Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

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:
Devilishpyjamas · 14/11/2016 13:57

Tbh ginger it's fine on a personal level. I read mumsnet a few times a week bit rarely bother to post - because as Justine has identified it's no longer the site for me.

I think it's a shame that the disabled 'stuff' has gone so wrong though. It used to be very forward thinking & a positive place to discuss issues around being the parent of a disabled child. I used to recommend it to newly dx parents. Lets just say I don't anymore.

It's up to MNHQ to decide whether that matters or not. (Presumably not).

Devilishpyjamas · 14/11/2016 14:00

I don't think support is on the agenda bishop Sad There must be better places to look for it (I use FB tbh - mixture of RL and virtual friends- quite a SN crew).

GingerIvy · 14/11/2016 14:01

Devilish - this is when I'd like a "like" button. I feel the same way.

BishopBrennansArse · 14/11/2016 14:05

Me too Devilish, most of my FB friends are either disabled or parents of disabled children.

MephistophelesApprentice · 14/11/2016 14:09

Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.

From Yeats, The Second Coming

Owllady · 14/11/2016 15:43

I agree with everything out have said devilish. I think it's incredibly lazy to tie in the two issues of disablism and transphobia together too :o wtf!

If I need support I'll email you Wink I'll need to tonight with this moon.

NoSunNoMoon · 14/11/2016 15:45

I've been here for a few years and the only time I have ever see "SN Brigade" used is when someone is complaining about people saying it.

But nobody does. The only people using that expression are people who think it is applied to them by others.

GingerIvy · 14/11/2016 15:52

NoSun - going back a bit, it was used a lot. The people that used to call us that now use other tactics instead, as the phrase "SN Brigade" was recognised as harassment and an attempt to silence any discussion of SNs on the main boards. Believe me - it was an issue.

TheCompanyOfCats · 14/11/2016 16:03

Excellent post.

I was getting a bit sick of being language-policed, or watching others be language-policed over vocabulary that is even routinely used by those fighting the good fight for diversity (Channel Four News and The Guardian, for example). It was getting a bit much.

If you carry on down that path you police each other into bland oblivion. We must be respectful of each other but that respect also means respecting (within reason) free speech.

BishopBrennansArse · 14/11/2016 16:10

Very odd because it was being used as a derogatory term around about 18 months ago, especially towards a poster who isn't here any more.

It was used, copiously, and rarely deleted. Generally it went when the entire thread got derailed by the goady contingent.

I don't appreciate denial of a very definite trend that certainly did exist. Whilst it's no longer acceptable here thankfully the fact it once was rankles just as much as the 'need to educate' that has also been considered ok in the past. So if there's inaction then yes it will be raised.

Are those in favour of stopping language policing in favour of it generally - i.e. In reference to misogyny, xenophobia etc or just on the grounds of disability?

PolterGoose · 14/11/2016 16:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

BishopBrennansArse · 14/11/2016 16:12

Oh and fwiw there are terms that other groups object to here that might not have occurred to me were offensive but once I know they are I am mindful of trying not to use them.

Owllady · 14/11/2016 16:13

The language police and the sn brigade, sounds like the making of a cbeebies series. Is it set in transphobia?

BishopBrennansArse · 14/11/2016 16:14

Either that Owl or Trumpton.

OlennasWimple · 14/11/2016 16:19

i've only seen "SN Brigade" used in a disparaging / derogatory way, as in "I wondered how long it would take for the SN brigade to turn up"

MorrisZapp · 14/11/2016 16:20

I can't think of a single sexist word or phrase that is ban worthy.

Slag. Slut. Harridan. Homewrecker. Old witch. Silly little girl. Gold digger. Kept woman. Bitch.

Are all used freely on here. I have occasionally reported for the worst stuff on OW threads and been told no, that's not ban worthy.

The equivalent hateful words regarding disability are not considered acceptable. The phrases you object to are the insidious ones that take some explanation. I've said before that I think it's pointless trying to prove that these are beyond the pale on a forum where slapper is not ban worthy.

BishopBrennansArse · 14/11/2016 16:26

I don't think anyone's calling for bans though, Morris. Unless it's repeated and deliberate goading. It's more deletions.

FWIW without wishing to patronise I have moderated my own speech due to learning on here some insidiously sexist terms that perhaps hadn't occurred to me. Those you list shouldn't be allowed to stand imo.

ErrolTheDragon · 14/11/2016 16:28

Two wrongs don't make a right... and I'm pretty sure there are some racist terms which would be liable to lead to a ban (and certainly deletion).

MorrisZapp · 14/11/2016 16:36

Lots of racist words would lead to deletion or banning. I don't need to say what they are.

Likewise, lots of disablist words would lead to deletion or banning.

I cant think of any sexist words that would get deleted, including cunt, whore etc unless used in a personal attack.

I'm aware two wrongs don't make a right but I've been asked by brennan many times if I'm OK with sexist language seeing as I'm ok with disablist language.

The answer is no I'm not OK with sexist language but I don't expect deletions or bans for it.

The phrases in question (disablism) are insidious. You can't delete and ban, it doesn't work no matter what ism you apply.

Bejazzled · 14/11/2016 16:57

I agree with both these posts by pps.
That particular phrase was used a while back but now it isn't, although it is referred to a lot as if it is.

I've been here for a few years and the only time I have ever see "SN Brigade" used is when someone is complaining about people saying it.
But nobody does. The only people using that expression are people who think it is applied to them by others.

And

Oh and fwiw there are terms that other groups object to here that might not have occurred to me were offensive but once I know they are I am mindful of trying not to use them.

PolterGoose · 14/11/2016 16:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Bejazzled · 14/11/2016 16:58

Bold fail ^

BeyondReasonablyDoubts · 14/11/2016 17:08

There is a slight issue though in that a lot of those who are anti racist, sexist etc are the ones who appear to be leaving in droves. So something is going wrong.

Devilishpyjamas · 14/11/2016 17:10

'SN brigade' was used a lot in a perjorative way - pretty much anytime someone suggested a subtlety. It's a large part of why I stopped bothering to post on SN issues a few years ago. Great if it's no longer being used although my dalliances with occasional SN threads suggest the concept is still very much alive and kicking.

BeyondReasonablyDoubts · 14/11/2016 17:14

It is very much implied now, even when it isn't used.