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

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:
MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 11/11/2016 18:10

I agree. I have always found MNHQ to be very fair and when they have made a mistake they hold their hands up. Sometimes it's not been as quick as it should have been but they get there in the end and they do listen.

I do think there are some boards where you get viciously attacked if you try to post outside of the party line and that's not on. Nobody owns a board except Justine and her fellow shareholders who own EVERYTHING and posters who have a tantrum because people see things differently doesn't help anyone see their point of view any better.

I don't want things to be over moderated. I do want to be able to post things without people looking for the backstory, arguing for the sake of argument and general twattery. But I would rather things were dealt with on the boards like adults where possible. I think some of us who have been here long enough when you could tell someone to stop being a twat (oh those were the days!) should stand up more and say it... and MNHQ shouldn't delete it.

I reserve the right to call someone out on their dickish behaviour. I have no right to call them a dick even when they are and I have no right to stalk about the boards being a dick and expecting to have my sensibilities placed in a higher regard than everyone else.

Sometimes I forget that and it's fine to tell me to stop being a dick. I'll tell you if I disagree and why!

PurpleDaisies · 11/11/2016 18:10

we'll all just have to hunker down and post innocuous threads about Tupperware or something

I love Tupperware. Maybe we could campaign for a new board.
Why do you always end up with more lids than boxes though? Where to they go? Grin

JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 18:11

@Amalfimamma

Justine

think there's a generally accepted definition of transphobia, Miranda - intense dislike of or prejudice against transsexual or transgender people.

Tbh i don't think I've seen this on the trans threads and I've been present on most if not all since August.

What I do see are the usual suspects coming in, throwing out words like transphobia, bigot and the such and when asked to point out exactly was transphobic they flounce.

Calling a misogynist by such a name after they have threatened, insulted and derided women, and especially mumsnet posters is the truth and not half as big an insult as needed in this case. I do not agree with PA against the MN team though. Or other posters. But PA don't get my goat nearly half as much as the constant troll hunting that is all to frequent on all sections.

I think I've seen a bit tbh Amalfimamma but we can obviously agree to disagree on that. And we'd agree that troll hunting is a problem too and certainly not confined to one area of the site. We do try to discourage it.

OP posts:
Didijustgetwinkpointshitcanned · 11/11/2016 18:11

I thought Justine said it wasn't accusing PL of being a misogynist that got stuff deleted. It was the blatant "he" "him" "that man" type stuff. It's transphobic to use the opposite pronoun to the one preferred in an attempt to attack someone.

BitOutOfPractice · 11/11/2016 18:11

No. I agree. I don't think they should have to put up with that shit. But you're in difficult ground when you have a draconian policy for yourselves in the interests of protecting your team and a liberal one for all other posts in the interests of "debate"

I realise it's difficult. And it leaves you wide open for criticism

FWIW I think your policy on the transphobia issue needs a massive rethink. I think you are out of kilter with the majority of your members on an important issue for women

VincentVL · 11/11/2016 18:11

Justine - you implied more than once that posters objected to your guest because they are transphobic, while refusing to acknowledge the very serious problems that we actually have with them.

You were asked to clarify what the rules are on personal attacks because previously the rule has been described as not applying to public figures who are not posting on Mumsnet. You said that it also applied to your Blogfest guests. Posters pointed out that personal comments made about other Blogfest guests werent being deleted elsewhere on Mumsnet and you ignored the inconsistency.

Also, the "personal attacks" deleted included using the word "he" to describe a male person, and using the word "misogynist" for the same person. But you described their calling women bitches etc as (paraphrase) 'something they did in the past and might regret' when there is no evidence of regret and abundant evidence they are still using their platform to insult women (generally and individually).

Women are asking you for consistency and respect and youre treating them (us) like plebs.

JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 18:13

@Xenophile

On the whole though, MN's moderation policy is reasonable and fair. It just seems to have gone a wee bit haywire over the last couple of weeks. No doubt sanity will return at some point, and until then, we'll all just have to hunker down and post innocuous threads about Tupperware or something Grin

That could well be cos I've got a wee bit more involved Xeno Smile

OP posts:
VincentVL · 11/11/2016 18:14

FWIW I think your policy on the transphobia issue needs a massive rethink. I think you are out of kilter with the majority of your members on an important issue for women
I agree.

BitOutOfPractice · 11/11/2016 18:15

I agree Vince. It seemed like being a blog guest made them above the law and immune to usual site policy and etiquette

Didijustgetwinkpointshitcanned · 11/11/2016 18:15

I disagree. There'll be plenty of users that don't engage on trans related threads because they'll be picked at and picked at until they hide the thread. The ones who speak loudest and most often don't necessarily represent the majority.

WannaBe · 11/11/2016 18:15

Agree entirely, and also that MN has become far, far more aggressive than it ever was, and I have been here for eleven years.

TBH, a few years ago I posted a thread in site stuff stating that certain boards were particularly unpleasant places to post, and that if users got to a point where they felt they would never post in those sections then perhaps something ought to be done about them. At the time I was referring to the doghouse, where one poster in particular gave the whole board a bad name. Subsequent to her being banned, although the doghouse is a somewhat robust part of the site, it is a much better place than it was. But now I see the feminist boards as that place, where most people would never post on because of the sheer amount of aggression and the constant attacks on anyone who disagrees with anything that goes against what they believe. IMO if personal attacks on the HQ team are that rife there, and attacks on other MN posters are as well, then perhaps there is a case to remove not just posts and threads, but entire boards if they have become that unpleasant.

I do think that attacks on staff members are completely unwarranted. But I also think that calling someone a cunt shows a distinct lack of ability to formulate an inteligent response. It always makes me Grin somewhat when I read posts from people who attack others. Recently I made a comment on the uber judgement thread about how I thought that we were decades away from having self driving cars, and a poster replied along the lines of "wannabe where did you get your crystal ball since you can obviously see into the future?" I just thought that their snippy response showed them up as a bit of a twat really. Grin.

MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 11/11/2016 18:17

majority of your members or a majority of vocal members.

I suspect therein lies the rub.

NerrSnerr · 11/11/2016 18:18

'FWIW I think your policy on the transphobia issue needs a massive rethink. I think you are out of kilter with the majority of your members on an important issue for women'

I don't agree with this. When anyone with a different opinion tries to engage in any trans thread they soon get shouted down. I engaged once- asked a question, got shouted at so didn't bother again. I can't be the only one.

Collymollypuff · 11/11/2016 18:18

DonkeyOaty - I haven't got any fuck-it-goblin fingers. Sad Or....have I?

MorrisZapp · 11/11/2016 18:19

I was firmly on MN side during recent furores over disablism and diabetes.

But in light of their decision to invite PL to chair an event about 'blogging for good' my view has crystalised further. Not only do MN not need to go on a diversity course, they need deprogramming from whatever diversity awareness training has led them to think that outspoken critics of feminism are to be celebrated if they used to be male.

Stop the madness.

JennyHolzersGhost · 11/11/2016 18:19

Hi Justine - thanks for posting this.
In the spirit of teaching I'm going to give 2 stars and a wish Grin

  1. 'not in the spirit of MN' covers a multitude of modding sins - while having the benefit of being true! A useful phrase for mods when making marginal judgment calls.

  2. accountability (you've heard from me before on this) - good stuff. Keep it up and encourage mods to engage where possible. I think it helps separate out the reasonable types - who appreciate the engagement even if they don't agree with the decision - from the permanently disgruntled types, who I'm afraid you're never going to get rid of completely.

  3. consistency and clarity - would be useful to have more of it. I appreciate that with a modding team you're always going to get differences of approach so it's ultimately down to the judgment of whoever is on duty. But most posters who don't intend to be an irritant end up becoming one when it's not clear what they can say and what they can't. It's upsetting if you're a law-abiding member of the community to be deleted and ticked off, and it gets people's backs up, particularly if the explanation isn't clear or doesn't feel fair. I appreciate I may be contradicting point 1 here Grin but sometimes it's helpful to have a clearer idea of where the line is.

Hope you don't mind me giving my 5p-worth. Star to all the mods, it's a tough job.

OurBlanche · 11/11/2016 18:20

I'm not so sure!

The whole issue still needs discussion... remember the tale of the squeaky wheel? If we stifle any debate on that, or any other vexing, issue then those who choose to have the last word get to be heard more!

If we lose the ability to have robust and sometimes relatively aggressive debate here then where the hell do we get to explore such issues?

Where do we get to 'attack' the views of people who wish to overrule or silence us on issues?

Where do we go to be given a window of insight into topics we may, as individuals, have no experience of?

Demanding MN becomes homogenous is a terrible idea!

Long live the diatribe! Smile

WaitrosePigeon · 11/11/2016 18:20

I'm sorry you and other members of your team have had to endure the wrath of some of the domineering people on this site - it's not okay.

I and I'm sure many other members agree that we recognise how hard your job is and it is impossible to make everyone happy.

Thank you for all you do Flowers

BitOutOfPractice · 11/11/2016 18:20

Nerr and Moving I guess that depends on what we think the majority opinion is on MN isn't it?

OurBlanche · 11/11/2016 18:22

Sorry, that last was for Vince, and BitOutof... Smile

JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 18:22

@VincentVL

Justine - you implied more than once that posters objected to your guest because they are transphobic, while refusing to acknowledge the very serious problems that we actually have with them.

You were asked to clarify what the rules are on personal attacks because previously the rule has been described as not applying to public figures who are not posting on Mumsnet. You said that it also applied to your Blogfest guests. Posters pointed out that personal comments made about other Blogfest guests werent being deleted elsewhere on Mumsnet and you ignored the inconsistency.

Also, the "personal attacks" deleted included using the word "he" to describe a male person, and using the word "misogynist" for the same person. But you described their calling women bitches etc as (paraphrase) 'something they did in the past and might regret' when there is no evidence of regret and abundant evidence they are still using their platform to insult women (generally and individually).

Women are asking you for consistency and respect and youre treating them (us) like plebs.

VincentVL - we can go over every bit of this again and again - I don't accept your description of what happened on the thread and you clearly don't accept mine. I believe some of the comments on the thread were transphobic, you don't. I don't think a thread discussing how fanciable Ed Balls is, with most people saying they fancy him and a very few saying they don't (and which I highly doubt was reported and so the community team probably wouldn't have seen) is akin to the unmitigated attacks on Paris Lees. I don't think I'm disrespecting or treating anyone like plebs - we just have a different opinion.

OP posts:
MovingOnUpMovingOnOut · 11/11/2016 18:22

I think so BOOP :)

I'm not sure I can say confidently what it is; I can be fairly sure what some perceive it to be and that there will be others who disagree.

BitOutOfPractice · 11/11/2016 18:24

I agree moving. Who knows what it is! But I feel like the MN modding policy in the issue stifles the debate which the op claims to want to encourage

JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 18:25

@MorrisZapp

I was firmly on MN side during recent furores over disablism and diabetes.

But in light of their decision to invite PL to chair an event about 'blogging for good' my view has crystalised further. Not only do MN not need to go on a diversity course, they need deprogramming from whatever diversity awareness training has led them to think that outspoken critics of feminism are to be celebrated if they used to be male.

Stop the madness.

MorrisZapp I don't agree. I'm sorry if that makes you feel angry or marginalised. You have a right to your opinion but you're not going to change our minds. And by the way, we're all feminists in this team.

OP posts:
JustineMumsnet · 11/11/2016 18:26

@WaitrosePigeon

I'm sorry you and other members of your team have had to endure the wrath of some of the domineering people on this site - it's not okay.

I and I'm sure many other members agree that we recognise how hard your job is and it is impossible to make everyone happy.

Thank you for all you do Flowers

Thank you. Much appreciated Flowers

OP posts: