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
SecretNutellaFix · 23/08/2017 19:46

HQ would be hard pressed to identify most posters on reddit with their MN nicknames as most are nowhere near their mn ones.

Circumlocutor · 23/08/2017 19:47

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

You seem to a lot of lurking on a Reddit sub that you clearly disapprove of. You don't disapprove quite enough to ignore it thought do you,?

Saucery · 23/08/2017 19:47

Hi Rebecca, thanks for stepping up to tackle this.

Can you give us any reassurance that procedures will be tightened up so that email pathways can't cross like this? I know it has happened in the past and we were told things had been changed so that data risks were minimised.
In itself it shows a dismissive and rude attitude to a poster, which isn't acceptable. The wider implication is that private operational emails can go astray and this can have serious consequences.

MNHQ
RebeccaMumsnet · 23/08/2017 19:48

@Saucery

I'd be a bit worried about Reporting in future tbh. With emails going to the wrong people, who is to say your details wouldn't end up with the person you had Reported?

There is no one button in our system that would do that, we would have to go and find the email address, press forward and put the email address in. Obviously, we are human and errors happen but this would be very very unlikely.

MNHQ
RebeccaMumsnet · 23/08/2017 19:50

@Saucery

Hi Rebecca, thanks for stepping up to tackle this.

Can you give us any reassurance that procedures will be tightened up so that email pathways can't cross like this? I know it has happened in the past and we were told things had been changed so that data risks were minimised.
In itself it shows a dismissive and rude attitude to a poster, which isn't acceptable. The wider implication is that private operational emails can go astray and this can have serious consequences.

Yes, we have looked into this and tightened things up

Saucery · 23/08/2017 19:50

Thanks, Rebecca. I know it has happened in the past, but obviously the steps have been altered since then from what you say.

Saucery · 23/08/2017 19:52

Too much to ask that staff resist the urge to be rude about site members unless verbally in the canteen over a restorative coffee and biscuit? Wink

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 23/08/2017 19:52

Can I ask why people are worried about PMs being read? This isn't a private system.

Mine are very boring and mostly consist of what holiday village to recommend to MrsKoala. What are the rest of you all writing about and can someone send me something sensational! Grin

NerrSnerr · 23/08/2017 19:52

You seem to a lot of lurking on a Reddit sub that you clearly disapprove of. You don't disapprove quite enough to ignore it thought do you,?*

I admit to lurking on the sub Reddit (I have a shed load of time on my hands) and it is funny. There are a core of people who appear to dislike mumsnet who still look at mumsnet and then bitch about mumsnet. Why give a forum you hate so much headspace?

I don't think I disapprove but maybe there are people who disapprove of mumsnet on the Sub Reddit and people on the Reddit who disapprove of mumsnet?

Circumlocutor · 23/08/2017 19:54

Like the Sharks and the Jets? Grin

Hunkle · 23/08/2017 19:55

Awks MN, very awks.

I never get told off

Halo
Mumof56 · 23/08/2017 19:55

what does the p in pm mean?

Confused
MNHQ
RebeccaMumsnet · 23/08/2017 19:57

@WorraLiberty

Unless I've totally misunderstood, all HQ meant by 'these people', was 'these people who re-register while suspended/banned'? Confused

That's correct Worra - not great but that is the context.

MadMags · 23/08/2017 19:57

Oh, dear.

I once sent a snotty text about my horrible MIL to my MIL Grin

I know how you feel, HQ.

YouAndYourFloofyCatNose · 23/08/2017 19:58

Sorry I didn't mean to NC specifically for this thread Blush Have changed back.

I do lurk on Reddit as I find it entertaining, although I can't bloody work out how to view posts in any order resembling normality Grin I was only drawn to it as I thought a thread here had been started for shits and giggles by a Reddit user as it was referenced, so had a peek, then saw a previous username of mine being mentioned and read more.

It's like a competition to see who can swear the most. Or who can slag MNers off the most. It's a bit toe curling tbh, a bit like being back at school.

Justoverfromreddit · 23/08/2017 19:58

Rebecca.

So. Me and another person from Reddit are liars, or have you changed your procedures recently?

It doesn't exactly show a professional tone, that email.

NomDePlumeReloaded · 23/08/2017 19:58

mum

The p stands for private. PM = private message

Gobbolinothewitchscat · 23/08/2017 19:59

what does the p in pm mean?

It means private as in off board. It doesn't mean that the entity that owns the infrastructure to send and receive them can't monitor them Confused. Surely that's obvious?

NerrSnerr · 23/08/2017 19:59

Mum private is never going to be 100% private on someone else's webpage. Twitter and FB will have access to your messages, Yahoo and google will have access to your emails (as will your workplace for work emails). Imagine the carnage if they didn't? Anyone could plan criminal activity or send abusive messages and if mumsnet couldn't access them there'd be nothing anyone could do!

JigglyTuff · 23/08/2017 20:00

Yep - P ostensibly stands for private. I didn't know MNHQ could read PMs I don't think. That's kind of disturbing. The mods can't read them on other forums I post on

zzzzz · 23/08/2017 20:01

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

YouAndYourFloofyCatNose · 23/08/2017 20:01

How could people not realise MNHQ could view their own messaging system? I know TSSDNCOP but that one's pretty obvious isn't it Grin

averylongtimeago · 23/08/2017 20:02

Oh dear yet more evidence that mn has changed so much, and not in a good way.
It's all very well saying sorry for sending the email to the wrong person, but "these people" are the ones who ultimately make the business that is mn work.

MNHQ
RebeccaMumsnet · 23/08/2017 20:04

@LineysRun

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).

No two cases are the same. Generally, we will attempt to keep as many posters as possible, we'd be silly not to. However, there has to be a line no matter how long a poster has been around. Otherwise, what's the point in guidelines?

We do engage when questioned about bannings from long standing posters but if we find we are getting nowhere and the issues keep happening, we will reach a point when engaging is not helpful to anyone.

NerrSnerr · 23/08/2017 20:04

Jiggly but the people running the forums can. I didn't think MN had moderators, just staff.