Why has Stratters been banned for reporting suspected Trolls as per MN policy?

[SoPassRemarkable]

Long standing, sensible poster.

Says she didn't troll hunt on the threads but reported. And has been banned for over reporting? Hardly her fault if there's lots of trolls to report?

Totally puts me off reporting any suspicions I have.

I've taken ' challenging directly ' as a pm. Is that what the ban was for?

We've always been told NOT to take it to thread - that's always been considered trollhunting. We've been always told to report- they love reports.

Have HQ now decided that clicks are more important? Ramping up drama to get more exposure for advertisers?

@AmyGMumsnet Could you confirm what process HQ has when imposing potentially controversial bans? Is it a decision of an individual Mod, or must more than one Mod agree to the ban?

Given what Stratters wrote (that she would comply with Katherine's request), it strikes me that perhaps someone was having a bad day and got a bit trigger happy with the ban button ...?

Bishops. That's what I thought. It would have ramped up the drama.

Hence I didn't.

Plus. I'd have got slaughtered given what it was.

But that is exactly what I was sent. So. I don't know

Stratters didn't PM the troll. She Pmd a few posters with her concerns.

OK. What did they mean about ' challenging directly '? Was there an issue with Pm-ing other users about another user?

TBH, they've been beyond sneery and patronising in a lot of their responses lately.

They just really, really don't give a shit. People will feel a lot less frustrated when they accept that, IMO.

I can see why users might then report someone sending them a pm though about something or someone they didn't agree with. Even if it was a warning. They might not take it that way and see it as something else. Even if the original sender had no intention to upset.

I'd hate to moderate. Must be like unraveling spaghetti. I can see why you'd go the other way and have lots of rules to make it easier to sort out these issues.

The only people she sent PMs to were a couple of people she was worried were getting sucked in.

Or just go ' fuck it, moderate yourselves '. Which is sort of what take it to the thread means.

The thing is she was right about the issue... oh the irony.
MN hq DID vouch for him, they allowed the just giving link to stand, but hey now they say oh we can't vouch for everyone, you can't have it both ways, we aren't daft on here!

Perhaps there is a rule about pm to users about other users? To stop behind the thread gangs. And it was applied in this case because users were upset to get warnings about another user. Frustrating if you know something is happening and you can't stop it. I can see why you'd pm but it's not necessarily going to go down well.

Has Stratters been banned over that spat with a well known poster where the well known poster was incredibly rude to the OP and made cracks and rude remarks about her sex life? And the well known poster is not very liked by Stratters?

I think pm is an issue actually.

It's really sad. When someone is being sucked in there is actually very little you can do for them as they will refuse to believe the evidence you present or your warnings.

But if it's not clear in the rules and that's what they were upset about why not give her a warning?

In the reply to Katherine you can see Stratters has promised to adhere to not challenging anyone....and then they ban her. I think they didn't like the tone of her reply. She didn't just say sorry and shut up.

BishopBrennansArse, if you were talking to me, no, it was for deliberately de railing a thread and goading. I don't care if you thought it was 'nice' or not. Clearly I wasn't the only one.

I am not talking about Stratters.

I don't even know if it's the person referred to earlier in the thread, just saying that I reported someone for constantly goading and derailing.

Having an alternative opinion is neither derailing or goading. Reporting someone for views that are contrary to your own isn't really on unless they're an ism or a personal attack, is it?

What is going on here lately??

Perhaps there is a rule about pm to users about other users? To stop behind the thread gangs. And it was applied in this case because users were upset to get warnings about another user. Frustrating if you know something is happening and you can't stop it. I can see why you'd pm but it's not necessarily going to go down well

I guess so but I have been warned off certain posters in the past and found it really helpful, especially when I was about to explode online at them and probably get banned myself.

There is no denying that there can be a gang mentality sometimes on here with people defending their mates but I don't think that's unusual on forums.

BishopBrennansArse not really sure what your issue is with me but I will respond just one more time and hopefully that will stop your persistence in adressing just me on this.

If you go on someone's thread and shout that you don't like it but don't explain why. It's neither giving an alternative opinion or discussing anything.

It's trying to get something shut down instead of reporting it.

If your view is so distorted about an issue that you don't even think that threads on it should be allowed, it's not really fair or a discussion.