Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Site stuff

Join our Innovation Panel to try new features early and help make Mumsnet better.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

Word of advice to MNHQ

999 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'

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
floofycatness · 23/08/2017 18:57

So saying "these people" is BU, but calling MN staff members (and I quote exact words here) bunch of twats/fucking wankers/cheeky fuckers/cheeky twats/arseholes on a Reddit thread open to be read by anyone is NBU? Hmm

Give your head a wobble. That thread you have started is unpleasant and pretty shit tbh, especially as it refers to one staff member by name (preceeded by "mardy")

Complaining about how you are being treated when you're saying even worse, and encouraging other people, doesn't put you in the right.

Saucery · 23/08/2017 18:58

What do business partners think of lax email practices?

NormaDesmondsEyebrows · 23/08/2017 18:59
LineysRun · 23/08/2017 19:00

it's pretty clear cut, surely? Must we get into a dialogue with these people, can't we just ban and ignore?

Question: I thought MNHQ said that they didn't do this? (ie 'ban and ignore'). I've read posts from them saying they don't, regarding longstanding posters (which the OP is).

IfYouGoDownToTheWoodsToday · 23/08/2017 19:01

I don't understand why they would suspend you for reporting.

It's all a bit of a doHmm

WorraLiberty · 23/08/2017 19:03

Question: I thought MNHQ said that they didn't do this? (ie 'ban and ignore'). I've read posts from them saying they don't, regarding longstanding posters (which the OP is).

Yes, but surely that wouldn't apply to a suspended/banned poster who has ignored their suspension/ban and just come back under a different name?

Otherwise they'd spend their whole working week in a dialogue with 'these people' Blush Grin

MsGameandWatching · 23/08/2017 19:04

I've had my own shitty, dismissive email from MNHQ, I feel a touch of schadenfreude just now 😏

SetPhasersTaeMalkie · 23/08/2017 19:04

That's interesting liney because that was my understanding too. I was reading a thread about a different poster being banned and I'm certain MNHQ said they wouldn't ban and ignore - despite posters on the thread saying that was what happened to them.

CheeseonTwats · 23/08/2017 19:04

What's the Reddit thread?

SetPhasersTaeMalkie · 23/08/2017 19:05

When I say ban I think I mean suspend.

Violetcharlotte · 23/08/2017 19:07

You're getting upset at being referred to as 'these people' in a private email you weren't meant to see, but it's ok for you to call other posters on this thread 'crawly arse lickers' on a public open forum? Hmm

endehors · 23/08/2017 19:07

I thought MNHQ said that they didn't do this?

I thought this was the official policy, to ban and ignore. Again, a few people on the other group have been banned, some for very minor reasons, no email, no warning, just unable to post. They have needed to email to discover if, and why, they have been suspended or banned, but don't often receive a reply.

WorraLiberty · 23/08/2017 19:08

I think some people are talking at crossed purposes here.

Surely HQ already had dialogue with the OP, if she knows she was banned/suspended for troll hunting?

I think the email explains that she came back during that ban/suspension, admitted in a PM who she is and now HQ want to ban a second time but without dialogue?

Apologies if that's not the case, but that's how I'm reading it.

DamnFineCherryPie · 23/08/2017 19:08

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TheRealBiscuitAddict · 23/08/2017 19:08

Well, they've certainly confirmed now that they just ignore, haven't they? And the OP has emails with mn logo's on them to prove it should she so choose.

And yes, many trolls are reported for weeks or months before HQ actually ban them. The latest one started posting fairly early on in the year and posters were reporting from the outset. Yet thread after thread after thread appeared and more and more people became drawn in, people with personal experience who would want to offer support. And people were banned for reporting because they'd already been told that the individual was considered to be legit. And oh behold, a link appeared for people to start giving money and only then did HQ have to sit up and take notice.

Except now the result of that is that a well loved and well known poster has passed away, a poster who people know personally and now no fundraising is allowed to happen on her part because of this previous fraud who could have been removed months ago but instead HQ let them hang themselves rather than act on the multiple reports.

Saucery · 23/08/2017 19:09

I'm sensing a subtext here."....... Confused
But if OP is doing that presumably she is not being paid to do that with guidelines often repeated on threads saying that MNHQ will reply to emails. Not hum and haw about whether they should even bother.

DixieNormas · 23/08/2017 19:09

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

CheeseonTwats · 23/08/2017 19:10

Found it.

Gosh I feel like I'm down the rabbit hole.

LineysRun · 23/08/2017 19:11

SetPhasers, exactly. I think that's where a lot of the ire is coming from - posters who were 'part of the furniture' so to speak saying they're being effectively 'gaslighted' (which effectively means we all are, too, by proxy iyswim).

floofycatness · 23/08/2017 19:11

I don't know the exact terminology Grin but there are sub forums for ex-MNers (or indeed current MNers) on Reddit which make for very interesting reading, especially as they are open to anyone to read. I bet MNHQ are having a great giggle at them - when they aren't reading about themselves in the terms used in my previous post.

They do show how easy is it to troll here though, but it's interesting to see them slagging people off and calling them trolls. I'm being charitable by not being more explicit, btw. Seriously.

Goingtobeawesome · 23/08/2017 19:12

Did they mean these people = trolls? It does come across as rather sneery.

DixieNormas · 23/08/2017 19:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Mysterian · 23/08/2017 19:16

Let me guess...

"We don't think this thread is in the spirit of Mumsnet."

DamnFineCherryPie · 23/08/2017 19:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

TashaRomanoff · 23/08/2017 19:17

Nice to know you're appreciated on MN Hmm wonder how they are going to explain this one, I bet with sorry not sorry Bear

Swipe left for the next trending thread