around transphobia.

Those of you who have been around for a bit will also know that some of these debates have been going on a long time.

Mumsnet has always believed - been founded upon - the idea that civilised debate is a broadly positive thing. That we can disagree but agree that people have a right to different opinions. That freedom of speech is in general good and that we'd rather let the conversation flow than censor it. That exposing ourselves to the widest range of arguments and opinions is generally healthier than banishing the ones we don’t like.

Increasingly you'll find that other places on the web will filter out views and information you might not like automatically - Facebook and Google both do this based on the data they have about you (which is a lot). Just take a look at the debate raging in the US right now over whether this kind of tailoring of news – some call it the “filter bubble” effect – was to blame for the election of Donald Trump. Whatever you think of Facebook’s role in sending Trump to the White House, it’s unarguably becoming increasingly hard to watch or read something that hasn't been selected for you.

We've chosen to be public, un-paywalled and welcoming to newbies with different opinions. That means from time to time we may be confronted by views that we think are outlandish and even noxious. Of course - given we're called Mumsnet - we're always going to be a space dominated by women but the only qualification we require of our users is a basic level of civility.

This doesn't mean that it's a complete free for all. Of course we do and will continue to remove posts that break our rules – for instance personal attacks and those that break the law or promote hate. But there are always going to be posts which fall into a grey area - posts that cause offence without intention, perhaps by using words in common use that some believe should be disallowed like “moron” or “idiot”. And our inclination here is to err on the side of free speech rather than censorship.

Many Mumsnetters have told us they've had their minds broadened by posts they've seen on Mumsnet and have become more tolerant and understanding as a result. We do understand it can be frustrating being told that we'd rather host a debate about why something was offensive so folks might change their mind, than delete it. We're mindful of the fact that many of our users are exhausted and often in impossibly difficult situations and would much rather people just understood or piped down - that we just deleted those comments which upset them or banned those who made them. But rightly or wrongly, that's not the Mumsnet we've chosen to be. We've chosen to be open and welcoming to new people and challenging different opinions. We've chosen to be a broad church not a narrow one.

At a time when the rise of intersectional politics often seems to be squeezing the space for public debate, when no-platforming has entered the everyday vocabulary of university campuses and social media reverberates daily to howls of outrage over some linguistic transgression or other, this seems more important than ever.

No-one is pretending that any of this stuff is easy. Rights only really mean anything when they are difficult to protect. And in the case of many of these arguments, we have deep instinctive sympathy with users calling for us to delete posts or ban certain words. We understand how anxious many who’ve battled for women’s rights feel. We understand that language plays an important part in making them feel marginalised and vulnerable. And many of us who have for years read the stirring and humbling posts on the SN boards will instinctively wish to defend parents who feel the casual, thoughtless language used by other posters is making their already hard lives harder still. We would go to the barricades with them in many ways, but not at the expense of a principle which makes Mumsnet what it is.

I think all this is worth stating because, frankly, the aggressive attitude of some Mumsnetters towards the community team in particular needs to stop. It's becoming demoralising and almost impossible to do the job. You couldn't actually hope to meet a nicer, more patient, diligent and selfless crew than the MN community team. Day in day out they do their level best to be fair, decent and consistent. Of course we get things wrong and don't always word things right - who doesn't? - and I know the majority of users know this and I'm really grateful for your support and kind words. The one thing I'm certain of, though, is that decent moderation is a big reason why Mumsnet has thrived and grown over the years.

But there are some users who, from what I've seen, are relentlessly denigrating the team in a way that can really only be described as aggressive heckling. Some of the attacks have been personal and downright nasty. In recent weeks members of the community team have been called ignorant, stupid, rude and not giving a shiny shite. The disabled members of our team have been described as tokens. I personally have been called sneering, supercilious, classist, venal and a hypocrite who’s drowning in the Kool-Aid amongst other things. (Let’s not get into a debate over whether that’s fair…)

The last thing we're saying is that we don't want feedback - we value it hugely, and we will always hold up our hands if we've messed up. (Incidentally almost none of the above critical posts have been deleted.) But, to be frank, if Mumsnet makes you that angry then maybe it's time to accept that it isn't the site for you - you probably need to acknowledge that we simply aren't and never will moderate the way you want us to. After all, we're here to make parents' lives easier and if the way we moderate raising your blood pressure on a daily basis - so much that you're calling the moderators “cunts” - then with the greatest respect I think you need to take a break.

In an increasingly polarised world of trigger warnings and safe spaces, preserving Mumsnet as a place that can host the widest debate in the most civilised fashion seems more important than ever. You’ll have to forgive me if this sounds pompous but this really is about freedom. As so often George Orwell put it best: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”

OP posts:
StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:30

small minded? fwiw worth there's a whole other world on the internet to be inhabited. So to focus on the finer filigree of a moderation policy, where a myriad of opinion and expression of those things are allowed and need mediating, to allege that that means 'fuck off' is pretty thin skinned. imo

To the point where, 'if you are such a snowflake then maybe MN isn't for you.' As I recall that happens quite a lot.

YonicProbe · 13/11/2016 20:33

Mmm hmm.

And your phrase coming across as basil has described was a complete accident?

Alrighty then.

SoupDragon · 13/11/2016 20:34

"And the fact that one or two seemed unable to grasp the implicit "fuck off from my site" in her words seems unbelievable".

Have one or two people not grasped that? Really? It was so clear that I don't think it could be missed.

Maybe, just maybe, people have a different interpretation to you. Wacky thought I know. People have different opinions! Who'd have thought?!

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:35

Basil - no I don't use any pa. I appreciate the FWR and have done over the years, even before it was FWR. Often used items and discussions to challenge stuff which I've learned from there in RL. Lots of times, in ways I am sure you would condone and agree with.
'we see you' - fairly creepy tbh.

BeyondReasonablyDoubts · 13/11/2016 20:38

That's just how you would interpret it though yonic....
We're only going to go round in circles trying to engage.

AskBasil · 13/11/2016 20:39

I know some people will interpret it differently from me Soupdragon and some people clearly interpret it the same as I have.

Pan, LOL at you calling me creepy. Projection I think that's called.

YonicProbe · 13/11/2016 20:41

Yup. Shall we talk about the weather again? Who went out in the cold to look at the supermoon?

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:44

I'm pretty sure just by the unsubstantiated 'Pan attacks FWR regulars so ignore anything he says as it's of no value' is an evidence of the thin-skinned view of Basil.
It's fairly tedious and not something is going to make any difference to a moderation policy so I'm demuring.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:46

Focus Basil - I said 'we see you' is creepy. Not 'you'. You see? Thin skinned?

BeyondReasonablyDoubts · 13/11/2016 20:46

I've been in bed since four yonic, is it worth getting up to look at? Or does it just look like the same old moon Grin

AskBasil · 13/11/2016 20:51

No Pan, I just know you of old.

AlchemySchmidtsSmile · 13/11/2016 20:53

We see you is creepy.

AlchemySchmidtsSmile · 13/11/2016 20:55

Like that sixth sense kid.

AlchemySchmidtsSmile · 13/11/2016 20:56

Demi Moore used it as well to Ashton Kutcher.
I see you.
With a picture of a big eye. Very illuminati.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:57

oh the last refuge of the desperate. 'I know you of old'. FFS.
I know you are worth more than that.
If it entertains you then produce some evidence? Though I know it doesn't exist. It appears you would rather slur. Which is the sign of the arrogant/lazy and thin-skinned, in some circs.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 20:59

we see you - it sort of evokes images of disembodied eyeballs a la cartoon scenario. Creepy but popular.

YonicProbe · 13/11/2016 21:01

Pan.

It was a personal attack.

Own it, man!

YonicProbe · 13/11/2016 21:01

In other news, what about that supermoon, hmm?

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 21:05

Personal Attack? Yonic? Basil was simply regurgitating a previously expressed view. Nothing personal. Often I like Basil's writings and perspectives. But dissent to anything seems heretical. As in 'the one faith'.
Spanish Inquisition style.

YonicProbe · 13/11/2016 21:07

The personal attack where you called her small minded. That one.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 21:07

I'll pop off. this isn't doing the thread any good. Though...the moon tomorrow will be fab.

AskBasil · 13/11/2016 21:08

LOL you've mistaken me for someone who is remotely interested in anything you've got to say whatsoever Pan.

Alchemy the #weseeyou thing is a specific expression, meaning "we can see what you're up to" sort of thing - used in all sorts of situations, I've seen it used a lot to describe creepy anti-feminist stuff, also sometimes I've seen it used to describe anti Semitic stuff disguised as pro Palestinian, that sort of hiding but visible IYSWIM.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 21:09

ffs - it wasn't personal - it was a criticism of the regurgitated view. Re-read if you wish, or not.

StrictlyPan · 13/11/2016 21:10

Well stop responding to me then Basil.

TiggyD · 13/11/2016 21:12

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

Swipe left for the next trending thread