Threads being deleted all the time

[Gwenhwyfar]

It seems to be at least 1 in 5 threads that get deleted because some over-sensitive person doesn't agree with something in it.
What's the logic MN?
Surely this is a place for people to discuss things, you either get involved in the conversation if you disagree or ignore the thread if it's annoying you too much. Why do interesting threads have to be deleted because people don't agree with some of the things said on them? The judgemental thread today is one example.
I understand deleting threads where the OP's story isn't true or there's a danger to someone being identified, but not just because someone's complained.

I am in favour of free speech, too. I would leave all posts, including the racist and disablist ones. It would require the ability to call a disablist cunt just that. As long as we cannot do that, they have to go or else we all look like cunts by association.

I'm in favour of that too, the 'judgemental' thread was so vile that in a way it was a relief to see that it was mostly just populated by inadequates and if the whole range of posts had been left to stand it would make it easy to just ignore those posters forever from that point if one wanted to.

I have always said that these threads and posts should be left to stand, preferably highlighted in dayglo pink with 'ARSEHOLERY' stamped across it in big letters.

"Or islamaphobic comments about judging women who chose to wear scarves"

Pfft, there's been far, far worse threads about Muslims then that on here that were left to stand with no deletions made. The absolute nadir was one that said we were all mentally ill, didn't belong in the UK and that it was absolutely ok to insult Muslims on Mumsnet, because in real life, we Muslims would throw acid at them. It was hideous.

There are sadly, plenty of other types of prejudice aired on Mumsnet, aside from disabilism.

OP you don't seem to understand that Mumsnet is not a public service, but a private business. Therefore if a thread is causing issues, it's far easier to zap the thread then to pick through and moderate comments.

I cannot at all see what is "interesting" about a bunch of tedious dullards claiming that SN diagnosis are dished out like sweets.

Those "controversial opinions" threads are always a horror show. If I were MNHQ, I'd strongly discourage them.

IPity that is just disgraceful, no other word for it. I agree with you that prejudice abounds here because some people are just 'like that'. They're secure in the anonymity that we all enjoy but they abuse that. Being told by posters on the thread that their post isn't ok with reasons given doesn't work because if they're of the type to post vile statements, what would they care about other posters telling them not to and giving reasons why? The only benefit to other posters doing that is to support the group currently under fire.

There's no vetting process to join here and even if you're banned, you can slip in again under a new name. I remember reading a deletion message from MN once that said it was like 'whack a mole' with the constantly popping up threads and that's the thing, if someone is determined enough to just keep re-joining and re-posting threads all over the place then it must be very difficult to halt that.

Going back to SN and disabilities, some posters just have no idea of what this is like, have no point of reference to instruct them and - if they carry on ignoring it like the OP has - then no wit or imagination to understand that it's lifelong, daily hard slog with not enough support - and judgement heaped on you on the forum that you count on for inclusion, support and a kind word. Some posters, the same ilk as above, just do not care.

You're absolutely right about the 'controversial opinions' threads in my opinion. Posters start off 'testing the waters' and then launch in to what they wanted it to be - a bunfight, an argument, name-calling, insults... all of that is grist to their mill. I hate those threads and I post on them to say, "You know you're doing this to be goady, stop pretending it's x,y,z because it isn't", and I'm ridiculed for that, told to get off the thread, stop being a 'sanctimonious twat' or some other choice insult. I don't care about that, I've been here a long time and as a poster I've made faux pas in the hundreds - but not with malice.

Very long-winded, sorry but I agree with all that you've said. I'm going to carry on spiking the spiteful guns because even if they're not listening, it does interrupt and spoil their glee somewhat. The threads aren't usually left to stand anyway but there's sometimes a delay of days.

I think it's a minority of posters and they're not interested in being part of a community anyway. I hope they'll be weeded out eventually but until then, if I see them I'll tell them what I think of them (within guidelines).

"that you think it's ok to cause additional upset to parents of children with disabilities because you have the right of freedom of speech says a lot about you."

All it says is that I believe in free speech.
I don't want people to be upset, but if nothing discriminatory is being posted, I would suggest sensitive people stay away from certain threads.
I've also suggested avoiding certain subjects because we know they'll cause problems, but there doesn't seem to be any support for that idea.

Well Gwenhwyfar you're going to get called on it - every, single time you - or anyone else - post like a twat on discriminatory issues. There's that 'freedom of speech' door swinging both ways again... what a pity for you that you can't manoeuvre posters off the threads that you think their sensitive little selves shouldn't be reading.

"I don't want people to be upset, BUT..." - and there it is. You'll upset them if it suits you to do so because you can't stop yourself. You're desperate to post on inflammatory subjects and you like doing so. Therefore everybody else must stand aside. No. Not.Going.To.Happen.

Perhaps, if you like the idea of sequestering people into little pigeonholes, that you go and form yourself a little goady coven - but somewhere else... not on a site for parents, and not one who has a 'watermark' doctrine of "This Is My Child". And that applies to other groups too - all covered by legal protection. So just stop it.

Do you even know what it is you're 'judging', Gwenhwyfar? What the basis of that is? If you take the comment in its simplest form - "I judge parents who put their children on reins", which is what several posters say - what are you actually judging there? That a child whom you presume to know is 'too old' to be on reins? Is that it?

So, assuming that you have a functioning brain in your head (even if you don't have care for other people), would your little grey cells not take your assessment further as to ask yourself why that may be? Surely, if an older child is wearing reins there's a reason. Is it a) some sort fashion statement, or b) the parent is secretly yearning to have a dog but must make do or c) there must be a reason centred on the child and, if that isn't something that you would reason the average child would want to be wearing, there must be another reason. What could it be?

If you are a parent yourself you would know that your concern would first and foremost be for the care and safety of your child so, if you've managed to discount the fatuous reasons above you will have arrived at the eminently sensible solution of 'safety of the child'. That is your answer, your synapses have done their stuff.

So what is there to 'judge' exactly? Even if you need a pen and paper because mental gymnastics isn't quite your bag then why would you think that making such a statement as "I judge blah di blah" would ever be something to blurt out? I mean, people might think you were a bit of an idiot, mightn't they?

For your info - and to pre-empt your undoubted response of "Don't mention children in reins", that logic process will apply to 'children in buggies' or 'people using lifts' or 'people wearing head-covering scarves' or 'people in turbans not wearing helmets' or even 'fat people eating McDonalds'. Pretty much anything really. There are reasons that people have for doing what they do. They are generally good reasons, or even the best in their personal situations - but either way, none of our business.

Idly musing is a world apart from sharing your thoughts online but I'll ask you. What do you personally Gwenhwyfar, get out of making judgements of people? Sharing these online? Is it because you need to belong to a tribe of like-minded people? Or that you're affected by judgement yourself so that you need to lash out at somebody else yourself? I know quite a few people who do this - they've been hurt so they need to pass that on.

You've said that you're not a troll so I'm assuming that you get some feeling of camaraderie from posting on here, as I do. The way you've said you want to post, ie. saying exactly what you like about other people isn't going to work. If you genuinely do not want to upset other posters then think about how you'd feel if you were in need of support and try to see if your proposed post would whip that support away from you?

In case you were wondering, yes, I'm countering all of your arguments, taking away every 'loophole' - and what you'll be left with, if you carry on - is that you'd be trolling.

"what a pity for you that you can't manoeuvre posters off the threads that you think their sensitive little selves shouldn't be reading."

The whole point is that I believe in free speech and argument. I don't WANT people to leave the thread. I made that suggestion because people were saying they were upset and they were getting whole threads deleted because of it. I'd rather they stayed.

""You have no interest in being educated, why did you bother pretending you were""

What's that based on?
I am interested in being educated actually.

"Do you even know what it is you're 'judging', Gwenhwyfar?"

Of course I know what I judge.

I didn't make any comment about reins. I don't have a problem with reins. Why go on about that?

"What do you personally Gwenhwyfar, get out of making judgements of people? "

EVERYBODY judges Lying. You're judging me now. It's part of human nature. I find it very interesting to know what other people judge. I find the conversation about it very interesting. Nothing in my comments were discriminatory.

"and what you'll be left with, if you carry on - is that you'd be trolling."

That's the funniest ever. If I disagree with you, I'm a troll. That's not what a troll is.

When people say "free speech", what they really mean is the "Freedom to say whatever I like without consequences".

You will not find that "freedom" on a privately owned website, so it is pointless to complain otherwise.

I don't know how to spell it out anymore simply, Gwenhwyfar?

Replace 'reins' with something else that you feel so free to judge. Anything you like. I used reins as an example, I thought it was the easiest one but obviously not.

If you don't get it then you don't get it - but you will be pulled up on threads if you or anybody else posts like a twat. Capiche?

I think that thread could have stayed with just the offensive and disablist posts being deleted. Mostly people were expressing their judginess as "I don't like" which isn't really surprising that different people like different things.

I used reins with both my toddlers and didn't feel in the least bit perturbed that someone criticised them as dog leads or whatever. It's a topic that's been done over and over again on MN and 99% of people agree that reins are perfectly fine just like 99% of people agree that loo brushes are perfectly fine and bathroom bins are perfectly fine. Calling them dog leads just makes the poster who thinks that way look like a twat imo.

Dixie, Lying, hazy and paxillin I'd only support that if the posters making the unacceptable comments had the ability to name change removed.

Posts being allowed to stand would be unworkable for MN though as it would reflect on how they wish to promote the site.

A5 well perhaps but there's a distinct difference isn't there, as above but I'll insert your loo brushes for you here:

"I don't like loo brushes/using loo brushes/anything to do with loo brushes"
and
"People who have loo brushes are x,y,z insulting term"

See the difference?

There was very much of that on the thread in the second example so it wasn't as benign as you seem to be portraying it as. Posts and threads are deleted because they are anything but benign.

I used reins with my toddlers too but was not judged. I'd like to put one of them on reins even now because they're a bolter but it is in no way comparable to what a parent of an older child with SN who HAS to be on reins might feel. If I put my running child on reins now I could laugh off any comments. If my child had SN any comments wouldn't run off my back so easily because I would possibly be dealing with those needs every single day and that judgement every time we went out.

Why does everything require comparison and judgement and why do people feel they have the right to judge and comment on what other people do? Doing so on a chatboard is just as bad if I'm the parent who faces that judgement in real life.

It's all well and good to say that calling reins, dog leads, makes the poster who thinks that way look like a twat but that's a bit like the 'sticks and stones' thing that parents of a bullied child have to listen to here. Completely unhelpful and actively unsupportive.

It would be good if MNHQ could come back to this thread and perhaps explain in a bit more detail how they feel about this issue as site owners and board hosts.

Good point, @RedDogsBeg. But at present, some posters go haywire with staggering disablism or misogyny, thread deleted and the poster, having just stayed on the non-ban-able side, goes on with a shiny halo and an un-besmirched name to advice others.

Oh absolutely, RedDogsBeg, I said on a recent thread where a twattish OP actually said that she had "name changed because she knew she'd get flamed". This was the 'messy house' thread. So many thigh-rubbing posters on it.

I suggested that MNHQ might like to randomly (if not permanently) pop onto to the thread with "Ahem. You might wish to know that this poster's regular name is 'LyingWitch' who has changed name just to be a goady fucker. No more name changing for that poster because they can't be trusted. As you were everybody".

They won't remove the name-changing facility, I wish they would because it's being abused. In and of itself name-changing is a brilliant and justified protection for poster - but not for goading and trolling.

As I said, I'd have no problem with offensive posts being deleted.

Mumsnet actively encourage name changing now because of the Daily Mail issue. I guess it's just not cost effective for them to have watertight proactive moderating - they've always got by by relying on reports. No one at HQ is going to start compiling a spreadsheet of namechangers and policing it.

If just the offensive posts were deleted from the threads that OP is referring to, there would be about 70% missing then MNHQ deletes thread.

They've got a full list of whose name has changed and when, I'm sure of it. Ebay forums always had a list of your names and that was years ago. I'm sure MN has it too. Managing 'by exception' only isn't too onerous but when you get multiple complaints about a thread you look into it, and they do.

Most threads and name changes drift on causing no issue whatsoever.

I quite see why this trollfest and goady fucker festival wasn't foreseeable but now it's here I don't see why measures can't be put in place to stop regulars name-changing JUST to do this before changing back to be sweetness and light again.