Active discussions

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

Talk

Back to thread
Original poster

Word of advice to MNHQ

45 replies

Hahahahaha123 · 23/08/2017 17:35

The next time you send an email about a poster to that poster by mistake. Probably best not to refer to your users as 'these people'

Go to post
MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 24/08/2017 13:10

@MaudGonneMad

Sorry can you be more specific? Genuinely confused about the nasty tone?

Justine, if you genuinely want to find out what's gone wrong, I suggest you listen to the many, many posters of long standing who are stating over and over again that the communication from MNHQ has gone downhill in the last 18 months or so. Tetchy, curt, abrupt. I haven't been on the receiving end of it, so I don't have an example to pull out of my hat, but it's a pretty widespread impression. Problem is, I'm not sure you do want to listen.

Yes of course happy to look at this but need examples - you said a sneery tone had been used by HQ on this thread - which means the posts by me (don't think RebeccaMN's were sneery) - and I wondered which posts you were thinking of because not my intention to be sneery?

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 24/08/2017 13:16

@TheNiffler

I believe we're talking about a pbp (although i know that's disputed on reddit wink)

Very disingenuous.

Anyone else feel they're being Mansplained at?

Well mansplaining is a new criticism I must say! As said, we believe the OP of this thread has been banned previously for ignoring rules on troll-hunting and returned under a pseudonym to do the same. I guess by disingenuous you're saying I'm lying and there's not much I can do to convince you as I'm not going to reveal private user information, even of a PBP.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 24/08/2017 13:25

@TheNiffler

Please don't bother, Justine, I know the poster off board, I'm happy that she says she's not a pbp, and I know she's been a constantly useful contributor over many years.

I think you're digging yourself a big hole now, and its probably time to go to that other appointment before it gets worse.

Yes I'm off for now because this has got a bit too sureal and I do need to be somewhere else (about 40 mins ago). Will come back later.

MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 24/08/2017 13:49

@FaithHopeCharityDesperation

Why do posters get their account suspended with no notification or explanation?

This perhaps explains why people re-reg.

It took days of repeated emails from me to MNHQ to find out why I couldn't log in for them to eventually tell me I'd been temporarily suspended.
(I didn't re-reg btw, I served my suspension like a good girl - but it was a bit of a shitty way to be dealt with tbh).

Hi FaithHopeCharityDesperation Sometimes if a user's posting history leads us to suspect they maybe a troll, we temporarily 'suspend their account to flush'. The thinking behind this being, if they are genuine (many trolls join with an email address that's only live for 24-36 hours) they will get in contact with us to ask what's going on. We can then open a dialogue with them to voice our concerns.

MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 24/08/2017 13:55

@DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen

I'd like to ask why the original 'stuck on holiday with sciatica' hasn't been reinstated. It was taken down but not put back as far as I know and the OP was genuine.

Hi there DameDiazepamTheDramaQueen This poster had a posting history littered with inconsistencies leading us to believe she was a possible troll. We got in touch and she did admitted to those inconsistencies, although the 'stuck on holiday with sciatica' thread was actually a genuine RL issue. However, she then asked to be deregistered, and so the thread was not reinstated.

MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 24/08/2017 14:17

@FaithHopeCharityDesperation

Ah I see, sorry, I don't know the answer Faith I'm sorry, but will find out and get back or one of the team will.

It's ok, I'm over it now Grin

It's just that I can see that the lack of communication (which seems to be a recurring theme on this matter) is a probable reason why people re-reg.

Hi FaithHopeCharityDesperation We've had a look at our mails to you and can see we did have a chat with you about your posting style and managed to sort things out, which is always our preferred option.
Then it appears, after reinstating your account, there was a techie error (really unfortunate, but these things do happen) where you needed to reset your password, which again we sorted. Hope that clears things up.

MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 24/08/2017 14:39

@ItsAllGoingToBeFine

reported a really off thread and been repeatedly ignored

I think MNHQ need to go back to autoresponding to reports. The complete silence after a report is a bit disconcerting.

Hi there ItsAllGoingToBeFine As far as we are aware, every report receives an automatic response from us. This news is disconcerting and we will look into it from our end. Thanks for the heads up.

MNHQ

SandyMumsnet · 24/08/2017 16:01

@Ceto

SandyMN, that explanation for Sciatica's thread doesn't really work. You reinstated her, she started a new thread which you apparently had no problem about leaving up, and she posted on at least a couple of threads. All the while you were still telling people you were looking into it, and indeed you were saying that only yesterday. And, as people pointed out, many if not most of us make sure we put a few inconsistent facts into our posts to avoid identification. If you thought she was a troll, you wouldn't have reinstated her; and if you thought she wasn't, surely her thread should have been reinstated.
Hi there Ceto When you reported to us yesterday and we replied to you saying we were still dealing, we really were. We felt it appropriate to allow Sciatica some time to undergo her back operation before we approached her. We did mail her as we've perviously explained (to clear up the inconsistencies that we felt crossed the line of anonymity) and it was later in the afternoon that sciatica asked to deregister.
MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 12:59

@DotForShort

I believe we're talking about a pbp (although i know that's disputed on reddit).

Justine, you have said a couple of times that you "believe" the person who received the email in error was a PBP. It isn't really a question of belief, is it? Either she was banned or she wasn't. Surely the only ones with that information, aside from the poster in question, would be MNHQ. Can you clarify exactly what happened, a permanent ban or a temporary suspension?

According to her own PMs she was a previously banned poster.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 14:07

So, thanks for all the input - I've now had a chance to digest the points raised as well as the overall sentiment and have talked to the team here and read this thread too.

In short, I think there are some things we should look at rejigging. It feels like the move to an entirely auto pop-up response for reports hasn't worked well for users - so we're going to reverse that change. The thinking behind it was that by automating our responses we'd have more time to explain our decisions on the boards but in truth, we need to do both.

It also feels like we might be waiting a bit too long for cast iron evidence of trollery rather than going with our (and your) guts a bit more and making a call based on the likelihood of risk.

And thirdly we'll also look at how we're dealing with suspensions and whether there's a better way of handling things than the current one.

Thanks so much for those who've taken the trouble to post on this and the other thread about emailed responses. We aren't always going to moderate things the way everyone wants but we are genuinely keen to improve our processes and you've shone a light on some stuff we can do better, which is much appreciated.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 14:17

@endehors

And how on earth can you not definitively know? It's your site.

Yes, and how was the OP to know if communication with her had ceased. She thought she had been suspended.

As has been mentioned PBP/shoplifter, still doesn't excuse a poster being discussed and treated in such a manner. A little communication and transparency might have avoided all of this.

When I say previously banned I mean exactly that - i.e. a previous MN persona under which she was actually banned - having gone through that whole suspension process with that identity and finally been banned.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 14:21

[quote GaryNumanIsOlderThanGaryOldman]👠👠 dances in...whilst we're building bridges could we build a glitterball emoticon at the same time before Strictly starts?! Grin. We're up to 44 supporters of such a thing (that's more than you got for the cadbury's choccy bar, surely?)

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 14:28

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 14:29

@SerfTerf

That sounds like it might be an improvement!

The reporting policy reversal in itself will make a massive difference, I think.

I think (hope) you might be right Serf - we'll be able to get going in earnest from Tuesday - bear with us till then?

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 15:17

@OlennasWimple

Any end in sight of the User142358 stuff...? I genuinely think that that will make a difference, both to the feel and tone of the site as well as discouraging trolls (who don't even have to think up a witty username FFS)

Yes we stopped that a few weeks ago now OlennasW - but there are a few who are stuck with those assigned names until they choose to change them...

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 15:18

[quote WatcherOfTheNight]@JustineMumsnet whilst you are on with tech can you remind them about the changes Nightwatch have been waiting for?

Thanks Gin[/quote]

yes will check out to see where we're at

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 15:19

@TheNiffler

I was told Tech would be sorting out my Stratters nickname. Any news on that?

Will check out.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 15:30

@TheNiffler

I was told Tech would be sorting out my Stratters nickname. Any news on that?

Sorry - I really don't want to appear humourless when clearly we're all trying to build bridges here but are you the same Stratters who's just posted a picture of a cockroach on reddit and suggested it's one of our mod team? If so I think that's beyond the pale... If not apols!

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 15:50

@TheNiffler

And? Entirely missing the point. If you treat your product decently m, they don't get fucked off, and start taking the puss.

Nothing will change here, we've all heard the fauxpologies before, the promised that things will change. We are pound signs, that's all. Well, were in my case.

I don't want to be rude but having just looked at the notes around your posting history - the volume of scraps and suspensions reads more like a typical troll than a typical Mumsnetter, and the cockroach thing kind of confirms that? I really think it's time you called MN a day.

MNHQ

JustineMumsnet · 25/08/2017 16:25

@TheRealBiscuitAddict

I have always been of the view that if you don't like something then you don't have to post there. I absolutely do believe that HQ have some questions to answer in terms of their own conduct internally e.g. Sending emails to the wrong users to bitch about said users and whether reporting threads/posters now constitutes troll hunting and is something which posters face being banned for. But this is the internet and people don't have to stay if they don't like it, but freedom of speech does give people the ability to voice their opinions on a subject.

However, I was around back in the day when some of the MN users left to create moldies, and the absolute uproar that caused including among MN HQ had to be seen to be believed, including articles in the guardian where I believe Justine's DH worked at the time.

So while MN HQ absolutely have the right to say to posters that if they no longer like it here they don't have to stay, let's not pretend that there wasn't a time when, when some people did exactly that (and no, I wasn't part of the group that set up moldies or an invitee,) MN HQ expressed their absolute outrage and apparent hurt that MN users should feel that MN had become such that they had no alternative but to set up another forum as MN hhad changed so much that it no longer met their needs.

Was it in the Guardian? I remember the Telegraph and the Mail doing a story but not the Guardian. And the real outrage was from those not invited as I recall it - we were sad but not outraged...

Watch this thread for updates

Tap "Watch" to get all the latest updates

End of posts

There are no more MNHQ posts on this thread

Back to thread